I am most interested and eager to hear the "mingyun" leaders talk about what thoughts they have developed or learnt since 1989
I think the most critical question is not to "pingfan" or not; to "forgive" or not; rather it is if we had to do it again, would we end in the same way?
To me, there are four scenarios (3 are hypothetical and 1 proven to be the case) that student movement would end:
1. The government gave in
2. The students gave in
3. The government and the students negotiated and came up with a deal for the sake of temporarily ending the saga/dilemma
4.Neither the government or the students gave in.
What are the probabilities 1-4 would happen (of course, #4 is proven to be the pretty much the reality)
To students and "minyun" leaders, #1, most desirable; #2 - most unacceptable option; #3 - probably not even thought of. It is logic neither the government or students preferred #4.
I am not sure I fully understand or anticipate what would have happened if #1 came true.Many have expressed theirs predictions in the discussion
I am all curious about #2. What would happen to students, leaders and country if #2 became the reality? what would the students, leaders , "mingyun" and the country lose if #2 is the reality? What makes #2 most unacceptable? and why so?
I do not dare to elaborate on those, but can only ask these questions. 1-3 for sure will avoid bloodshed, so they worth consideration.
I hope the "mingyun" leaders and the government, even the ordinary Chinese people would think about these questions; which essentially help up move forward. Once we could answer those questions, we have gone beyond 64, and 64 is not just another tragic event that have gone wasted.
I am tired and even a bit disgusted at the yearly repetition of "pingfan", and now "forgive"..; it seems things are going nowhere doing that. Can people step back a bit and sit down to do some analysis, 64 became a platform the Chinese will launch, rather than just an occasion for licking wound or bickering. Moving forward does not equal "forgiveness" suggested by Chailing; and "forgiveness is not the prerequisit for moving on.
What Chai should have really said is something like lets reanalyze 64 and what have learnt and how to proceed to make China's political system better - this would totally sound like a moving on message; instead of inappropriately offering forgiveness in the name of God.
回“老戗“：
”。。。所谓学运领袖为学运失败转为流血冲突。。。？“ 你居然不责备举起屠刀杀戮的， 而责备被杀戮的没有及早下跪避免被杀？！ You are SO HORRIBLE!
mapesbel 发表评论于 2012-06-07 17:03:14
丢人现眼的东西们，滚吧！
汉威2008 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:53:59
你们配吗?
pach 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:51:41
To Flam.
I share your views. The fact that the students do not know what is the end point for their movement is the biggest problem.
EnoughIsEnough 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:50:50
flam,
The opinions in the first two paragraphs of your post are absolutely true, but the opinions in the last two paragraphs of your post are questionable. After Zhao Ziyang failed to calm down the students and to reach some sort of compromise with the student leaders, the situation was already out of control and was heading to a fatal crash. Either Deng would crackdown and regain the control, which he did, or the government would be overthrown and what you described in your second paragraph, chaos or civil war, would happen.
iamhereforfun2 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:35:43
Cai and Wu are both garbage.
最近特别烦 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:34:39
问问王丹怎么想的？其他人没发言权。
bumiao 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:16:32
尔开西:我无法原谅自己
煤炭 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:14:47
吾尔开西:我无法原谅自己
sanmudashu 发表评论于 2012-06-07 16:00:17
柴玲是对的！要不然，整天斗来斗去，哪有完结啊！？
支持柴玲！！！
flam 发表评论于 2012-06-07 15:13:49
When the student movement of the June fourth incident was hijacked by some foreign forces and turned to topple Chinese government, it became a life and death struggle for both sides.
If Chinese government had lost control, a civil war would probably have started. Some generals would still have been loyal to communist party and the other would have switched their loyalties to these student leaders. If you drop your anger and emotion, think realistically what the ending game should have been if the government had not regained control.
That is not to justify the killing of hundreds of people. Chinese government could have had a better way to accomplish the same thing with no loss or much less loss of human life. That is also not to exonerate the action of Chinese government at that time.
If I was a judge, I would assign 90% blame to Chinese government and 10% blame to these student leaders.
被捕的前一天，有几位日本志士苦苦劝谭嗣同去日本，谭嗣同不听；再三劝他，他说：“各国变法，没有不经过流血就成功的，现在中国没听说有因变法而流血牺牲的人，这是国家不富强的原因啊。有流血牺牲的，请从谭嗣同开始吧。”终于没有离去，所以遭了祸。
谭嗣同已经囚在监狱里，……在八月十三日这天，在刑场上被害，享年三十三岁。就义的那天，围观的达万人，谭君慷慨激昂，神情没有丝毫改变。当时军机大臣刚毅监新，谭君喊刚毅上前来说：“我有句话……”刚毅走开不听，于是从容就义。啊！壮烈呀！
-----------------------------------------------
可惜89没有这样一个刚烈的学生领袖.
再一次为64牺牲的学生,市民致敬. 鄙视柴玲这种没有道德的人谈论宽恕.
moral : beliefs founded on fundamental principles of right and wrong. Generally arise from accepted customs. Typically religious or culturally based and passed from generation to generation. 根据西方社会的定义，我深信！89年的时候，一个在大学怀孕3或4次并流产的女孩子是不道德的。
89的20周年，柴玲参加藏独集会更是可耻的。
何为史 发表评论于 2012-06-07 13:46:34
被捕的前一天，有几位日本志士苦苦劝谭嗣同去日本，谭嗣同不听；再三劝他，他说：“各国变法，没有不经过流血就成功的，现在中国没听说有因变法而流血牺牲的人，这是国家不富强的原因啊。有流血牺牲的，请从谭嗣同开始吧。”终于没有离去，所以遭了祸。
谭嗣同已经囚在监狱里，……在八月十三日这天，在刑场上被害，享年三十三岁。就义的那天，围观的达万人，谭君慷慨激昂，神情没有丝毫改变。当时军机大臣刚毅监新，谭君喊刚毅上前来说：“我有句话……”刚毅走开不听，于是从容就义。啊！壮烈呀！
-----------------------------------------------
可惜89没有这样一个刚烈的学生领袖.
再一次为64牺牲的学生,市民致敬. 鄙视柴玲这种没有道德的人谈论宽恕.
moral : beliefs founded on fundamental principles of right and wrong. Generally arise from accepted customs. Typically religious or culturally based and passed from generation to generation. 根据西方社会的定义，我深信！89年的时候，一个在大学怀孕3或4次并流产的女孩子是不道德的。
89的20周年，柴玲参加藏独集会更是可耻的。
