reply to post by captaintyinknots
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
I have no agenda, and I called you no names. I pointed out facts.
Did I say you called me with names? No, I said: "Maybe I like being called with names". And yes you
do have an agenda, otherwise you
would've not posted in first place. Your agenda may be as simple as gaining points, voicing your opinion, knowledge or whatever, but still it is an
agenda. Agenda kind of equals to objective and quite likely every action has objective, even yours.
About your facts; if your facts about knowing someone are based on a few irrelevant posts, then I guess they are kind lightly based ones. I hope your
facts on disputes between India and China are bit more well based.
Well, now we are closing in the subject in order not to derail the conversation any more:
In my initial post I pointed out my belief that China and India would be reasonable enough not to start a war because of this dispute and said that
Dalai Lama is irrelevant (regarding the matter). You kinda agreed by saying that:
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
You really ought to research india-china-pakistan tension, if you think this is only about Tibet and the Dali.
But as you suggest by injecting the words: "is only about", you suggest that no matter what, Dalai Lama is important figure on this. As you said
earlier, he is after all a symbol for millions of people. Would China harm his character physically, it would do a big mistake, but I think that they
are considerable enough not to do that.
Well, as you pointed out that I am ignorant in this matter, I concur, because I really don't know much about it. I am not either quite keen to know,
so forgive me my bad manners, narcisms and whatever and allow me my right for my ignorant opinions.
Regardless of what you think about me, I think that your topic is an important one and I wish that this issue will gain more visibility and public
knowledge.
-v