Sterotypical?
Facts are stereotypical? Stop evading.
What have I posted that is incorrect or untrue in any way?
If you have such a problem with what I've said, then it would be easy to say what's wrong. And no, I don't need "Indian sources" to prove any of these points.
I never said religion makes political boundaries.
You claim ethnicity does, and I made an analogy that uses both religion/culture
and ethnicity to refute it.
Political boundaries, in the rule of international law and custom, are determined by bilaterial treaties between independant nations. This is what makes Tibet legally independant. Just because India accepted China's invasion after the fact, does not retroactively support Chinese legal basis for the invasion.
And if you seriously think I'm advocating that India 'owns' Tibet, then you have completely missed the point of both my and godofthunder's posts here. I'm using Chinese-gov't logic and applying it exactly as it were to India and Tibet, showing that, if we were to use this misguided logic, India would have a better "historic" claim to Tibet than China.
My point is showing just how inane and unfounded China's claims to Tibet are. Tibet belongs to Tibetans. Even if India were to use Chinese logic and claim Tibet, India would
still claim Tibet for Tibetans!
China conquered it and brutally suppresed its people, but it doesn't make it legally, morally or politically right, no matter what revisionist history is cooked up to support it.