Should india back tibet?

Question

Should india back tibet?

Answer 1

No, India is fine the way it is

Answer 2

I think india should passively support tibet. what i mean is  india should give shelter to the dalai lama, and other tibetan refugees. but at the same time, not make remarks against the chinese govt., that might strain indo-china relations, after all, china is a very powerful state, and if offended, can seriously hurt india. just think of it, even if it stops the goods supplies to india (the chinese toys n stuff) think how much inflation it'll cause.

so i support india's current stand : dont say much officially, help those who you can without harming anybody's sentiments.

cheers!!

Answer 3

Big  countries like USA talk too much of freedom, democracy. But it's hypocrisy. When it comes to trad benefits all big talk n principles go out off the window. Do u think china should have been given Olympic? The whole meaning of Olympic has lost it's value. In my opinion every country must back Tibet. At least rest of the world should share some Bordon, why only India has to put up with all the cost.

Answer 4

Yes, India should back Tibet and I think its already doing so by sheltering the Lama...

The problem is that the monopoly and bullying that will happen if it vocally announces its support will cause havoc...but its time for all the other countries to come out and get together and do something about it...

I live in Canada and we have the Lama come in every year to talk about peace and all...hey thats all good, but how about we get together with India and support it once and for all. an boycott the whole thing and give them their freedom...

Answer 5

Yes, India was once a colony of England, and it knows how much TIbet wants and needs freedom. I believe Manmohan Singh should back Tibet 100%. China is not treating Bhuddists well in Tibet. FREE TIBET!!!

Answer 6

Hope the following may answer your question or, shed light on the issue you’ve just raised:

First, the current anti-China and anti-Chinese campaign runs parallel with US and UK’s world I, world II and the Cold War propaganda. As for World I and II, the propaganda was for involving America in the bloodshed and hatreds of Europe. It was the same as that was waged in the Cold War against the USSR. Now it was being used to push and prepare the US and UK public into a future war with China. To do that the US and UK have to rouse the public’s hatred and the racial contempt for anything of China and of the Chinese.

Second, the US and the UK have been suffering a bad image since the start of Iraq Invasion. Their image is in a fast decline. This is especially true of US image in Europe. For W. Bush, landing on any of the Western European lands would trigger off a protest storm. Besides, this year is 5th anniversary of Iraqi Invasion. Therefore, to keep Bush from visiting any western Europe is a top priority in order to keep the world public away from Iraqi War. This explains as to why Bush bid his respect to Tony Blair’s final visit at the Camp David (July 2007)  John McCain traveled to Western Europe on Bush behalf(March, 2008)----a first precedent for a US president-nominee-to-be to “campaign abroad”. It also explains well as to why that Gordon Brown has visited US twice within a very short time.