Dalai Lama says: "POLAND HAS RETAINED ITS SPIRIT"

Very true, lesser. He has a political agenda also. We can't forget this but he is furthering a noble agenda too.

The Dalai Lama is economical? Surely that is good :)

It is better to be badly (possibly) ruled by your own people than badly ruled by a foreign occupation.

Absolutely!!

Iraq seems to be bearing this out. Yes, Hussein killed many thousands over the course of a long reign but, in only 5 years in Iraq, so many have been killed in this period.

Agreed, Hussein was a bastard, no denying it, but the streets of Iraq were a lot safer for the average person then, than they are now.

Hussein maintained some semblance of order, dissenters knew what they faced. Fractious divisions were seized upon and snuffed out. Hussein did his utmost to instill allegiance to the Baathist regime.

Now, chaos reigns and the new adminstration faces an uphill struggle to put a lid on it. It's a hornets' nest now, go try containing hornets and see how far you get.

However, I believe the tide will turn and history will show that there was some merit in America's decision to impose a democracy there. The problem is that so much blood will be spilled along the way, this fact will pale into relative insignificance.

So much for Shock and Awe and will be over in a few weeks

The point is, America was bumbling along to stumble across the right strategy.

Anyway, this is for another thread I think

mind you, when have you ever heard of a famous person going to a country on an official visit and not having some nice words to say. What politician visiting Zimbabwe as a guest would not have a nice pre written speech about Robert Mugabe. Its common sense.

The fact that the commies had propaganda for you shows how they wanted to assimilate Polish people, "hearts and minds".
The English never came up with propaganda for the Irish, against the Irish yes but they did not want us.
I do see a difference in our histories about this.
I think i know what you mean a dominator is a dominator but there is a difference, know what I mean?

I will not pretend that I know Irish history because I don’t. In Ireland’s case the English Crown desired ultimately to incorporate Ireland into the realm of British authority and the tools used to achieve this were British settlers in Ireland and use of English language. In Poland’s case it was virtually the same, the only difference being it was Russia or Germany trying to force their language on us and eventually incorporate us into their realm. Propaganda was just another tool for them to achieve their objective, it’s not designed to win "hearts and minds", well maybe in the short term to pacify the population or at least keep it neutral and give it a common goal to strive for but in the long term its goal is to assimilate the conquered people.

Although some historians tend to treat Ireland as the exception because Ireland has neither successfully assimilated into the British state as Wales and Scotland have (but have they?), nor completely broken with Great Britain in a successful bid for independence as most of Britain's former colonies have because of the Northern Ireland situation, I see it as just their unique position and circumstances and only temporary. One can even find similarity between Northern Ireland and Królewiec situation. I find many similarities between Poland and Ireland and virtually no differences, it’s just that our unique situations make it appear so. Trust me Russians and Germans “wanted us” for the same reason as the English Crown wanted Ireland – territory and cheap labor that’s all (just another possession). It’s a bit more complicated in Russian case but it sure holds true when it comes to the Germans.

Agreed.
Conquest was the fashion of the day.


There are Scots and Welsh who would punch you for the mere thought and others who'd shrug their shoulders, same in Ireland.
As one Scotsman i met said to me, " you have it lucky, youz aren't stuck on to the bitch". Maybe not PC but he had a point, I think?


:) Long live the E.U :p


I agree, except different ideology behind the take overs.


Ok, i see where you are going with this, my point was about communists.
The German conquest could be seen as similar.

That’s not me talking, it’s the assessment that I have read by some of the historians looking at present day Britain.


Yap that’s a B**** :-).


Don’t kid yourself it’s almost the same and never out of love.

I know. I was not threatening you at all, i just wanted to tell you of my experiences.


Yes, it is difficult for me to understand communism.
But I can see similarities wherever people have been conquered.
Ah yes, Dalai Lama says: "POLAND HAS RETAINED ITS SPIRIT".
And in Africa too, I personally understood or empathised with the blacks in South Africa than the Whites, something you don't forget.
(It must be noted that there are very many fine white people in S.A.)


If you mean it was not out of "true" communist brotherly love, well yeah.
Maybe it was just a different way of doing the same thing?
But boy oh boy, communism is different.

And you should that’s what Dalai Lama talks about.


I don’t growing up in a totally homogeneous country this is probably as alien concept for me as communism must be for you.


No, no - Ideology remember; everything is sacrificed for the greater cause including your own family so you can forget about nationalism. Why do you think they called themselves Soviets instead of Russians?

Possibly.


Without looking, it must be Canada?

(And before anyone starts jumping down the guy's throat, these are his experiences)


A kind of "in with the new out with the old"?

LOL I wish that was the case.

How much would you willing to sacrifice to change bad foreign occupation to possibly even worse domestic regime? Your fortune, your life, fate of your family? What type of sacrifice would you recommend to people in Tibet?

Robert Mugabe, 'The Reign of Terror' (Robespierre)...

Hi guys I am new here but I want to contribute in this forum

How do you define Martyrdom. Someone like Dalai Lama who does not believe in God how come after his death becomes a martyr. He is non-believer her rather believes in another non-believer (Bhuda) as his God.

What he wants is autonomy of Tibet. He just wants his people to be able to talk freely in Tibetan, teach their children Tibetan history and tradition, and, of course, Buddhism. He is NOT asking for Tibetan independence.

Is that too much to ask for? I don't think so.

he is simply taking the middle path. it is an important aspect of buddism

Maybe he wanted to say 'Poland has retained its spirits'. How does the Dalai Lama know what the Polish spirit is anyway?

What?
I assume you are aware of the "Free Tibet" campaign.
Or are you suggesting they are better off under China's regime?


Rhodesia, Read (Wiki) about the Rhodesian Bush War, if you would like to know how Mugabe was created.
He is indeed a terrifying dictator.

But I hardly think China and Tibet are comparable to indigenous people ruling themselves as Mugabe or Robespierre, wouldn't you say?


Didn't he meet Jan Pawel Drugi, an excellent representative of the Polish spirit.

I think he did, yes. So did Ian Paisley and that was a farcical meeting. His presence would be contrary to the Polish spirit.

I agree wholeheartedly with that.

I have one sad though about this - with all the 'Free Tibet' graffitis etc... when China will get to work with flattening Tibet down, as they already started, will there be any help for them.

I think for example that we Poles should, after having waited for Western help in the last war, we should understand.

I think that Americans should, because they invaded Iraq on the ground of putting down a regime.

Britain might as well, after all they take part in most of the alive conflicts on the planet.

The question is - will China be 'attackable'?
I'll make a thread.

Scots, Poles and many others around the globe are aware of the drive towards independence. Yoshi is a Japanese guy and I find that they are very aware of what their Chinese neighbours get up to.

We don't want to see the day when all the major powers are police states. The EU, America, Russia and China already have much apparatus in place to show that that exists to differing extents.

The battle for identification is one VERY much worth fighting. The Chechens, the Tibetans and the Ughyurs being but 3. Poland will not be trodden on, they must see the warning signs when they can but when your leader caters mainly to mafia elements....

That's Poliszynel's secret, innit...

Norman Davies described the previous system in Poland as a spider web of unlawfulness and mediocrity. Korwin-Mikke is noting that this spider web had not given up after 1989 - it has simply changed the name and appearance.

I aggree. In the Soviet colony we were run by BMWs (Bierni, Mierni, ale Wierni - nonactive, mediocre, but faithful). People who could not see outside of their own interests, and would not understand law apart from supporting their own. They are still around.

This is part and parcel of politics. There was some kind of legitimacy to it before as they were under occupation. More things were shrouded in secrecy but one prong of democracy is transparency and Tusk can't hide behind smokescreens and the like.

Sure he can, he's blocking the re-appointment of attorneys.
When Ziobro wanted to be Attorney General and put the mobster behind bars, the entire party was pictured as fascist. (while it is in fact socialist, pro-benefits et c.)

Rightly so. Fascists are 'whippers', so let's whip some mobsters. Or course from mob's point of view, nothing can be less fair.