Actually no, it was signed by representatives of the present reigning Dalai Lama prior and in good faith with no coercion all before harming a single hair on their pretty little heads. Even the prominent Tibetan historian Tsering Shakya noted this in his book Dragon in the Land of Snows, though the self-proclaimed exile government now claims it is not so. It was only when the Communist Party began implementing radical communist reform, natch, that the Tibetans chose to rebel. Unfortunately for them, while the agreement like the U.S. constitution may have outlined how Tibet was part of China, it did not contain provisions for its seccession.
In other words the ChiComs reneged on the treaty. It's still a lie that they hadn't come in killing before the treaty.
Well...who you gonna believe?
Sorry...I'm not buying what you are selling. Tibet was invaded by the Chinese and ruthlessly occupied...and is still occupied to this day.
The Communist Chinese are the agressors here, and have been from the get go. One day, and as far as I am concerned, the sooner the better, the communist there are going to get their come uppance. Probably at the hand of their own peoples.
...and, trying to compare what happened in Tibet to the US constitution was very, very lame. Pretty telling actually.
What are you, the wicked witch of the North? No, you are a garbagman (new word, not a mispelling). This ain't a debating society, we all saw innocents slaughtered in the streets this week. I'll work on getting you banned. Don't feel bad, the garbagemen at Stanford don't get to comment in the lecture halls either.
Chicom propagandists begone!
Did you copy this from Chinese History text book? Treaty or not, the same as a marriage, Tibetans should have the freedom and rights to choose their own their life and “get divorced” from the horrible “marriage” with the chitcoms!