The emergence of China as an economic superpower

It's interesting that you mention Ireland, because the same logic you're using also proves the "fact" that all of Ireland is a part of Britain. It was subject to the English crown from 1169 and directly ruled by the British starting from 1603.

So if Britain decided tomorrow to cross the border into southern Ireland and re-assert its control, would you say that we should talk about the "2008 British reunification" instead of calling it an invasion?

Hi Turtlewind,

Thanks for commenting. The key difference here, I would say, is the fact that Ireland is a sovereign nation, whereas Tibet was never a sovereign nation and will never be, simply because the then Republic of China and the People's Republic of China never renounced their claim on Tibet--even the Dalai Lama does not reject China’s sovereignty over Tibet, for he calls for autonomy, not independence.

Yes, England did in fact rule Ireland from 1600s-1900s, but after the Irish War of Independence, the 1920 Government of Ireland Act was signed such that the symbols, powers and functions of independence were passed on to the Irish Free State (Southern Ireland) by England.

Thus, Southern Ireland is equivalent to a nation, while Tibet is simply a region, at least on paper. The term "invasion" can only be applied to one nation invading another (like U.S.-Iraq), so yes, I would call it an invasion if Britain decided to enter Southern Ireland.

Yes, Face the Facts. Indeed. Chinese are amazed that westerners continue to talk about the Chinese invasion of Tibet in 1950. About as amazed as Tibetans, Mongols, Europeans, and Americans are to hear Chinese talk about the "Peaceful Liberation" of Tibet, or the "Peaceful Re-Unification" of Tibet. Both sides have a responsibility to try to understand the other. Why?

Because world peace is at stake.

Because of the rising tide of extreme nationalism in China today, and because of China's rapidly expanding military, because of China's support of the genocidal government in Sudan-- Non-Chinese are disturbed when Chinese insist that they alone know the truth. It reminds us of other extreme nationalist movements in the past, which resulted in World War II.

Because of the horrors committed against China by Mongols, Manchu's and Europeans-- and genocide was used against China, repeatedly-- Chinese today have this chip on their shoulder. What is usually described as "An aggrieved sense of nationalism." Of course that's what Germans felt just before WWII. This aggrieved sense of nationalism means that most Chinese are happy to swallow the distorted history of Asia, that they have been fed since 1912, by Nationalist and Communist governments.

But you cannot build a modern Chinese state on lies. Chinese must come to grips with the facts of history. And those are very simple. China never conquered Tibet until 1950. China lived under foreign rule for more than half of the past 1,000 years. They hated their Mongol and Manchu rulers-- and Mao made that very clear when he rose up against what he called the foreign Manchu rulers of China.

If the world were to accept China's distorted view of history-- that the Mongol conquest of Tibet, and then China, (and all the rest of Eurasia) somehow made Tibet part of China... what then. Next will Chinese be telling us that the entire South China sea has belonged to China since ancient times?

By distorting history, to justify its invasion and occupation of Eastern Turkestan, Tibet, and Southern Mongolia (Xingjiang, Xizang and Inner Mongolia)-- the Chinese nation is showing the rest of the world that it is willing to create, and broadcast, lies, to justify invasion. Can you imagine how much that frightens the rest of the world?

We remember when Hitler said that Austria and "been part of Germany since ancient Times" and used false history to justify his invasion of Austria, and Poland and so on..

If Chinese want to retain Tibet, they need to quit lying and just say it straight. Ok. We took Tibet and East Turkistan, and Inner Mongolia, and we are not giving them back. Its war if you want to contest that. However, we will not be making any further territorial demands-- including Taiwan.

Instead we see a rising anger in China, at how mis-understood China is. In fact westerners are conflating China, with the actions of the Party. Chinese are victims of the party, just like Tibetans... And there, that’s the main issue, which no one is willing to touch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZMyHq7cQeE
Here is a simple presentation of the facts.

Errr...no. Tibet has been independant from China, and a lot more recently than Ireland was. There are plenty of historic maps to prove it. Have a look

http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/viewthread.php?tid=446&pid=8802&page=1&extra=page%3D1#pid8802

http://www.davidrumsey.com/rumsey/Size3/D0114/0586068.jpg?userid=38&username=browserRumsey&resolution=3&servertype=Browser&cid=8&iid=RUMSEY&vcid=NA&profileid=13&usergroup=Rumsey3x&language=0

People keep forgetting that China itself was not aunified country for most of its history. And Tibet was also independant then.

Ireland is Britain's Taiwan so we can certainly sympathise with the Chinese and their frustrations over Tibet. There are many places around the world that should still be part of the UK but thanks to neglect of the Empire by the British authorities have been tragically lost. Britain should have followed France's lead when it came to decolonisation and integrated its smaller territories with the Fatherland. The French Empire is a lot less worse for wear because of it. I wish the British government would take a leaf out of China's book in dealing with our rengegade Irish province. It should have never been allowed to break away from the rest of the country in the first place. No doubt, that colossal mistake was the darkest day in the nations history and our sovereignty will not be complete until the 26 separatist occupied counties return to the fold. Let's hope it's sooner rather than later.

And yeah, British maps should show the whole of the British Isles as being part of the United Kingdom and should drop the "Northern" from our countries name. It's not as if the banana republic calls itself Republic of Southern Ireland so why should we compromise over our name. Ireland belongs in the UK, it is British and always has been whether those stubborn Irish like it or not.

Kosovo is Serbia and Ireland is Britain. Solidarity with our Serbian brothers and sisters and down with separatist scum. Reunification now!

"The key difference here, I would say, is the fact that Ireland is a sovereign nation, whereas Tibet was never a sovereign nation and will never be, simply because the then Republic of China and the People's Republic of China never renounced their claim on Tibet--even the Dalai Lama does not reject China’s sovereignty over Tibet, for he calls for autonomy, not independence."

Ireland is not and never has been a sovereign nation. The 26 indepedent counties are not a nation! The whole Ireland of island is a nation, and the Irish nation along with the English, Scottish and Welsh nation make up the British nation. Those are the facts. The British nation is a collection of 4 very similar but distinctive individual nations and it makes no sense whatsoever for only 3 and a bit to be in unification. There will never be an independent sovereign republic occupying the whole of Ireland because there will never be a majority of separatist losers in Ulster. In fact, support for withdrawing from the UK in Ulster is decreaasing. It is a lost cause and if anything, Ireland and the remaining UK are growing closer and should one day completely reunify.

"Yes, England did in fact rule Ireland from 1600s-1900s, but after the Irish War of Independence, the 1920 Government of Ireland Act was signed such that the symbols, powers and functions of independence were passed on to the Irish Free State (Southern Ireland) by England."

England hasn't existed as part of a sovereign state since 1707. The 1920 Government of Ireland Act was a mistake and is completely invalid. The Southern Irish occupation regime has violated its key principles repeatedly. For example, they declared a republic instead of retaining the London based Monarch as Sovereign of Ireland. The UK government has never recognised the Irish people as foreigners from the rest of the people that make up the British Isles and never will. They are part of the British people and nation.

"Thus, Southern Ireland is equivalent to a nation, while Tibet is simply a region, at least on paper. The term "invasion" can only be applied to one nation invading another (like U.S.-Iraq), so yes, I would call it an invasion if Britain decided to enter Southern Ireland."

You may think it is equivalent to a nation but the fact is it is simply not a nation. A nation is not based on political borders but on a common heritage, culture and the ethnic descent of its people. Only when all of the territory of these people exists within the political borders of the nation does politics represent the nation.

"The key difference here, I would say, is the fact that Ireland is a sovereign nation, whereas Tibet was never a sovereign nation and will never be, simply because the then Republic of China and the People's Republic of China never renounced their claim on Tibet--even the Dalai Lama does not reject China’s sovereignty over Tibet, for he calls for autonomy, not independence."

Ireland is not and never has been a sovereign nation. The 26 indepedent counties are not a nation! The whole Ireland of island is a nation, and the Irish nation along with the English, Scottish and Welsh nation make up the British nation. Those are the facts. The British nation is a collection of 4 very similar but distinctive individual nations and it makes no sense whatsoever for only 3 and a bit to be in unification. There will never be an independent sovereign republic occupying the whole of Ireland because there will never be a majority of separatist losers in Ulster. In fact, support for withdrawing from the UK in Ulster is decreaasing. It is a lost cause and if anything, Ireland and the remaining UK are growing closer and should one day completely reunify.

"Yes, England did in fact rule Ireland from 1600s-1900s, but after the Irish War of Independence, the 1920 Government of Ireland Act was signed such that the symbols, powers and functions of independence were passed on to the Irish Free State (Southern Ireland) by England."

England hasn't existed as part of a sovereign state since 1707. The 1920 Government of Ireland Act was a mistake and is completely invalid. The Southern Irish occupation regime has violated its key principles repeatedly. For example, they declared a republic instead of retaining the London based Monarch as Sovereign of Ireland. The UK government has never recognised the Irish people as foreigners from the rest of the people that make up the British Isles and never will. They are part of the British people and nation.

"Thus, Southern Ireland is equivalent to a nation, while Tibet is simply a region, at least on paper. The term "invasion" can only be applied to one nation invading another (like U.S.-Iraq), so yes, I would call it an invasion if Britain decided to enter Southern Ireland."

You may think it is equivalent to a nation but the fact is it is simply not a nation. A nation is not based on political borders but on a common heritage, culture and the ethnic descent of its people. Only when all of the territory of these people exists within the political borders of the nation does politics represent the nation.

Sorry for posting twice site was acting homosexual.

Ireland is not and never has been a sovereign nation. The 26 independent counties are not a nation! The whole island of Ireland is a nation, and the Irish nation along with the English, Scottish and Welsh nation make up the British nation. - should have been the first sentence.