ok this is a long story for a simple question. I went tonight to a photo reportage about Tibet given by someone who has lived in China for many years and had made several trips to Tibet. since I have been in Tibet the year before him, I have seen 80% of his journey with my own eyes. It dashled me that his view on the country and the political problems are so completely different then mine. He has a very chinese and economical vision. For him Tibet was a backland country under the power of rivaling monasteries who used the modan people for there own enrichment. Tibetan people are durty, poor and have a stupid simple religion and the good motherland China has bring only economical prosperity to these poor fellows. Tibet has always been a part of China, even in the period that it was independently gouverment (by these selfish rivaling monks) it was still theoreticaly a part of China so it was only normal that China took it back. Although I can agree that the country is very poor and China has brought economical prosperity in the region, when I was in Tibet I felt a lot of sadness and melancholy in the air. They are so very deep entagled with there religion and traditions. Although I'm not a fan of Tibetan boedhism, which is so much more folkloristic than the sober Japanese zenboedhism, I respect there religion. It is there soul! And China is killing it year by year with there "everyone has to be exactly the same" mentality. Children has to learn Chinese at school instead of Tibetan and people (monks) that speak out there opinion (even in a peaceful way) are arrested and locked up in concentration (!!!!!!) camps, tortured for years without a trail. For me saying that China has the right to do this because Tibet as always been theres, to me is the same as saying that Germany had the right to take over Belgium and unite the "German tribes" again, making the "aryan race (han chinese)" the elite and all other races as lesser people, locking up everyone who has an other opinion or who doesn't work "for the greater good of the nation". I don't know, maybe I'm missing something. It is indeed the fact that these people has gained some more economical wealth than before, but they payed with there freedom of mind. What would for you be most important? Would you give up your economical wealth if your freedom was treatened?