India-China News and Discussion

KaranR · Post by **KaranR** » 14 Aug 2009 22:56

Land of Tibet was called by the Arya 'Trivishtap'. Tibet is not a name of Tibetian or Chinese language. It is a corruption of the word Trivishtap- Sanskrit. No other origin of the Tibet is known. In Sanskrit 'Trivishtap'[also called Vaikunth in the Hindi Kush] means 'thrice-'. Evidently this name was given to that land because Tibetian highlands were created by the 'thrice-folding' continents of the earth's crust, which rescued the Tibetian and lands from the great Tethys sea, which at one time the Tibetiari, Chinese and the Himalayan regions.
Tibet at one time was under the Sea . People to this day mine sea salt in Tibet. It is held together by the push of the Indian Continent. One day the entire Tibet will fall into the cracks and disappear and form a lake.
Chinese know very little about Tibet and yet they make a cliam!

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 14 Aug 2009 23:30

Please read the Biography of Ashoka The great as well as Buddhism on Wikipedia (provided that you do have access to Wikipedia from the middle kingdom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka_the_Great

sivabala · Post by **sivabala** » 15 Aug 2009 02:28

The discussion going on here right now is akin to the one I had with a fellow chinese student recently. My understanding is Chinese cannot comprehend that people with difference in langauge, culture, ethnicity can live together without compromising any of their own. He believes every Chinese must know Mandarin and follow what was supposed to be so called 'official'. He could not understand that I can be an Indian just knowing my native langauge.
The other thing I noted is they are so brain washed about India's "slavery" under British and think the society is rigidly "casteist".

P.S: Liu is a she. Fellow forumites refer her with appropriate gender. Sad thing is, I have not come across a Indian girl in this forum in my 4 year encounter with this forum, unless somebody is hiding behing a "masking" ID.

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 15 Aug 2009 03:59

China refuses India's request to declare Masood Azhar a terrorist

pran · Post by **pran** » 15 Aug 2009 05:09

durgesh wrote:China refuses India's request to declare Masood Azhar a terrorist

GOI takes its Babu mentality too seriously. The first order of business now should be to liquidate the pest and send a pic of the dead vermin to TLC(TelloList Lepubric of China) representative Dai Binguo. It is good to force the TLC hand and then lob a rotten egg on the TLC H&D.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 15 Aug 2009 05:31

Latest article from Forbes:

New Asia
India's China Problem
Gordon G. Chang, 08.14.09, 12:01 AM EDT
As it catches up to its neighbor and arch-rival, India finds its safety compromised.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 06:29

fjauin wrote:Land of Tibet was called by the Arya 'Trivishtap'. Tibet is not a name of Tibetian or Chinese language. It is a corruption of the word Trivishtap- Sanskrit. No other origin of the Tibet is known. In Sanskrit 'Trivishtap'[also called Vaikunth in the Hindi Kush] means 'thrice-'. Evidently this name was given to that land because Tibetian highlands were created by the 'thrice-folding' continents of the earth's crust, which rescued the Tibetian and lands from the great Tethys sea, which at one time the Tibetiari, Chinese and the Himalayan regions.
Tibet at one time was under the Sea . People to this day mine sea salt in Tibet. It is held together by the push of the Indian Continent. One day the entire Tibet will fall into the cracks and disappear and form a lake.
Chinese know very little about Tibet and yet they make a cliam!

yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 15 Aug 2009 06:40

Liu wrote:
fjauin wrote:Land of Tibet was called by the Arya 'Trivishtap'. Tibet is not a name of Tibetian or Chinese language. It is a corruption of the word Trivishtap- Sanskrit.
...
Chinese know very little about Tibet and yet they make a cliam!
yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

Since USA has it's history with American Indians, will China repeat this history? Liu are you proposing that China will rename Tibet to Hanland after killing all the Tibetians? I am not sure I understand what you meant in your post.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 15 Aug 2009 06:41

Liu wrote:
fjauin wrote:Land of Tibet was called by the Arya 'Trivishtap'. Tibet is not a name of Tibetian or Chinese language. It is a corruption of the word Trivishtap- Sanskrit. No other origin of the Tibet is known. In Sanskrit 'Trivishtap'[also called Vaikunth in the Hindi Kush] means 'thrice-'. Evidently this name was given to that land because Tibetian highlands were created by the 'thrice-folding' continents of the earth's crust, which rescued the Tibetian and lands from the great Tethys sea, which at one time the Tibetiari, Chinese and the Himalayan regions.
Tibet at one time was under the Sea . People to this day mine sea salt in Tibet. It is held together by the push of the Indian Continent. One day the entire Tibet will fall into the cracks and disappear and form a lake.
Chinese know very little about Tibet and yet they make a cliam!
yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

ok. wtf does this mean?

pran · Post by **pran** » 15 Aug 2009 07:39

yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

Liu It was a pathetic attempt at humoring Indians.Your comment surely reflects your contempt for Indians in general. You sure did find it unpalatable that Tibet does not have any this common with the Han Culture starting with the name itself.

Most Chinese citizens believe that their Emperor has nice outfit on him for the world to see where as the rest of the world knows for a fact that the outfit Emperor is putting on shows the naked reality. Consider the Olympics, what a great show was put up to hide the dirty laundry. Neither it was good for business nor public relations and rest of the world just wanted to get it over with and give the chinese ego a pleasure it has been hankering for decades. All the despotic regimes are your friends, that tells something about yourself.

archan · Post by **archan** » 15 Aug 2009 07:46

Liu wrote: yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

Next time I see you trying to act smart, I will throw you out of here. You better edit that post of your or you will be gone.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 07:57

shaardula wrote:
Liu wrote: yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".
ok. wtf does this mean?

well " indians" here were " american native Indians".

during 19th century, Yankees massacred tribes of "Aemrican native Indians" .but now those hypercripsy yankees are teaching people "human rights" all over the world.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 15 Aug 2009 08:04

pran wrote:...Most Chinese citizens believe that their Emperor has nice outfit on him for the world to see where as the rest of the world knows for a fact that the outfit Emperor is putting on shows the naked reality. Consider the Olympics, what a great show was put up to hide the dirty laundry. Neither it was good for business nor public relations and rest of the world just wanted to get it over with and give the chinese ego a pleasure it has been hankering for decades. All the despotic regimes are your friends, that tells something about yourself.

Well said, pran.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 15 Aug 2009 08:09

Liu wrote: yankees once said BS.

Liu please dont take civilised behaviour for inability, you might know abuses/epithet that can be used from mandarin believe me we have thousands of languages and if it were not for the sobering talk from admins you would have received the choicest epithets to shame your whole clan

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 15 Aug 2009 10:14

I reiterate my request to the mods for an outright ban on prc drones. For all those who still are not able to come out of the hind-chini bhai bhai & 'let-us-respect-other-viewpoints' balderdash, it is time you all woke up & smelt the coffee. As I have said in the past, I again reiterate, the prc posters have zilch to contribute to this forum apart from some dirty propaganda.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Aug 2009 11:53

yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".

So China is trying to do the bad things that others did 4 centuries ago?

Now is it any wonder why you are backing up the wrong horse?

Should 'civilization' be based on these value systems?

Now think why China is not respected. Why it has hardly influenced Asia ever. India influenced Asia much more for millenia without the need of increasing it's physical boundaries using hard power. China with all the hard power at it's disposal can't even influence it's backyard, Cambodia and Vietnam, Korea and Japan. Or for that matter it's own people..

Sorry to say but hundreds of millions of even ordinary Chinese find solace in Indian originated value systems.

Your hard power is a failure for starters. People will never respect the Hitlers, Stalins and Maos of this world. You may win a few battles, but long run you've already lost. Think about it.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 15 Aug 2009 12:21

Whatever one may say, the best laundry people are the Chinese.

I get all my clothes done by them!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 15 Aug 2009 12:32

Once upon a time Chinese Dentists were equally famous, because it involves using lot of China

pran · Post by **pran** » 15 Aug 2009 12:43

Harbans ji,
Carefully watch the pattern. Comlade Liu responds to fjauin's post about Tibet's historical name bearing a link to the Indian civilization which he did not find palatable. So he goes off in a tangent and posts how bad the American settlers were who went on murdering the natives and instead of using the right ethnic name (american-indians or less respectable one red-indian) makes it indian. He is trying to be one smart aleck , immediately changing tune to american-indians still insisting that the big khan in no good for Indians. It is like in mahabharata "aswathama hata iti Gaja". He is not comfortable with the idea of India becoming strategically important to the khans to give his uncle jiang some sleepless nights. It is good example of a conditioned mind and noodle logic.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 15 Aug 2009 12:49

Liu,
If you want to see Indian influence on Tibet, look no further just study classical Tibetan language and then study Sanskrit and look for similarity. It will not take a rocket scientist to find out that it is just a derivative of Sanskrit and not Mandarin by any means.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 15 Aug 2009 13:05

Liu wrote: the history and status quo fully prove that the borders are painted according to power balance ,instead of morality or ethnic.

To take what you are saying one degree further, Darwin's theory of evolution does state that the fittest will survive. However, what it doesn't state is how the fittest will be able to survive: through competition with others or through cooperation with others or maybe a little bit of both.

Clearly China has chosen a path of natural competition with others despite the fact that your livelihood (i.e economy) depends on others for its export-oriented economy. We in India have chosen a path of natural cooperation with others despite the fact that our livelihood (i.e economy) is not dependent on others. At the same time, we realize that no matter what we do, there will always be people who will wish us harm because of their own hangups.

China sees the world full of enemies and guards itself against friends (also known as paranoia). While as, we in India see the world as being full of friends and guard against enemies.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 15 Aug 2009 14:22

harbans wrote:yankees once said " only dead Indians are good Indians" ,but where yankee's live is still call " USA" ,instead of " Indianland".
Should 'civilization' be based on these value systems?

No, civilization will never be based on such value system, barbarianism (as in the past) will be. The funny thing is that given their officially drummed-up sense of historical injustice and victimization, it turns out that India is the only "outside" entity they have some "love" for. Despite their natural hostility towards the rest of the world and this hostility is now certainly filtering its way towards India.

The Porkies have a great philosophy based on their own interpretation of Islam and see India as a hinderance to completing their version of Islamic dream and hence their hostility to India. The Chinese, on the other hand see India as a hinderance towards their goal of achieving world domination and hence their hostility to India. However, unlike the Porkies, the Chinese don't seem to have a deep seated philosophy or value system that would guide this hostility towards India. This is a gap that can certainly be filled BEFORE the Chinese rulers and their minions get too full of themselves as a result of matching the splendor of western cities (so to speak).

As far as world domination is concerned, their notions of superpower is modeled on the current post coldwar status of US as the only super-power of the world. I think its safe to say that this was a temporary stage of world history. Such concentration of power into one country cannot last for long and will only be replaced by multiple power centers in the world in future. The Chinese are chasing an elusive unachievable dream. Or perhaps this is the only way their leadership could mobilizing support.

I am not sure anymore what people speak of when they utter the words "ancient chinese culture". What ancient culture? Communism or Barbarianism? If there was ever an ancient chinese culture, it is either passive or completely dead against the test of time.

KaranR · Post by **KaranR** » 15 Aug 2009 14:27

Liu wrote:well " indians" here were " american native Indians".

during 19th century, Yankees massacred tribes of "Aemrican native Indians" .but now those hypercripsy yankees are teaching people "human rights" all over the world.

You have answer from various members. But I fail see your point!!
“Once king Maha Bali with huge Daitya army invaded China. He had only one desire to wipe the Chinese from the face of the Earth; defeated and driven out of their country. It was the ruler of Tibet that saved them.”
If you consider using force to occupy Tibet and other areas to be legitimate. Why do you object when people use force against you to defend their culture and land? So the Japanese were correct invading China?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Aug 2009 14:46

The Porkies have a great philosophy based on their own interpretation of Islam and see India as a hinderance to completing their version of Islamic dream and hence their hostility to India. The Chinese, on the other hand see India as a hinderance towards their goal of achieving world domination and hence their hostility to India. However, unlike the Porkies, the Chinese don't seem to have a deep seated philosophy or value system that would guide this hostility towards India.

Excellently phrased. This is exactly what drives both and the lack of deep seated Chinese hostility..is exactly what keeps some sanity between India and China. Liu and Xie simply exemplify what we and our planners for millenia are appalled to know every time we hear it..that brutalit forms the corner stone to civilization.

History has shown ALL brutal 'Civilizations' have fallen on the wayside. What exactly is the 'Chinese Han civilization'? The Great Wall of China, Gun Powder? It is not for no reason Hinduism is the oldest surviving religion and India the oldest surviving Civilization, despite the worlds most savage and bloodiest conquests conducted in the most brutal manner on it's soil. No other Civilization could have survived the brutality that India suffered. The Persians fell, the Romans, the British and the short lived American one is at it's end of domination in a few decades.

What would the world want to see in place? A Chinese Imperialistic empire dominating or a pluralist, tolerant India? If i was in Thailand, Phillipines, Cambodia, Japan, Australia, US, Europe, Africa i know what i would want. There would be no competition at all. China will bet a lot of backing from the Islamic world for sure through not a congruence or synergy of ideas, but a plain 'my enemy's enemy is my friend logic'. How powerful would that be against the rest?

If China continues in that path it's a matter of time that it's markets will be cut off, it's economy devastated, it's internal dissensions out in the open. What happened to the mighty Soviets? How easy they crumbled.

Indeed Tibetan script is Devanagri. If the Han Chinese even had 1/10'000th the influence India has had in Tibet, they'd be outshouting us. But would India ever have taken over Tibet? Never would that have happened. And no one in India contemplated taking over Tibet. Like Bhutan max it would exist as a protectorate.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 15 Aug 2009 15:24

Sardar Patel called Tibet "the last outpost of Indian culture in the Himalayas." Nehru called it "a peice of barren rock." Nehru won in the end because he refused to send the India army to Tibet in a pre-emptive move despite pleadings of the Tibetan leadership to save their country from China.

This is what happens when Hindus consistently choose as their leaders people who are hostile to their own civilisation. Hindus are the only race in the world to show this behaviour. By electing Sonia Gandhi and Congress, they have shown that they are incapable of learning any lesson from history. But you cannot learn any lesson from history if you don't know your history!

China's claim to Tibet is nothing but a hoax and a lie based on bullying. The cocky Chinese leadership has to be given a bloody nose, like the japanese gave it. Indian army is fully capable of doing it. Just make sure that we don't have another articulate but deranged leader like Nehru presiding over our India in war time. Indian army is usually defeated by not the enemy but by the Indian prime minister.

The sooner Indians prepare for an all-out war with China, the better. That war is the unfinished business of 1962 that Indians have to complete. Indians should not make the mistake of fighting this war in Tibet. You can raze the whole of Tibet and it will be like water off China's back.

Indian army has to fight this war by going through Burma and taking the fight to the main population centers of China. This is what Indian strategy should be. It is better for the next India China war to be fought in Burma, not in Tibet.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Aug 2009 15:35

Sanjay ji, don't get me wrong when i said India would not have conquered Tibet in the sense the Han did. It would be similar to Bhutan-India relationship. India should have made Tibet a protectorate in the early 50's itself. I do believe Nehru's vision did India in in that regards and agree every bit with Patels on this score. But even now we see, we're not putting the bully on the backfoot. We're being deferential on AP, while we should be talkin Tibet or at the very least Kailash, Mansarover, Aksai Chin and Tibetan rights.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 15 Aug 2009 15:36

harbans wrote:Sanjay ji, don't get me wrong when i said India would not have conquered Tibet in the sense the Han did. It would be similar to Bhutan-India relationship. India should have made Tibet a protectorate in the early 50's itself. I do believe Nehru's vision did India in in that regards and agree every bit with Patels on this score. But even now we see, we're not putting the bully on the backfoot. We're being deferential on AP, while we should be talkin Tibet or at the very least Kailash, Mansarover, Aksai Chin and Tibetan rights.

To take on China, you need unapologetic Hindu nationalists in power. This is not possible till Indians get rid of the leftist/liberal mafia that Nehru reared and left behind to rule after him and which is today being fed by the anglo-saxons. Nehru from his grave is still not allowing us to fight a bloody war with China.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 15:48

Dhiman wrote:
Liu wrote: the history and status quo fully prove that the borders are painted according to power balance ,instead of morality or ethnic.
To take what you are saying one degree further, Darwin's theory of evolution does state that the fittest will survive. However, what it doesn't state is how the fittest will be able to survive: through competition with others or through cooperation with others or maybe a little bit of both.

Clearly China has chosen a path of natural competition with others despite the fact that your livelihood (i.e economy) depends on others for its export-oriented economy. We in India have chosen a path of natural cooperation with others despite the fact that our livelihood (i.e economy) is not dependent on others. At the same time, we realize that no matter what we do, there will always be people who will wish us harm because of their own hangups.

China sees the world full of enemies and guards itself against friends (also known as paranoia). While as, we in India see the world as being full of friends and guard against enemies.

it is amusing that all neighbours of India seem to dislike India now while China is popular with most of its neighbours.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 15 Aug 2009 15:57

it is amusing that all neighbours of India seem to dislike India now while China is popular with most of its neighbours.

China is popular with all banana republics, tin-pot dictators and failed states, whether in Asia or Africa. A country is known by the company it keeps.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Aug 2009 16:04

it is amusing that all neighbours of India seem to dislike India now while China is popular with most of its neighbours.

China's best friends:

Bakistan: Terrorist Central.
Myanmar: The worlds most despotic military totalitarian regime.
Nepal: The Maoists led by Prachanda who will bring Nepal to it's knees and destroy it's culture.
Bangladesh: We all know where it's headed and what sort of interests China projects there.
Sudan, North Korea, Libya form another triad of Chinese friends.

I mean Liu, don't you sometimes think you deserve better friends and a better image for yourself in the world? Do you really want to be known as despotic, brainwashed people?

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 16:10

harbans wrote:it is amusing that all neighbours of India seem to dislike India now while China is popular with most of its neighbours.

China's best friends:

Bakistan: Terrorist Central.
Myanmar: The worlds most despotic military totalitarian regime.
Nepal: The Maoists led by Prachanda who will bring Nepal to it's knees and destroy it's culture.
Bangladesh: We all know where it's headed and what sort of interests China projects there.
Sudan, North Korea, Libya form another triad of Chinese friends.

I mean Liu, don't you sometimes think you deserve better friends and a better image for yourself in the world? Do you really want to be known as despotic, brainwashed people?

you forget someones:

Southeast Asia: " china , your market and tourists are welcome"
S.korea:" China is S.Korea' biggest market"
Africa: " we need chinese investment"
Latin America:" it is important to let Chinese market open"
Australia:" I love CHinese wallet"

anyhow, thick checkbooks are helpful to promote popularity, if you are not charmful enough.
now China may be not charmful enough,but it has thick checkbooks.

however, India has neither charmful face nor thick checkbooks. so India are not popuar in south Asian sub-continent.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 15 Aug 2009 16:19

I love Chinese Food, does it make me your friend?

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 16:24

vaman wrote:I love Chinese Food, does it make me your friend?

thick wallets can make you other's boss,while food can not.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Aug 2009 16:26

anyhow, thick checkbooks are helpful to promote popularity, if you are not charmful enough.
now China may be not charmful enough,but it has thick checkbooks.

however, India has neither charmful face nor thick checkbooks. so India are not popuar in south Asian sub-continent.

Valid points. So China's claim to popularity in the neighbourhood is gonna be Brute Power and Thick pockets.

But, you see what is happening is that India's wallets are fattening too. India's economy is as big as what China's was in 2002. And people are watching it rise. Everyone is coming to know that India will be big, very big. They too are making bets. And like Nigerians actively exposed the fake 'Made in India' drug scam from China, it's going to happen on a much larger scale. Already Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan are opening up to India. Why name them? Indian companies deal with China too. You have a 35 billion USD trade surplus with us. They have lobbies too.

So while i agree with you, trade is good for cooperation, China's friends defined politically are all crooks, thugs and despots in the real sense of the word.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 15 Aug 2009 16:34

Liu wrote:
vaman wrote:I love Chinese Food, does it make me your friend?
thick wallets can make you other's boss,while food can not.

The Japs have thicker wallets than yours, are they your friends? Were they your friends when they came to show you their thick wallets? More than anything dear Liu, we sense deep heartburn in Chinistan over the positive press reports that India is getting, and what's more diyar Liu, we are making progress despite the government and despite all the social evils that you seem to associate with India and Indians. Perhaps it is time to reduce visits to D&D forum and starting my Nodong is fatter/uglier but attracts more prostitutes than yours kind of debate

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 16:36

harbans wrote:
anyhow, thick checkbooks are helpful to promote popularity, if you are not charmful enough.
now China may be not charmful enough,but it has thick checkbooks.

however, India has neither charmful face nor thick checkbooks. so India are not popuar in south Asian sub-continent.
Valid points. So China's claim to popularity in the neighbourhood is gonna be Brute Power and Thick pockets.

But, you see what is happening is that India's wallets are fattening too. India's economy is as big as what China's was in 2002. And people are watching it rise. Everyone is coming to know that India will be big, very big. They too are making bets. And like Nigerians actively exposed the fake 'Made in India' drug scam from China, it's going to happen on a much larger scale. Already Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan are opening up to India. Why name them? Indian companies deal with China too. You have a 35 billion USD trade surplus with us. They have lobbies too.

So while i agree with you, trade is good for cooperation, China's friends defined politically are all crooks, thugs and despots in the real sense of the word.

distorted data of GDP just lead you nowhere.

on the surface, India's economy is as big as what China's was in 2002,because ,China' GDP in 2002 was 1.2 trillion USD ,and India's GDP today is also 1.2 trillon USD. both are same.

however ,if you really visited china in 2002, you will find it just a joke that India's economy is as big as what China's was in 2002.

a chinese Grade C city in 2002 was still more modern and cleaner than Mumbai today.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Aug 2009 16:46

a chinese Grade C city in 2002 was still more modern and cleaner than Mumbai today.

if that was the correct metric to judge GDP people would have used it in stead !

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 15 Aug 2009 16:48

a chinese Grade C city in 2002 was still more modern and cleaner than Mumbai today

True Liuddin but then you said just a little while ago

anyhow, thick checkbooks are helpful to promote popularity, if you are not charmful enough.
now China may be not charmful enough,but it has thick checkbooks

Why does cleanliness matter if the wallets are fat enough?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 15 Aug 2009 16:51

I submit with all humility that Liu has been cleaning the floor at this thread very effectively. Using most of you herrowic posters as the mop. Please try to argue with Liu using intelligence and civility.

So Liu, you appear to be saying that China views Tibetans as savages to be eliminated, not as equal citizens of the People's Republic? Is this also true of all non-Han minorities in China? The Han plan is, to paraphrase Chinese emulation of the 18th century "Yankee" example that you use as inspiration,

The only good non-Han is a dead or enslaved non-Han

This is a very new picture of modern China _ and here I thought Chinese people are well-educated and modern, not the same as the filthy hordes of Chengiz K. Han who went around destroying civilized societies? Shows how ignorant I am about modern Chinese, I guess.

So it is true, the report I read about over 1 million Tibetans being massacred in the past 3 years? How about the Uighurs?

The only good Uighur is a dead Uighur?

Or the Taiwanese?

The only good Formosan Splittist is a dead Formosan Splittist?

Or the Vietnamese?

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 15 Aug 2009 16:58

Rahul M wrote:

a chinese Grade C city in 2002 was still more modern and cleaner than Mumbai today.

if that was the correct metric to judge GDP people would have used it in stead !

GDP is sometimes helpful. but it is not helpful for you to understand of economy of China.

but I just trust what i see. I can compare china and the coutries i visited.

Malaysia has a per nomonal GDP of 10,000 USD or so, But after visiting Malaysia, I don't think Malaysia is more advanced than Chinese coastal provinces like Guangdong,Jiangsu and Zhejiang
,although the per nominal GDP of those chinese province is just about 1/2 of Malaysia.