Glad that you are now asking for the difference.
Sun Yat Sen's intention is to overthrow the Qing Monarchy
dynasty and the corrupted offcials, and return the power to the
people. He didn't ask for independence for Guang Zhou or the jalan
where he was brought up.
What Dalai Lama want is autonomous for Tibet.
Then what the separatists in Tibet want is independence for Tibet.
Their way of fighting and the direction is different from Dalai
Lama. That's why when the recent riots break out in Tibet. Dalai
Lama has warned them if the violence prolong and escalate, he will
resign. Isn't that clear? Dalai Lama is not behind this riot. The
riot is planned by someone else.
You get what I meant? Sun Yat Sen want to unite all in china to
overthrow the old political system. But the Tibet separatist want
to get rid of the ethnic Han and fight for independence, their
target is not just the government but the normal civilians that
look like chinese.
You may think they are the same just because they both use weapon
and force, but I don't think they are the same.
ah yes ... you're saying one groups' seperatist, the other's
revolutionary ? .... basically, what you're saying is, one group's
not ethnic chinese, but is fighting against the Chinese people, the
Han, so that's wrong ..... and the other group were chinese
fighting FOR the good of the Chinese, so that's different .... eh ?
... despite that both were fighting to free their respective
people against the yoke of an oppressive regime ... yah ? ... that
the ethnicity makes all the difference ? ...
is that your benchmark ? ....
and I did say don't compare Sun Yat Sen with the Dalai Lama,
which our friend sgdiehard was doing in his confusion. he seems to
think that a coordinated uprising against the chinese regime is to
be supported, a la sun yat sen, is to be supported, I quote him
here:
"If the riots in China now is a
coordinated effort to free tibet, like what Sun Yet San did in
overthrowing the Qing regime, once order given, every single
tibatan rise up and is prepared to die to free tibet, there is a
reason for outsiders to show support."
maybe you'd like to sort out his confusion with him ? ... first,
he says tibet belongs to china, but now he says if tibet stages a
co-ordinated uprising, then outsiders should show support ....
hmmmmmmmm ....
so ... you believe, and I quote from your post, that
"Dalai Lama is not behind this riot.
The riot is planned by someone else."
You do not believe in the official chinese version of the
events, that the riots were orchestrated by the "dalai lama
clique" then ? ... not surprisingly, I don't put much stock in the
pronouncements of that goverment either.
i am not sure I agree with you that the current troubles in
tibet has it's roots in Mao's policies, it seems a bit to easy to
blame a man long dead for the troubles, but the problem is easily
rectified, and I certainly don't agree with you that Buddhism in
tibet is protected by the chinese central goverment, or else it
will suffer the same fate as buddhism in India, India is the birth
place of Buddhism and it is certainly flourishing there, some
forumers just made pilgrimages there too ... I'm sure if you take
it up at the Buddhism forum, they'll tell you the opposite is
true,
but however, the practise of Buddhism in Tibet is no longer
free, we now see two different lamas on both sides of the fence,
one recognized by the tibetans, another installed by the Chinese
goverment ... is the Chinese goverment trying to play Buddha ?
....
one thing I failed to understand before, is why go through all
the hassle and trouble of invading and subjugating another country,
if it's just for the sake of buffer zones against bigger enemies ?
.... I was just arguing with a PRC classmate online yesterday night
as I got going here as well ... and he offered me a startling
insight, something which i never knew about before .....
You know why China will never set Tibet Free now ? .....
Because of oil ....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1502117.stm
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/oil/China/2001/0905disc.htm
http://www.tew.org/archived/tibet.oil.html
ah ..... see ...... now the penny drops ....... it's not really
about historical ownership and what not now ... but really about
strategic natural resources ......
btw ... the spratley islands have lots of oil too ....
