[EdisonOne]

[And quite the contrary it is the Chinese government that believes itself to be God and has the sole right to determine where international boundaries should lie.]W

Hell! If Lord McMahon is the rule of International law, then I would presume that every Gurkha on earth is his domestic servant so what can I say when I flunk history big time. O’h... How I wish there are happy faces here instead of just colons and semi colons and brackets :)... I mean I do get a big laugh out of this funny argument ;)...

[ravager]

First of all it isnt “Lord” McMahone. He wasn't a “Lord” or a Viceroy. He was just a foreign secretary of the British Indian government. The McMahone line is recognized as a legitimate demarcation between India and Tibet by the governments of British-India, Tibet and later on independent India. It is a mutually agreed boundary line. Bilateral treaties such as the one above form the legal basis for international borders between countries. That is how international boundaries between countries are delineated. It has nothing to do with “Lord” McMahone and his rule except that he was a negotiator for the British-Indian government.

And what exactly is the Chinese claim over Tibet or the borderline regions of India-Tibet? The fact that the Yuan dynasty had occupied Tibet for a brief period in Chinese history? And the Yuans weren't even Chinese, they were Mongols. If occupying an area through a give period in history gives you a legitimate claim then Japan probably has as much legitimate claim over Manchuria and Taiwan as China has over Tibet.

Besides if you have a better argument sans your nonsensical trash talk then lets hear it.