Olympic torch through London et al

[chalice]

Manicgeek was wrong and he knew he was wrong and still ....
Come on you have to admit that was impressive.

Nah, men never admit they're wrong . Ten a penny my friend.

You're so right.

You liar.

[Squeamous]

And on that note...

[manicgeek]

Well you know, those goons surrounding her were Chinese secret police, and they did spend all day pushing around the organisers and met police, so that protestor never stood a chance.

I wonder how MG feels about these people walking our streets?

What people... law abiding ones you mean... better than thugs I'd say... you obviously wouldn't !

[manicgeek]

Nah, it's because I know you so well .

No you don't apparently.

[Alien5]

Archbishop and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Desmond Tutu urged world leaders not to go to the Games.

"Tell your counterparts in Beijing you wanted to come but looked at your schedule and realised you have something else to do."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/7337925.stm

- do something else.

[Biggles]

In order to give someone a bit of a thugging one has to strike them, verbally abuse them or attack their property. The chap in question was an older middle aged chap of non-thuggish demeanour. He did not hit Konnie or abuse her verbally. He grabbed the torch as a political act and obviously expected to not get far - indeed the surprise was that he got to the torch at all considering the number of police around it. The protest was in the holding of the torch. To compare that to say the anti-globalisation riots where whole streets are trashed seems to me to be something of a dilution of the word thug. It is bit like saying a Mini is big and so is a Hummer. At this rate we could reduce the English language to about three words.

One might question whether direct action makes any difference but equally one could ask whether giving the Chinese lucrative contracts and the Olympic games makes any difference. If our political leaders appear complicit in the oppression of the Tibetan people are we right to sit on our butts and not let them know we are less than happy?

Turning this towards a more positive frame, what are the alternatives. Boycott of all Chinese products? Boycott of all UK companies who buy Chinese products? Boycott of the Olympics?

[manicgeek]

Turning this towards a more positive frame, what are the alternatives. Boycott of all Chinese products? Boycott of all UK companies who buy Chinese products? Boycott of the Olympics?

OR

Accept that the Chinese have a right to Tibet and that the Tibetans claims to be an independent state are false ? Ignore the Tibetan situation and allow them to sort it out for themselves ? Stop telling every other country how they can act (based entirely upon our own view of what is acceptable) ? Start acting as a nation state that recognises the rights of other nation states ?

Well we must try an balance the debate Les.

[Biggles]

We could do that although the claim does not look desperately strong on paper. It seems to be based on the fact that the Mongols conquered both Tibet and China in the 13th century and that the Chinese see themselves as successors to that Empire. Prior to that Tibet was pretty much separate - in fact in the 7th to 9th centuries bits of Western China were subject to the Tibetan Empire.

Equally we could let them sort it out themselves but as there are only a few million Tibetans and a billion Chinese that doesn't seem much of a starter to get anywhere.

Was the invasion in 1950 legitimate? If not then perhaps international law is Tibet's best recourse. As a co-signatory we are duty bound to uphold their rights under international law. However, although appropriate nods have been given towards such rights the World continues to actively deal with China despite questionable activity in Tibet, Burma and Sudan. I am realistic about this though. Money buys the law and the Chinese are very rich these days and own a lot of Western debt. We aren't going to rock any political boats even if it does stick in our craws.

Personally, I think the best the Tibetans can hope for is a return of their Lama and more religious and cultural freedoms. Tibet is China's launching platform for its IBMs - it is not going anywhere.

[manicgeek]

I personally think there is nothing we can do to change China politically, we will have to wait for market forces to do that, we can encourage those market forces to become the primary driver of China by means of trade though.

Whilst China remains in the political state it is in (and has been in since the cultural revolution) Tibet has no chance of ever gaining any kind of freedom at all, and even after a political change there will be a period of time before a state the size of China sorts itself out to a point where the Tibetans will have any chance... in other words I don't think it'll change in my life time, but if they're lucky it might happen in my childrens lifetime... assuming we've not all melted by then

And for all of the fun I've had on this thread I do think the protests are a valid and good thing, if only because it shows support for the Tibetan people themselves.

[Squeamous]

We could do that although the claim does not look desperately strong on paper. It seems to be based on the fact that the Mongols conquered both Tibet and China in the 13th century and that the Chinese see themselves as successors to that Empire. Prior to that Tibet was pretty much separate - in fact in the 7th to 9th centuries bits of Western China were subject to the Tibetan Empire.

Trouble is, in the first half of the last century Tibet was functioning as a separate state only in name because I didn't go through the official route to independence. It just declared itself so while there was a power vacuum in China and they got kind of forgotten in the mayhem. China has a pretty strong claim on Tibet, as strong as any. Tibet was conquered and became part of China and has a long long history of such. Even the international community recognises Chinese rule and not the exiled Tibetan government. China also has some claims to have improved the lives of the people in Tibet from what it was before they took it back.

Still, I'm not sure anyone has a right to take a country over just because they think they can do a better job of running it than the indigenous population .

I can't see Tibetan independence being the immediate goal. They must be allowed religious and cultural freedom though. The current method of control of those things coupled with restriction of movement of people and the building of rail and infrastructure to faciliate movement remind me of something.....