Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
questionmark

Obama: U.S. can't support Tibetan independenc

37 posts in this topic

EIJING, Feb. 21 (UPI) -- President Obama agreed with the Dalai Lama on renewing talks between China and Tibet, but couldn't support Tibetan independence, the White House said Friday.

Obama encouraged direct dialogue to resolve long-standing differences, saying such a dialogue could be positive for China and Tibetans, the White House said in a readout of the meeting.

"In this context, the president reiterated the U.S. position that Tibet is part of the People's Republic of China and that the United States does not support Tibet independence," the readout said.

so, why are we not surprised... or let me formulate that in a different way: there are $843.7 billion reasons to not support you, your holiness!

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ashamed to be an American right now.

33.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm ashamed to be human.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But by god, he wants to arm those Syrian rebels...

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't USA independent from China?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't USA independent from China?

Yes, but Tibet doesn't have anything America wants so there's no need for it to be liberated.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially not coming by way of this Wolf in Lama skin ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could care less about Tibet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but Tibet doesn't have anything America wants so there's no need for it to be liberated.

They have gurkhas, but I guess that's not worth the trouble for USA to cross swords with China. And gurkhas are already with the brits kinda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have gurkhas, but I guess that's not worth the trouble for USA to cross swords with China. And gurkhas are already with the brits kinda.

that would be Nepal, not Tibet.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, life under the Lamas was an absolute pile of steaming **** for the Tibetan people.

I realize that Volvo driving Free Tibet types will probably disagree with that statement.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, life under the Lamas was an absolute pile of steaming **** for the Tibetan people.

I realize that Volvo driving Free Tibet types will probably disagree with that statement.

quite, quite, the problem is that it did not improve under the Chinese either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite, quite, the problem is that it did not improve under the Chinese either.

Have to update that QM ... Tibet has made it through a lot of 'development' in the past 10 years ~ not all agreeable ... but it is what it is ...

It is not a Geo Location that is made for 'modernization'

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody has yet to give a reason WHY Tibet should be under the control of the Dali Lama.

How any people can consent to be ruled by someone who's claimed to be thousands of years old and the reincarnation of the same person over and over again is beyond me.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody has yet to give a reason WHY Tibet should be under the control of the Dali Lama.

How any people can consent to be ruled by someone who's claimed to be thousands of years old and the reincarnation of the same person over and over again is beyond me.

No one has given a reason for it to be under the Chinese. Lets face facts here - he was and still is the rightful leader of Tibet, sanctioned by the Tibetan people. China has no such legitimacy since they gained control by annexation. You really don't have a defensible position here.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody has yet to give a reason WHY Tibet should be under the control of the Dali Lama.

How any people can consent to be ruled by someone who's claimed to be thousands of years old and the reincarnation of the same person over and over again is beyond me.

He's not wanting to control Tibet, he wants it to be a more autonomous region in China, just so the Chinese don't get too mad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's not wanting to control Tibet, he wants it to be a more autonomous region in China, just so the Chinese don't get too mad.

An autonomous region... governed by whom?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to think reincarnation would be good for a politician, they know what mistakes not to make.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to think reincarnation would be good for a politician, they know what mistakes not to make.

He is not a politician he is a Spiritual leader. He has gone on record in the past as saying he lays no blame on China, that Tibet has to live through it's Karma before it can be free. AKA: let it be and freedom will come when it is the right time. I don't understand why he is painted as a protagonist in this arena, he really does not seek any violent agenda just reconciliation and cultural autonomy for his people - meaning his main beef if there is one, is to protect the Tibetan Heritage, which can be done under Chinese if China allows it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rust in the salt is that those backing this 'Dalai' does not share nor is unfavorable to regional destabilizing tactics to pursue their ambitions ~ in total polar positions inclusive of exclusively antagonizing the Central Govt ...

As a religious Leader he should know that 'sacrificing' anything for the purpose of greed on part of the few does his reputation as a religious leader no favors ~

He may parade as a head of a religious order but the purpose of his identity has become political a long time ago ... and with the complicity of this 'wolf' himself

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with you third-eye and am really not understanding the reference to him being a "wolf" of any description. I have met him by the way, when he was in Melbourne during an inter-faith event and more close up in Geelong when he spoke directly to a smaller audience about life and happiness.

At no time did he push any political agenda and the support of a variety of faiths in his message of compassion and the means of true happiness was heart warming, Muslims, christians, hindus just to name the most notable attendees and speakers. Tibet was not a part of the agenda and when the media tried to draw him into a political statement about our then Prime Minister Howard and Australia's relationship with China his only comment was (paraphrased) "if the Prime Minister wishes to continue relations with China then I am very happy for him" it was barely worth a headline and most of his visit provided nothing for the media to continue with, by the time I met him he wasn't even in the papers anymore.

Edited by libstaK
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with you third-eye and am really not understanding the reference to him being a "wolf" of any description. I have met him by the way, when he was in Melbourne during an inter-faith event and more close up in Geelong when he spoke directly to a smaller audience about life and happiness.

~snip

The Dalai is a monk from his early age Libs ... I know that ... he must be some kind of well practiced and trained to be where he was / is ... the Buddhist mantra had hardly made much changes since Krishnamurti or even Bhagwan/Orsi or Maharishi ... maybe UG Krishnamurti did a bit of shaking it up but it was just a different tone along the same veins ~

thing is the 'Dalai' got caught up into this nasty Tibet for Tibetans business ... and he 'complied' with it ...

What I am saying is the 'message not the messenger' and 'the messenger with a wrong message' ~

The Dalai has his own karma to deal with ~ but all this 'new borders' of Tibet thing is giving the inter faith 'message' a blunt after taste ~

I wouldn't mind sitting down to a cuppa tea with him truth be told ~ but I do wish he would keep more distanced from the worldly madness of the political realms ~

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dalai is a monk from his early age Libs ... I know that ... he must be some kind of well practiced and trained to be where he was / is ... the Buddhist mantra had hardly made much changes since Krishnamurti or even Bhagwan/Orsi or Maharishi ... maybe UG Krishnamurti did a bit of shaking it up but it was just a different tone along the same veins ~

thing is the 'Dalai' got caught up into this nasty Tibet for Tibetans business ... and he 'complied' with it ...

What I am saying is the 'message not the messenger' and 'the messenger with a wrong message' ~

The Dalai has his own karma to deal with ~ but all this 'new borders' of Tibet thing is giving the inter faith 'message' a blunt after taste ~

I wouldn't mind sitting down to a cuppa tea with him truth be told ~ but I do wish he would keep more distanced from the worldly madness of the political realms ~

~

Who would speak for the Tibetan people on the world stage if not the Dalai Lama. Certainly we can not expect the Chinese to represent the Tibetan nationals in a fair and impartial manner. He has a duty to his people to attempt to get the cultural autonomy they desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But by god, he wants to arm those Syrian rebels...

No he doesn't.

Obama is a Muslim communist. He wouldn't/doesn't support anyone's freedom. Except for terriosts being held by the USA.

I said it before obama is a trailer.

Edited by danielost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is not a politician he is a Spiritual leader. He has gone on record in the past as saying he lays no blame on China, that Tibet has to live through it's Karma before it can be free. AKA: let it be and freedom will come when it is the right time. I don't understand why he is painted as a protagonist in this arena, he really does not seek any violent agenda just reconciliation and cultural autonomy for his people - meaning his main beef if there is one, is to protect the Tibetan Heritage, which can be done under Chinese if China allows it.

But, when the time comes it may in tail fighting. Freedom is rarely free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.