The Chinese empire has ruled the region Tibet for longer than the U.S.A. has existed, so you americans should shut up or return to the Europe you came from, handing the land back to the native indians. The Tibet issue is chinese internal affairs and ignorant americans should keep out of these.

Of course, we think Americans are dumb assholes in Europe, but we need cheap labour to compete with the chinese so we might take you back anyhows.

I didn't say EU. Europe and EU are not necessarily same. Wiki will be helpful if need more details.
I admit though it wasn't correct to say "almost all" of them "boycotting" opening ceremony. Probably I was thinking about biggest European countries.
Anyway, as you mentioned yourself, at least four European leaders said will do so.
If you’d happen to be in Europe you should know what Europeans think about the issue.
“According to the poll, a majority of Europeans believes Tibet should not be under Chinese rule, ranging from 53 per cent in Britain to about three-quarters in Germany and Italy. Sixty-nine per cent of Japanese thought Tibet should not be governed by China. “
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7889016e-236e-11dd-b214-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=9c33700c-4c86-11da-89df-0000779e2340.html?nclick_check=1
If you are so passionate about Tibet why don’t you go home (assuming you are indeed from Europe) and try to convince your fellow europeans first?

First you say China invaded tibet in 1950. After I showed that Tibet was at that time already Chinese, suddenly 1910 was the new year for the takeover.

In 1910, the Qing government sent a military expedition of its own to establish direct Chinese rule and deposed the Dalai Lama in an imperial edict.

The Dalai Lama returned to Tibet from India in July 1912, and by the end of the year the Chinese troops in Tibet had returned, via India, to China Proper.

In early 1913, Agvan Dorzhiev and two other Tibetan representatives signed a treaty in Urga, proclaiming mutual recognition and their independence from China.
 

The subsequent outbreak of World War I and the division of China into military cliques ruled by warlords caused the Western powers and the infighting factions within China to lose interest in Tibet, and the 13th Dalai Lama ruled undisturbed until his death in 1933. At that time, the government of Tibet controlled all of Ü-Tsang (Dbus-gtsang) and western Kham (Khams), somewhat larger than the Tibet Autonomous Region today.

Since 1951, Tibet has been under China's control. According to a 1951 agreement between the Tibetan government and the PRC, Dalai Lama-ruled Tibetan area was supposed to be a largely autonomous region of China.

indoctrination

I don't say that this quote proves anything, but neither does the propaganda you cited prove anything.

The important thing is which countries have recognized or are recognizing Tibet as an independent state.

When I showed that Tibet was chinese also then, then suddenly you claim that you never meant that Tibet had been independent at all.  Rofl ...

Rofl .. this is from the same Wikipedia you just cited ...It states clearly that the chinese rule began
in 1720, well before 1910  ...

Things look a bit different if you read the whole thing doesn't it.

The general history of Tibet begins with the rule of Songtsän Gampo (604–50 CE) who united parts of the Yarlung River Valley and ruled Tibet as a kingdom. He also brought in many reforms and Tibetan power spread rapidly creating a large and powerful empire. In 640 he married Princess Wencheng, the niece of the powerful Chinese emperor Emperor Taizong of Tang China.

Under the next few kings who followed Songsten Gampo, Buddhism became established as the state religion and Tibetan power increased even further over large areas of Central Asia while major inroads were made into Chinese territory, even reaching the Chinese capital Chang'an (modern Xian) in late 763.[10] However, Tibetan troops occupied Chang'an for only fifteen days.

Songtsän Gampo (Tibetan: སྲོང་བཙན་སྒམ་པོ་, Chinese Han Characters: 松贊干布, Wylie: Srong-btsan sGam-po, 605 or 617? - 649) was the founder of the Tibetan empire (Tufan 吐蕃), by tradition held to be the thirty-third ruler in his dynasty. In the Chinese records his name is given as Qizonglongzan.[1]

The dates of his birth and when he took the throne are not certain. In Tibetan accounts it is generally accepted that he was born in 617 (one year before the founding of the Tang Dynasty, when Gaozu became emperor of China). As he is thought to have ascended the throne at age thirteen (twelve by Western reckoning), by this reckoning c. 629 CE.[2][3]

Nanzhao (in Yunnan and neighbouring regions) remained under Tibetan control from 750 to 794, when they turned on their Tibetan overlords and helped the Chinese inflict a serious defeat on the Tibetans.[11]

The Tibetans were allied with the Arabs and eastern Turks. In 747, the hold of Tibet was loosened by the campaign of general Gao Xianzhi, who tried to re-open the direct communications between Central Asia and Kashmir. By 750 the Tibetans had lost almost all of their central Asian possessions to the Chinese. However, after Gao Xianzhi's defeat by the Arabs and Qarluqs at the Battle of Talas river (751), Chinese influence decreased rapidly and Tibetan influence resumed. In 821/822 CE Tibet and China signed a remarkable peace treaty. A bilingual account of this treaty including details of the borders between the two countries are inscribed on a stone pillar which stands outside the Jokhang temple in Lhasa.[12] Tibet continued as a Central Asian empire until the mid-9th century.

At the end of the 1230s, the Mongols turned their attention to Tibet. At that time, Mongol armies had already conquered Northern China, much of Central Asia, and as far as Russia and modern Ukraine. The Tibetan nobility, however, was fragmented and mainly occupied with internal strife. Göden, a brother of Güyük, entered the country in 1240. A second invasion led to the submission almost all Tibetan states. In 1244, Göden summoned the Sakya Pandita to his court, and in 1247 appointed Sakya the Mongolian viceroy for Central Tibet, though the eastern provinces of Kham and Amdo remained "under direct Mongol rule".[13]

Between 1346 and 1354, towards the end of the Yuan dynasty, the House of Pagmodru toppled the Sakya. The following 80 years were a period of relative stability. They also saw the birth of the Gelugpa school (also known as Yellow Hats) by the disciples of Tsongkhapa Lobsang Dragpa, and the founding of the important Ganden, Drepung, and Sera monasteries near Lhasa. After the 1430s, the country entered another period of internal power struggles.[14]

In 1578, Altan Khan of the Tümed Mongols invited Sönam Gyatso, a high lama of the Gelugpa school. They met near Khökh Nuur, where Altan Khan first referred to Sönam Gyatso as the Dalai Lama; Dalai being the Mongolian translation of the Tibetan name Gyatso, or "Ocean".[15]

In the 1630s, Tibet became entangled in the power struggles between the rising Manchu and various Mongol and Oirad factions. Ligden Khan of the Chakhar, on the retreat from the Manchu, set out to Tibet to destroy the Yellow Hat school but died on the way near Koko Nur in 1634. [16] His vassal Tsogt Taij continued the fight but was defeated and killed by Güshi Khan of the Khoshud in 1637, who, in turn, became the overlord over Tibet, and acted as a "Protector of the Yellow Church"[17]. Güshi helped the Fifth Dalai Lama to establish himself as the highest spiritual and political authority in Tibet and destroyed any potential rivals.

In 1705, Lobzang Khan of the Khoshud used the 6th Dalai Lama's escapades as excuse to take control of Tibet. The regent was murdered, and the Dalai Lama sent to Beijing. He died on the way, also near Koko Nur, ostensibly from illness. Lobzang Khan appointed a new Dalai Lama, who, however, was not accepted by the Gelugpa school.

And about Taiwan  - the list of countries that recognize it isn't very impressive, but lets discuss that once you admit your inevitable defeat on the Tibet issue ....

The Dalai Lama returned to Tibet from India in July 1912, and by the end of the year the Chinese troops in Tibet had returned, via India, to China Proper.

In early 1913, Agvan Dorzhiev and two other Tibetan representatives signed a treaty in Urga, proclaiming mutual recognition and their independence from China. John Snelling says: "Though sometimes doubted, this Tibet-Mongolia Treaty certainly existed. It was signed on 29 December 1912 (OS) [that is, by the Julian Calendar - thus making it 8 January 1913 by the Gregorian Calendar that we use] by Dorzhiev and two Tibetans on behalf of the Dalai Lama, and by two Mongolians for the Jebtsundamba Khutukhtu." He then quotes the full wording of the treaty (in English) from the British Public Records Office: FO [Foreign Office] 371 1609 7144: Sir George Buchanan to Sir Edward Grey, St. Petersburg, dated 11 February 1913.[29] However, other sources claim the 13th Dalai Lama denied he authorized Agvan Dorzhiev to represent Tibet to sign a treaty.[30][31]

The subsequent outbreak of World War I and the division of China into military cliques ruled by warlords caused the Western powers and the infighting factions within China to lose interest in Tibet, and the 13th Dalai Lama ruled undisturbed until his death in 1933. At that time, the government of Tibet controlled all of Ü-Tsang (Dbus-gtsang) and western Kham (Khams), somewhat larger than the Tibet Autonomous Region today. Eastern Kham, separated by the Yangtze River, was under the control of Chinese warlord Liu Wenhui.

In 1935 the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso was born in Amdo in eastern Tibet and was recognized as the latest reincarnation. He was taken to Lhasa in 1937 where he was later given an official ceremony in 1939. In 1944, during World War II, two Austrian mountaineers, Heinrich Harrer and Peter Aufschnaiter came to Lhasa, where Harrer became a tutor and friend to the young Dalai Lama giving him a sound knowledge of western culture and modern society, until he was forced to leave in 1959.

Since 1951, Tibet has been under China's control. According to a 1951 agreement between the Tibetan government and the PRC, Dalai Lama-ruled Tibetan area was supposed to be a largely autonomous region of China.

As in China, some of the population of Tibet were serfs ("mi ser") prior to the installation of the Communist government,[32][33]. They were often bound to land owned by monasteries or aristocrats. The serfdom is well documented; Anna Louise Strong, a jounalist, wrote a book, When Serfs Stood Up in Tibet, based on her travel experience in Tibet, which documented some details of the serfdom, and contained many interviews with Tibetans on the subject. There was also slavery,[34][35][36] although its severity and extent has been disputed among historians.

Tibetans-in-exile have claimed that the serfs and their masters formed only a small part of Tibetan society, and argued that Tibet would have modernized itself without China's intervention. The Chinese government, on the other hand, claims that most Tibetans were still serfs in 1951,[37], and have proclaimed that the Tibetan government inhibited the development of Tibet during its self-rule from 1913 to 1959, and opposed any modernization efforts proposed by the Chinese government.[37]

Not even Dalai Lama  argues for Tibet's independence - but apparently you are is dumb enough to do it ... rofl

It seems that you claim Tibet was once a sovereign state.
 

The Dalai Lama has stated his willingness to negotiate with China for genuine autonomy...

...but according to the government in exile and Tibetan independence groups, most Tibetans still call for full Tibetan independence. The Dalai Lama sees the millions of government-imported Han immigrants[citation needed] and preferential socioeconomic policies, as presenting an urgent threat to the Tibetan nation and culture.

A rebellion led by noblemen and monasteries broke out in Amdo and eastern Kham in June 1956. The insurrection, supported by the American CIA, eventually spread to Lhasa. It was crushed by 1959. During this campaign, tens of thousands of Tibetans were killed and the 14th Dalai Lama and other government principals fled to exile in India.[38]

The Central Tibetan Administration states that the number that have died in the Great Leap Forward, of violence, or other indirect causes since 1950 is approximately 1.2 million,[39] which the Chinese Communist Party denies. The Chinese Communist Party's official toll of deaths recorded for the whole of China for the years of the Great Leap Forward is 14 million[citation needed], but scholars have estimated the number of the famine victims to be between 20 and 43 million[40]. According to Patrick French, the estimate of 1.2 million in Tibet is not reliable because Tibetans were not able to process the data well enough to produce a credible total. There were, however, many casualties, with a figure of 400,000 extrapolated from a calculation Warren W. Smith made from census reports of Tibet which show 200,000 "missing" from Tibet.[41][42]

The Dalai Lama has stated his willingness to negotiate with China for genuine autonomy, but according to the government in exile and Tibetan independence groups, most Tibetans still call for full Tibetan independence. The Dalai Lama sees the millions of government-imported Han immigrants[citation needed] and preferential socioeconomic policies, as presenting an urgent threat to the Tibetan nation and culture. Tibetan exile groups say that despite recent attempts to restore the appearance of original Tibetan culture to attract tourism, the traditional Tibetan way of life is now irrevocably changed. Tashi Wangdi, the Representative of the Dalai Lama, stated in an interview that China's Western China Development program "is providing facilities for the resettlement of Han Chinese in Tibet."[43]


Projects that the PRC claims to have benefited Tibet as part of the China Western Development economic plan, such as the Qinghai-Tibet Railway, have roused fears of facilitating military mobilisation and Han migration.[44] There is still ethnic imbalance in appointments and promotions to the civil and judicial services in the Tibetan Autonomous Region, with disproportionately few ethnic Tibetans appointed to these posts.[45]

The PRC, on the other hand, claims that its rule over Tibet is an unalloyed improvement, but foreign governments continue to make occasional protests about aspects of PRC rule in Tibet because of frequent reports of human rights violation in Tibet by groups such as Human Rights Watch. The government of the PRC maintains that the Tibetan Government did almost nothing to improve the Tibetans' material and political standard of life during its rule from 1913–59, and that they opposed any reforms proposed by the Chinese government. According to the Chinese government, this is the reason for the tension that grew between some central government officials and the local Tibetan government in 1959.[37]

The government of the PRC also rejects claims that the lives of Tibetans have deteriorated, and states that the lives of Tibetans have been improved immensely compared to self rule before 1950.[46] They claim that from 1951 to 2007, the Tibetan population in Lhasa administered Tibet has increased from 1.2 million to almost 3 million. Benefits that are commonly quoted include — the GDP of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) today is thirty times that of before 1950, workers in Tibet have the second highest wages in China,[47] the TAR has 22,500 km of highways, as opposed to none in 1950, all secular education in the TAR was created after the revolution, the TAR now has 25 scientific research institutes as opposed to none in 1950, infant mortality has dropped from 43% in 1950 to 0.661% in 2000, life expectancy has risen from 35.5 years in 1950 to 67 in 2000, 300 million Renminbi has been allocated since the 1980s for the maintenance and protection of Tibetan monasteries.[48]

The Cultural Revolution and the cultural damage it wrought upon Tibet and, indeed, the entire PRC is generally condemned as a nationwide catastrophe, whose main instigators, in the PRC's view, the so-called Gang of Four, have been brought to justice. The China Western Development plan is viewed by the PRC as a massive, benevolent, and patriotic undertaking by the wealthier eastern coast to help the western parts of China, including Tibet, catch up in prosperity and living standards.

These claims are, however, largely discredited by many Tibetans. In 1989, the Panchen Lama was finally allowed to return to Shigatse, where he addressed a crowd of 30,000 and described what he saw as the suffering of Tibet and the harm being done to his country in the name of socialist reform under the rule of the PRC in terms reminiscent of the petition he had presented to Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in 1962.[49]. Five days later, he mysteriously died of a massive heart attack at the age of 50.[50]

In 1995 the Dalai Lama named 6 year old Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the 11th Panchen Lama without Chinese approval, while the PRC named another child, Gyancain Norbu in conflict. Gyancain Norbu was raised in Beijing and has appeared occasionally on state media. The PRC-selected Panchen Lama is rejected by exiled Tibetans and anti-China groups who commonly refer to him as the "Panchen Zuma" (literally "fake Panchen Lama"). Gedhun Choekyi Nyima and his family have gone missing — believed by some to be imprisoned by China — and under a hidden identity for protection and privacy according to the PRC.[51] exile.[52]

In 2001 representatives of Tibet succeeded in gaining accreditation at a United Nations-sponsored meeting of non-governmental organizations. On August 29 Jampal Chosang, the head of the Tibetan coalition, stated that China had introduced "a new form of apartheid" in Tibet because "Tibetan culture, religion, and national identity are considered a threat" to China.[53]

In 2005, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's offered to hold talks with the 14th Dalai Lama on the Tibet issue, provided he dropped the demand for independence. The Dalai Lama said in an interview with the South China Morning Post "We are willing to be part of the People's Republic of China, to have it govern and guarantee to preserve our Tibetan culture, spirituality and our environment." A statement that was seen as a renewed diplomatic offensive by the Tibetan government-in-exile. He had already said he would accept Chinese sovereignty over Tibet but insisted on real autonomy over its religious and cultural life. Tibetan government-in-exile, called on the Chinese government to respond.[52] The move was seen to be unpopular with many Tibetans. Naturally. They have to live there

In January 2007 the Dalai Lama, in an interview on a private television channel, said "What we demand from the Chinese authority is more autonomy for Tibetans to protect their culture." He added that he had told the Tibetan people not to think in terms of history and to accept Tibet as a part of China.[54]

Talks between representatives of the Dalai Lama and the Chinese government began again in May, 2008 with little result, but more are scheduled to be held in June.[55]

Wow, you managed to post the whole wikipedia. Unfortunately, you fail miserably to explain what standpoint you have, if you indeed have one ...

So far I have managed to extract the following rare pieces of sense out of your ramblings, though:

1. You do not dispute that no country has recognized Tibet as independent
2. You do not dispute that Tibet was under Chinese rule already at the time of the military excursions in 1910 and 1950
3. You do not dispute that China acquired Tibet through the liberation of Tibet from the Mongols around 1720.

Is that correct ?

1. So you don't dispute that Tibet was a nation as early as 6th century AD?
2. You don't dispute that after WWI China in effect had abandoned Tibet?
3. You don't dispute that no matter what kind of liberation stories you want to tell from 1720 that ordinary Tibetans do not see it as "liberation" now? Liberation, y'see, is when you remove previous occupiers and return the nation to the people who previously owned it. Like the way your hated US (helped) liberate France from Germany. They don't occupy France today right? They didn't annex France right?  Right.