Your book felt like a torture read because it was so so sad,meaningless loss of our brave soldiers. Thank you for the well researched details given in your book.Hope and pray we don't do anything foolish now.
If Dalais always said he wasnt seeking for independence and not a separatists, what made you say China ran over Tibet. Or half told stories. Just like India kept saying India gave China Buddhism while in reality Buddhism was actually wiped out and disappeared in India.
From China's perspective, Tibet and Xinjiang have always been parts of China, regardless of different governments. In this sense, this talk lags historical perspective.
@@SAMARTHSAMANTonly for 20 years. Even during the kmt era they claimed and still claim even arunachal as a part of china. Tibet has always been a part of china. Just need to look at qing's map. Arunachal used to be a part of qing dynasty too and before that there were other dynasties as well. Its the same like hyderabad or south like tamil. They have had different kingdoms. But are a part of india. If tibet isnt the part of china then tamil nadu isnt a part of india either. But we know thats not the case. Most importantly. Tibet and han chinese and genetically closer and their culture and language are also similar if not the same. Compare that. With a kashmiri and a tamil. Both are genetically distant one being closer to cuacasian while other being african in appearance. Language is different,even gods are different while being the same hindus. Culture and food way way different. But still part of the same country.
@@oriondoublecrossed that's an outlandishly *wrong analogy* . reason 1. yóū didn't take the will of the people into account. 2. anthropologically speaking Tibetans are not related to Han Xainese, their genetic proximity to Eastern Xainese people is equivalent to that of Koreans with Xainese or Japanese with Xainese 3. Historical maps mean nothing in modern era, If Indians were given a chance to claim historical regions just like Xainese then it's not just Tamil Nadu that we'd be claiming, we'd be claiming everything from the Oxus river to Cambodia, the Hindu Kushana empire stretched all the way from Volga river in Georgia to Ganga river in North India, while the Hindu Chola Kings had control over almost all of the south east asia, should we Indians embark on Uniting all that just because our maps tell us we used to rule them once ? Now Even if i let all three reasons slide and give yóū the benefit of the doubt what about the Uyghurs ? They're not related to Xainese at all are they ? except for both the Xainese and Uyghurs being mongoloid populations, there's nothing common between both of them, Uyghurs are Turks and are related to Kazakhs and Uzbeks. The genetic reasoning for Tibetans won't work there. And the most important of them all is the *will* of the people, Uyghurs and Tibetans don't want to be a part of Xaina regardless of genetic or geological proximity or historicity of the place. That must be held above all and that must be respected.
Your book felt like a torture read because it was so so sad,meaningless loss of our brave soldiers.
Thank you for the well researched details given in your book.Hope and pray we don't do anything foolish now.
In depth analogy......much appreciated.
Why do I get a sense of déjà vu here! History repeating itself?
Such a great explanation...people should know about it..
Nice information Bai lge rho
my blood is boiling ,,
They may try take this down
Barahoti was Nehru's - "Koi aaya nahi" in Ladakh is Modi's - hope I'm wrong.
Sir how we got ur book now..zee tv give ur referenced of ur book.. jai hind🇮🇳 its better book in hind🤔🤔🤔
Amazon is the best bet...
@@182kunal 🙏🇮🇳
Neharu...a shame for India.!!
If Dalais always said he wasnt seeking for independence and not a separatists, what made you say China ran over Tibet. Or half told stories. Just like India kept saying India gave China Buddhism while in reality Buddhism was actually wiped out and disappeared in India.
From China's perspective, Tibet and Xinjiang have always been parts of China, regardless of different governments. In this sense, this talk lags historical perspective.
Yes but atleast for common people in 1940a and 50s Tibet was neighbour and indian government papers also state the same
@@SAMARTHSAMANTonly for 20 years. Even during the kmt era they claimed and still claim even arunachal as a part of china. Tibet has always been a part of china. Just need to look at qing's map. Arunachal used to be a part of qing dynasty too and before that there were other dynasties as well. Its the same like hyderabad or south like tamil. They have had different kingdoms. But are a part of india. If tibet isnt the part of china then tamil nadu isnt a part of india either. But we know thats not the case. Most importantly. Tibet and han chinese and genetically closer and their culture and language are also similar if not the same. Compare that. With a kashmiri and a tamil. Both are genetically distant one being closer to cuacasian while other being african in appearance. Language is different,even gods are different while being the same hindus. Culture and food way way different. But still part of the same country.
@@oriondoublecrossed that's an outlandishly *wrong analogy* .
reason 1. yóū didn't take the will of the people into account.
2. anthropologically speaking Tibetans are not related to Han Xainese, their genetic proximity to Eastern Xainese people is equivalent to that of Koreans with Xainese or Japanese with Xainese
3. Historical maps mean nothing in modern era, If Indians were given a chance to claim historical regions just like Xainese then it's not just Tamil Nadu that we'd be claiming, we'd be claiming everything from the Oxus river to Cambodia, the Hindu Kushana empire stretched all the way from Volga river in Georgia to Ganga river in North India, while the Hindu Chola Kings had control over almost all of the south east asia, should we Indians embark on Uniting all that just because our maps tell us we used to rule them once ?
Now Even if i let all three reasons slide and give yóū the benefit of the doubt what about the Uyghurs ? They're not related to Xainese at all are they ? except for both the Xainese and Uyghurs being mongoloid populations, there's nothing common between both of them, Uyghurs are Turks and are related to Kazakhs and Uzbeks.
The genetic reasoning for Tibetans won't work there.
And the most important of them all is the *will* of the people, Uyghurs and Tibetans don't want to be a part of Xaina regardless of genetic or geological proximity or historicity of the place. That must be held above all and that must be respected.
This whole nehru family js a curse to our nation...