Any history experts ? How come Tibet is under China rule but VietNam / Korea is independent?

Enhancer

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
Any history experts ? How come Tibet is under China rule but VietNam / Korea is independent?


Why is that so? because i find tat korea and vietnam has greater similartieis with China

imperial examination, mandarin officials, emphasise on confucian values

but how come they not under china rule but tibet is
 

Cheers USA

Banned
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Hi TS,

Too bad, ponpokku is not here. He is an expert in history. He is known as a walking encyclopedia.
I really admire him for his enormous knowledge in history, languages...etc.

I regard him as a big cyberbrother! He is more than happy to show off his expertise knowledge to you. U have my guarantee that you won't be disappointed by ponpokku's remarkable knowledge. :)
 

mee_goreng

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
466
Reaction score
1
not very sure, but i think korea once was a country which paid tribute to china as a subordinate country
but after Tangs dynasty they broke off
where Southern country like Burma and vietnam were always not regarded seriously and developed properly by ancient chinese rulers, thus when china face foreign invasion, these places were broken off from china
 

Starmaster

Master Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
3,925
Reaction score
5
not very sure, but i think korea once was a country which paid tribute to china as a subordinate country
but after Tangs dynasty they broke off
where Southern country like Burma and vietnam were always not regarded seriously and developed properly by ancient chinese rulers, thus when china face foreign invasion, these places were broken off from china

the correct term for korean is called a vassal state .

vietnam is considered a border country of china , one of the dynasty they are a vassal state of china too.

but if u wanna compare all the way back , japan also used to rule china , mongolian also used to rule russia and eastern europe , it will be no end to it.
 

GrimaH

Master Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
2,877
Reaction score
17
Any history experts ? How come Tibet is under China rule but VietNam / Korea is independent?


Why is that so? because i find tat korea and vietnam has greater similartieis with China

imperial examination, mandarin officials, emphasise on confucian values

but how come they not under china rule but tibet is

Because imperial examinations, Mandarin officials, and emphasis Confucian values all ended with the fall of the Qing in 1911.
It's 2008 now.

Plus Tibetans are more known for meditating during war than actually retaliating.
 

Kiwi8

Honorary Member
Deluxe Member
Joined
May 3, 2001
Messages
128,397
Reaction score
10,112
Any history experts ? How come Tibet is under China rule but VietNam / Korea is independent?


Why is that so? because i find tat korea and vietnam has greater similartieis with China

imperial examination, mandarin officials, emphasise on confucian values

but how come they not under china rule but tibet is

Well, we dun really have to dwell too much into the history specifics. Current independent countries are what they are now, not only because of history, but also because of either their military might or the general acceptance of the other countries with military might. An example of this is the United States. If history is to be regarded, they would still be under the United Kingdom and not independent now. Similarly, Taiwan is not able to declare independence now because of its inferior military (compared to PRC) and the non-acceptance of the majority of the other countries.

To reply to the 2 countries as u questioned, Vietnam and Korea have a nationalistic culture that allows them to tend towards independence, hence the Vietnamese and Koreans will not be willing to be subordinate to PRC.

As for Tibet, now is a struggle between the PRC central party and the separatists. If the separatists manage to convince enough of the Tibet people that they should be independent, then yes, they will fight to become independent. But if they can't and the PRC central party convinces enough of the Tibet people that Tibet is better off being part of PRC, then Tibet will not be independent. History plays less of an influence to whether a country is independent or not, than more tangible factors like military might, international relations, etc.
 

solidghost

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
0
Tibet is under China rule because Chinese troops are stationed there. Just like China was under Japanese rule because there were Japanese troops stationed there previously. History doesn't really matter.
 

Emo My Ass

Banned
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
4,951
Reaction score
0
if i'm not wrong, china had never regarded korea, vietnam and myammar as part of their empire at all, how would it be possible for them to declare korea and vietnam as one of their state?

Taiwan and tibet was part of china since donkey years ago. Thus china regard them as part of theirs
 

Iceshadow

Master Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2003
Messages
4,215
Reaction score
0
if i'm not wrong, china had never regarded korea, vietnam and myammar as part of their empire at all, how would it be possible for them to declare korea and vietnam as one of their state?

Taiwan and tibet was part of china since donkey years ago. Thus china regard them as part of theirs

Korea was a vassal state. Whether that meant that they were actually part of the Chinese empire or not I'll not argue since I am not to sure myself. But that Korea (as a whole) was a client state is not disputable.

As for Burma, it was also at one stage a client state if I recall. But I don't really know much about Burma.
 

Emo My Ass

Banned
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
4,951
Reaction score
0
Korea was a vassal state. Whether that meant that they were actually part of the Chinese empire or not I'll not argue since I am not to sure myself. But that Korea (as a whole) was a client state is not disputable.

As for Burma, it was also at one stage a client state if I recall. But I don't really know much about Burma.
As far as i know, china did not include them in their dynasty. But tibet and taiwan was part of theirs on their map for almost every dynasty...
 

Iceshadow

Master Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2003
Messages
4,215
Reaction score
0
As far as i know, china did not include them in their dynasty. But tibet and taiwan was part of theirs on their map for almost every dynasty...

taiwan probably... but tibet is arguable. I only recalled the Qing dynasty trying to invade burma but failed. Not sure if Burma because a client state to the Ming Dynasty though,
 

Emo My Ass

Banned
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
4,951
Reaction score
0
taiwan probably... but tibet is arguable. I only recalled the Qing dynasty trying to invade burma but failed. Not sure if Burma because a client state to the Ming Dynasty though,
i'm not sure either, i did ask about tibet and taiwan from my china friends, they all said that in their texts, taiwan and tibet were long time part of china in majority of their dynasty.

For me i have read up on it.

other then that, i learned from romance of the three kingdom!!!
lol
 

thesingingbard

Master Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,131
Reaction score
0
I should check my facts first... but this is what I recall...

Korea, Vietnam were vassal states of China at least during Qing dynasty. Korea was given 'independence' because of force by Japanese. Vietnam i suppose was french colonization (?).

Tibet was under Qing rule (that's a definite) coz Qian-Long (or was it Kang Xi?) even built a replica of Lhasa Palace in Beijing to make the then Dalai at home when he visited Beijing.
 

seePyou

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
14,658
Reaction score
2,591
There are a lot of misconception of historical events by the West (Oh great self-righteous ones)

China as of today is largely drawn by the last recorded borders of the Qing Dynasty. Korea and Vietnam were vassal states.

Taiwan and Tibet were NOT.


Only Taiwan was sliced off to Japan as military tribune after the first Sino-Japan war. Tibet went on self-proclaimed independence after WWII. That's why the communists moved in. If Tampines goes "self-proclaimed" independence, SAF will step too.
 

cancer81

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
61,057
Reaction score
0
Tibet is roughly autonomous with vessal state status for most parts. Its old kingdoms before the rise of what was once known as Tubuo were fragmented. Unification was brought about under Songtsan Gampo whom the Tubuo kingdom became firmly established.

During the Qing dynasty, it required assistance first from Kangxi then from Qianglong to stave off invasions from neighoring nations like Nepal. This relationship carried on till the outbreak of WW1 during which internal strife in China was so great that no one paid Tibet much attention. The Dalai then ruled largely undisturbed. It was around this time when Tibetian independance thoughts came to be. The areas which should be considered to be Tibet is debated upon heavily since large areas under the Tubuo was subjugated. This coupled with a complex relationship with China and India brought us to today.
 

boucyfirebal

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
HAHAHA there actually a simple reason for it

when china was a under the ccp rule. Vietnam was under the french and transited to a free state under french watch. Moreover korea is spit between north and south;)

historically tibet has always been a free state. its only in the manchu(qing) where link are closer and under china protection due to close religious ties.

and vietnam has been in direct control of china in the past;)
 

largeresource

Banned
Joined
May 21, 2000
Messages
4,737
Reaction score
0
with communist embracing capitalist

any toms, DICKs, Henry reasoning are also a reason to rule what ever **** the chinese think they are
 

infinitriX

Supremacy Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2002
Messages
7,381
Reaction score
20
Actually, this would make a very good history question as there are a million possible answers.
Pre-WW2 China was having civil war, therefore not much opportunity for land grab.
After WW2, russian and american powers were hawking over korea, and the french were in vietnam.
To sum it up, colonialism was what's carving up these nations, and history have shown that the colonial powers were very willing to risk war to protect their interests.
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top