Here is my view on Tibet:
Tibet is a country that was invaded by a communist country that took advantage over their peaceful ways and took it over. It has struggled for it's freedom for over 50 years and deserved to be freed as soon as possible. It is a country of peaceful Buhddists and is being taken advantage of by a Communist country and that ABUSE should be ended. China's communist government is old and fading and will fail soon after the Democrocy movement starts up again and Tibet will be a huge part of it. Tibet deserves to be free.

As for the question of China

Why do you accuse me of being communist. I may have some socialist beliefs as well as some democratic beliefs as well. What I definately am not is someone who thinks that capitalism is the final solution. Back to China, no I do not support China, and I am fully in support of the freedom of Tibet. (I hope your point is not based upon the human rights issues, because the US has enough of that to deal with themselves) What I am in support of is the fact that, although China still has a long way to go, they are starting to move in the right direction. I think that after Tiananmen Square there has been a definate change in the attitude of their government. It may take generations to fully change. But society does not change its culture overnight. What will be interesting to see is if China can become an economic force in the world, alongside having socialist beliefs. The US is petrified of the economic power that China has. The world needs another superpower and China is as good as any.

__________________
'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.'
(Mahatma Gandhi)

To dimension XI: I clearly did not fully understand your position and apologize for the sterialization. You do make many good points. I do not agree with everything you say, but you are not the communist I had pictured you as. You do make some good points. And yes, China is making progress. Sorry.

Apology excepted

__________________
'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.'
(Mahatma Gandhi)

sorry guys tibbet is part of china. It is chineese so deal with it. It's like saying free san fransisco. Not gonna happen. If you want to tibet free then you have to fight to free china.

If they want their freedom, they should take the path of the followers of Buddha in Vietnam and learn and train in the art of the Sapper.

__________________
Micheal Hart, contemporary American scientist, ranks the three most influential persons in history in this order: Muhammad,Isaac Newton, and Jesus. Hart places Muhammad at the top of his list of 100 humans because he was "the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels."

Im not surprised, but your the first person Ive heard say this. LOL.

Ive heard they were invaded on TV(History Channel),Books, The Internet.

Can you even back up your statement?

You probably just dont agree with freeing Tibet because it is a Left Wing Rallying Point.

__________________
Micheal Hart, contemporary American scientist, ranks the three most influential persons in history in this order: Muhammad,Isaac Newton, and Jesus. Hart places Muhammad at the top of his list of 100 humans because he was "the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels."

Lion that is just being nasty. In earlier history Tibet invaded China, they also publically sanctioned The Great Yuan Dynasty, the Mongols that purged much of China. While on a topic of Tibet, only the US will wrangle it off them at a mostly costly expense to life especially if what you read on other threads stands as true, with Iraq being a "possible" staging point for China. That sort of attitude wont get them their freedom. So indirectly you can blame America for Chinas grip on Tibet if you like.

The Truth hurts sometimes.

__________________
Micheal Hart, contemporary American scientist, ranks the three most influential persons in history in this order: Muhammad,Isaac Newton, and Jesus. Hart places Muhammad at the top of his list of 100 humans because he was "the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels."