Tibetan sovereignty and independence from China.

My mom thinks im pretty.

"Regardless, China has no claim on Tibet at all. In fact, it should be the other way around, Tibet has some claims on Chinese land along with Mongolia.

Note: I've been on a time crunch lately, so I only skimmed the thread and may be restating things.

A few facts:
1. Tibet is almost completely dependent on China. The Chinese government provides almost everything that the Tibetan people live on. Setting them 'free' is like handing them a death sentence.
2. The 'Free Tibet' idea is both foreign and an unpopular idea. In the actual province of Tibet, the vast majority of the population want nothing of this 'freedom' that the West touts. Why not? Well for one, the population is mostly Han Chinese. For another, the group calling for 'freedom' is a minority mignified by the Western media.
3. Look at a map of China. Now, find Tibet.
Tibet is roughly 1/3rd the country. "Greater Tibet" is roughly 2/3rds. There is only one way that the Chinese people will let Tibet go... from their cold, dead hands. Land itself is a highly sought commodity in China and Chinese culture. To lose 2/3rds of the country is unthinkable.

And one unconfirmed note:
Tibet allegedly has large uranium mines, according to Western sources.
Of course, people don't like talking about this, on either side. I'm pretty sure that the reason speaks for itself.
What will an impoverished nation with no other natural resources but a large amount of uranium do?

And where in the world did you get this?

Well as we stated at the beginning, the Tibetan culture is practically being destroyed and the chinese government is sending chinese people over there to live there. Of course there would be more chinese. The fact that the han chinese that their culture have legitimate claims on tibet and mongolia is completely false. If Tibet and Mongolia use the same thing on china, then they would have legitimate claims.

China had no right to annex Tibet when it did, and it is rather deliberately trying to annihilate Tibetan culture and replace it with Han Chinese culture (well, post-Mao Han Chinese culture, anyways). Tibet was an independent state who was outright conquered and annexed by China; this means that China does not have a legitimate claim on Tibet. Since the founding of the UN, and even before that, annexation has been plainly illegal. Winning a war does not give the victor the right to rule over the territory of the loser. That's why people are pissed at Israel today, and why China has never had a legitimate claim on Tibet.

No they're not. The Chinese simply put them into a system where they are dependent on Chinese materials. As soon as they're turned free they'll ween off of them and become independent in market as well as politics.

That's not true at all. You don't see many free Tibet protests though because they'll all get shot.

Why don't a bunch of Americans just move into Portugal and demand "reunification" with America?

Which is false. The Western media hasn't reported on Tibet in ages. If Tibetens could protest you'd see that it wasn't a minority.

No it's not.

Tibet is no more than a 1/7th. And this is more than Tibet would be asking for.

But they're not asking for "Greater Tibet", just Tibet proper.

Which further shows the extent of their imperialism.

Tibet is just mountains. It's not the Garden of Eden or something. It's pretty worthless in the grand scope opf things.

Good, a prime export.

No, it doesn't.

Export it to nations in need of Uranium, probably to fuel their nuclear plants.
I really see no other way they could use the Uranium. I mean it's only default uses are nukes, reactors, and export. They can't build nukes or reactors because they lack the technology and money.

Its too bad that western officials try to pretend they support Tibet, when really all we care for is China.

Well Tibet is more important than China obviously

Damn right it is, Buddhism ftw. Suck it Confucius Chinese, wait fuck Communist.

At anyway i can't wait until the Chinese people wake and realize the economics of china are slowing down.

Which is why the chinese are being so imperialistic. If fact, the chinese plate where China Prime is locate has very few areas of large mineral resources, especially iron. The chinese want the land around it to fuel its need for minerals and its economy. This is why it wants Mongolia and Tibet. The chinese don't give a fuck about the Tibetan nor Mongolian people, all they care about is there minerals.

Another place there going for Minerals is Siberia which there is all ready 200,000,000-300,000,00 ethnic chinese illegals living in the Siberian border, Useally do any mining work or farm work.

Its kind of hard to mine in a frozen tundra.

It's also why there is North Korean work camps in Siberia.

There are Ruby mines in Greenland. With new mining and extraction methods, the whole "frozen tundra" problem becomes a lot easier to deal with.

Southern Parts are actually pretty nice. I mean ya, chilly, but it would be like calling Montana frozen tundra.

And there rich on resources.

Contradiction here. The Chinese provide for the Tibetans because the province of Tibet has NOTHING except parhaps uranium.

And there is a problem here as well. The Tibetans are not even sure how large a terrictory that they are asking for.
Btw: The Tibetans are asking for the HISTORICAL boundries of the Tibetan kingdom, which are far larger than the provincial borders that they have right now.
And even if they aren't, 1/7th of a country that is strapped for land is still quite a bit. Imagine if the U.S. was poised to lose 1/7th of its land.

This coming from an American.
The Chinese people will not stand to have land robbed from them, ill got or not.

Proof? Examples of this happening in Tibet?
And I got that from a Western source.

??? That is in no way the equivilant of what I said.

Proof?
That is a ridiculous thing to say.

Am I reading this right?
You are supporting the sale of nuclear material? Are you mad?!
China would NEVER let that happen any more than the U.S. would allow Mexico or Canada to sell nuclear material.
And for that matter, no NPT-ratifying nation would allow for it without being hypocritical to the greatest of degrees.

So looking to the future is bad now?
And please provide proof of Tibetan resources. I don't remember reading anywhere on this thread about mines in Tibet.

They probably don't. Niether do they care for Zimbaweans or Americans, but all parties seem to be profiting from Chinese economics.
Does anybody care for them? I think not. So they look after themselves.

I'm not the one to argue or debate but I'm literally pissed off at you right now. Your posts on this thread give us the impression that you support china ruling tibet illegally. Annexation of other countries has been banned since the establishment of the UN and that law applies to tibet and china.
The Tibetans were able to produce their own food with farms and livestock especially the yak. They were poor because they couldn't make a surplus. They had enough food to provide the people. Although it's hard to farm in mountains, it's not impossible.
I'm asking you this question, do you want Tibet to be its own sovereign nation and stop the destruction of its culture? Or would you want Tibet be under illegal control of China and allow the progressive destruction of its culture?

They USED TO be able to support their population. Can they use these methods to do so now? With their population at least 5x what it was when they were annexed? Every farming method has its limits. China knows this better, parhaps, than any other country.

To me, it is less a question of whether I want Tibet to be independent and more a question of whether I want the Chinese people to be whole.
And whether other countries and cultures will dictate the fates of Chinese.

I still need proof of this.
Stop it? If it is happening, fine, I see little problem with preserving culture.
But remember that whenever a culture comes in contact with another, it will inevitably change. Look at the U.S. They are the 'melting pot' and their 'culture' is a prime, parhaps a unique, example of this. Only complete isolation can possibly 'preserve' a culture. Even Chinese culture has changed.
And even complete isolation is no guarentee that a culture will remain the same as time goes on. So many things influence it that it will inevitably change.
And not all cultural change is bad. As Western culture helped to abolish the footbinding trade in Chinese culture, Chinese culture has helped to abolish open slavery in Tibetan culture.
If the Tibetan culture is, as you say, being 'destroyed', then parhaps something needs to be done. I value the preservation of unique cultures as much as the next man, but I realize that sometimes things change and sometimes it is for the better.

Please define what is 'illegal control'.

Because of the chinese government "encouraging" han chinese to settle in Tibet, the population obviously raised. If Tibet wasn't annexed, it would be able to support it population through improved farming methods over the past 50-60 years.
When I mean illegally control, I mean annexation. Just because you win a war against a smaller nation doesn't mean that you have legitimate claims to have complete authority and control over their land.