Comments by "K `" (@user-jt3dw6vv4x) on "MYANMAR: All the Keys to the Coup D'état - VisualPolitik EN" video.

The military committed the genocide against Rohingyas. I can't believe you'd support the military. That's why you need to do your research before you say such things.
2
So you trust a Laotian man that lives in the US and not the actual Burmese people that are risiking their lives and posting updates on what is happening in the country on social media before the internet shuts down. Why am I not surprised? There is a reason why the US is stereotyped as an uneducated country.
2
You Americans think all Asians are the same. Just look, you're believing the words of a Laotian and applying that to Myanmar. Oh goodness.
2
@aprilchan3726 Your name says it all. Rohingyas were considered part of Myanmar until the citizenship law in 1982. Prior to 1982, there were Rohingyas in the Burmese government. Don't speak about things you don't understand.
1
@aprilchan3726 Just to make it easier for me? Why would you mention India? I'm not even from there. This has nothing to do with India. Like I said before, it's very clear. I know where you stand. Don't pretend that you have more of a right over others. I can see right through it. Yes there were issues regarding the Rohingyas that created tension but if you did your research you'd know that the British played a prominent role in what happened during WWII in Myanmar. I don't need to give you sources. If you actually cared about getting your facts straight instead of believing the Tatmadaw's propaganda, you wouldn't be asking me that because it's right there in English on the internet. I'm someone who prefers to accept reality as it is. I know what happened, I know there were issues with the Rohingyas, I know the historical baggage but I also know that the Tatmadaw is the cause for what we are seeing today. Prior to 2012, things were not as bad as they are currently now in Rakhine State.
1
@aprilchan3726 What I said is true. It's not sudden. They want to be part of it because they are part of Burmese society. The Tatmadaw stripping off their citizenship isn't going to change reality. There was no issue with Rohingya during the Arakan kingdom days. You really have no idea of what you're talking about. Go read some books.
1
@aprilchan3726 You're talking about comprehension skills but you can't even comprehend this basic piece of information. Tell me how on earth can a government strip a population off their citizenship if they were never a part of the country to begin with? You can't strip a population off their citizenship if they never had citizenship in the first place. For the Rohingyas to be stipped off their citizenship in 1982 proves that they were part of the nation before 1982. They became stateless in 1982 after they lost their Burmese nationality. Understand now? Is this clear to you or do I need to spell it out for you again? Educate yourself on the 1982 Citizenship Act and understand that Rohingyas were left out of the act before you start speaking about this topic.
1
@aprilchan3726 Can't stay on topic? All I've been doing is sticking to the topic. Notice how you're running around in circles parroting the same old stuff knowing well that what I said is right there online for you to read? Did you even watch the video you sent me???? He literally spoke about the 1982 Citizenship Act which excluded Rohingyas from Burmese nationality. Goodness gracious, you're claiming I don't understand a thing and then here you are sending me a video that supports exactly what I've been talking about.
1
@aprilchan3726 False? False? False? What I explained in my previous comments are detailed in the video you provided a link for in your other comment. Throwing a tantrum and telling me that it's false isn't going to change reality. It is what it is. He literally mentioned the 1982 citizenship law right before he spoke about the regulations. WATCH THE VIDEO.
1
@aprilchan3726 Get your facts straight before you comment for goodness sake. You don't know what you're talking about.
1
@aprilchan3726 1. They sided with the British because they were bribed into thinking they were getting their own state. 2. There was no Bangladesh until 1971. 3. I think it's pretty clear to see that Rohingyas of today want to be part of Burmese society. You have many Burmese activists of Rohingya descent like Wai Wai Nu who are fighting for democracy in Myanmar.
1
@aprilchan3726 Your comments have proven to me why Myanmar is still so far behind. While some ex-colonies manage to move so far forward for the betterment of their citizens, some countries still hang onto the past and fail to understand the importance of building bridges and starting new. I don't know if you're a Buddhist or not but this really isn't the way to go. It's the way you generalise and fail to realise that people can change. You're one of those people who believed the Tatmadaw so there's really nothing I can say to change your mind. All I can say is that many members of Gen Z, especially those on the frontline fighting, are the ones that believe in ethnic unity and recognise the Rohingyas. It seems like they have the mentality that extraordinary leaders like Lee Kuan Yew and S Rajaratnam (both of Singapore) had in terms of building ethnic harmony and unity. If you're more interested in holding grudges and burning bridges, then so be it. We can't change your mind.
1
@aprilchan3726 I'm just talking about you not supporting Rohingyas and believeing they all deserve to be punished. That's what I'm commenting on. Your comments show that you don't care about them or like them. Is that not correct? I'm not talking about anything else that you don't or do support, I'm just talking about your belief that Rohingyas don't deserve rights in Myanmar. I'm not assuming anything. I'm commenting on what you have published here. Try to rationalise? No, how about you try and rationalise things from both perspectives? Up until 2012, there was no issue with Rohingyas. Yes Rohingyas have no rights in Myanmar but Rakhine villagers were living side by side with Rohingyas in Maungdaw and Buthidaung until the ethnic riots of 2012. You keep harking on about defense this defense that and I'm defending Myanmar and all this stuff but you're just masquerading your bigotry behind this belief. If you genuinely had a heart, you would move on. Most Rohingyas don't deserve this but no matter what you say you believe that they do. You keep speaking as if Rohingyas are the ones to blame. Have you thought about what the Rakhine people have done? It takes two to tango. Both Rohingya and Rakhine are to blame. You see, I'm rationalising things from both perspectives - you aren't. This is why I said that Myanmar is still so far behind. Look south and you see Singapore which has managed to pull itself out of ethnic division to create an ethnically harmonious nation. Malaysia doesn't have a good track record in terms of ethnic unity but it's so much better than Myanmar's way of managing diversity. Myanmar had so much potential but now look at it now. What a waste.
1
@aprilchan3726 1. No you believe all Rohingyas deserve punishment. Stop behaving like this. I can see all of your bigoted replies throughout this entire comment section. Crying because people keep talking about the Rohingyas. 2. I never have blamed Aung San Suu Kyi or the civilian government. The military is to blame. Accept this. 3. Crying to me and throwing a tantrum because you can't accept the fact that both sides are to blame isn't going to change this. 4. I know that before 2012 there were issues but there was a sense of calm of anf if you actually cared to listen to Rakhine people who live in Maungdaw you'd know that they said they would go to Rohingya shops and Rohingya children would play with Rakhine children. 5. There were Rohingyas in the Burmese government prior to the military takeover in the 1960s. In fact, there was a Rohingya politician who won the seat of Maungdaw in 1990. So prior to 1982, Rohingyas were (de facto) treated as a part of Burmese society. It's not my problem that you're clueless about these facts and are instead parroting propaganda because you're more interested in defending the Tatmadaw. Facts over feelings. You stating all this stuff isn't going to change the fact the Rohingyas were treated as a part of Burmese society by their representation in Burmese politics. Go cry about it. 6. No you didn't win the argument. You're just running around in cirlces claiming i'm ignorant when I am fully educated on this topic. Also, no I will never delete my comments. Why would I? Everything I said is correct. It is you that should delete your comments after failing to get your facts straight, not once, not twice but three times. Please, this whole thing is so funny.
1
Rohingyas don't persecute non-Muslims in Myanmar. Why do you all lie? Anytime I see you on one of these videos about Myanmar, I see that all of you do nothing but lie. Stop it.
1
How can you say that Aung San Suu Kyi is not a fan of Rohingyas or non-Buddhists? Some of her closest political allies are Burmese Muslims.
1
@archonmarch3965 Yes but that doesn't negate the fact that she has Muslim members in her government. Bamar Muslims are culturally very similar to the Bamar Buddhists. The Burmese military are the people who kicked out all of the Rohingyas out of the Burmese government in the late 20th century.
1
@archonmarch3965 1. Bamar Muslims and Bamar Buddhists eat the same food, use the same names, wear the same clothes, speak the same language. They're culturally similar. That's what I'm talking about here 2. It's very easy to judge from the outside without actually putting yourself in one's shoes. The very fact that ASSK was arrested is a clear indicator that she never had full control. She was a puppet. There is a reason why she was called the "de facto" leader of the country and not the "de jure" leader of the country. She was never official in the way other heads of states are.
1
@archonmarch3965 That is culture. Full stop. Ever heard of cultural diffusion? Chili peppers may have originated in the Americans but they are firmly part of the culinary cultures of South and Southeast Asia. Christianity didn't originate in Europe yet it's an integral part of the religious heritage of Europeans, whether Christian or non-Christian. Bamar Muslims and Bamar Buddhists are culturally similar. I have no idea why you are responding like this. What is it that you don't like?
1
@archonmarch3965 She was the de factor leader of Myanmar, aka the de facto head of state in the country. It doesn't matter how you feel about her, she was out there representing Myanmar at international forums because she was the de facto leader of the country. Extend the same courtesy to you? I haven't been rude to you. This also has nothing to do with the West so if you think a Western person's opinion on this is lesser than yours because you don't live in the West, then you're wrong.
1
@aprilchan3726 Doesn't matter. The point is that the Burmese military is continuing to murder citizens, like they have always done.
1
@jxyeee6525 Cancel culture?? No. Cancel culture has no existence outside of the United States. This has nothing to do with cancel culture.
1
@klm2639 Singapore is a democracy. Just because the majority of Singaporean people prefer to vote in the same government each year doesn't make it any less of a democracy.
1
1. Aung San Suu Kyi is not to blame 2. The Burmese military committed a genocide. If you think it's not a genocide then you don't know what a genocide is and you obviously support what has happened to the Rohingyas.
1
@toobalkain 1. Per the legal definition of the term? So to you what constitutes a genocide? If you think the stripping off citizenship of the Rohingyas, the burning of Rohingya villages, the testimonies from the Burmese soldiers who turned themselves and revealed that they were asked to shoot every Rohingya person they saw, man, woman, child doesn't matter as well and the destruction of any evidence that Rohingyas are people who live in Myanmar, both on the ground and at a national level, doesn't constitute genocide what constitutes genocide to you? 2. The persecution of the Tamils wasn't a genocide because there wasn't a systematic attempt to wipe out Tamil existence in Sri Lanka. Yes, Tamils were heavily perseucted (still are) and the end of the war resulted in grave human rights abuses against Tamil people but it wasn't a genocide because there are Tamils in other parts of Sri Lanka who weren't targeted. The violence in Sri Lanka was directed at the Tamil people who lived in the north of the country and to those in the capital. The Rohingya situation is different. Every Rohingya person was a target and the government didn't want their existence in the country.
1
No Rohingyas are Burmese. There was no issue with Rohingyas people until the British invaded Myanmar and bribed the Rohingyas to fight alongside the British instead of letting the Rohingyas side with the other Burmese during the Japanese invasion. That was the starting point and Rohingyas were always seen as traitors by a section of the Burmese community. You should read about the divide and conquer strategy that European colonists used. That's why most of Myanmar's ethnic minorities are fighting with the military and why ethnic minorities continue to be persecuted by the military. Same thing that happened to the Rohingyas is also happening to the Shan, Karen, Kachin and so on.
1