Why is China allied with Pakistan?

[RedDragon]

Very true, great indeed!! what was your today's threat given out to your smaller neoghbour ?? No one cares China right? ...China Super Power !! my foot !! Joke of the century a country that was raped by a smaller Japan repeatedly and saved by USA from humilaton ... now comes to show your big mouth... ---- Off man !! I have seen Chneese selling themselves to foreigners in your so called big cities... Chineese people are cheap and easy to get...

Back stabber Chineese you should be greatfull to USA for what they have done for you... un greatfull chineese...



Chineese are also stupid... this is amply clear from your statement above... arm chair general...

We will also take you too down to hell... if we have to go down in any means ... Do you understand MAD theory ?? Now do not come and show us a cheap copy of Russian Plane... they are cheap copies only... and will perform just like those cheap Chineese products we have seen in our streets... First try to build a jet engine with out stealling and illigal copy from others ... then come and open your big mouth...

China is a paper tiger with no teeth left to bite...only empty threats... even smaller countries do not take you seriously...

India has enough to take China to stone age... Even your CCP thugs knows this...

Remember 1975 ?? or CCP have not told you ??

Remember 1987 ?? How you came in our land in Aurachal Pradesh by crossig the fence ?? when you saw the Indian movemet there you ran away with your tails between your legs ??? Huh! dreaming of super power status ??? You are a third world country with a third class mentality...

Go a figure out what happened to your mothers & grand mothers in 1940's... CCP must have erased it from your history books...



Do not worry we are in the South China Sea, exploring oil right under your chin... Now show us your Super power navy...

We will return you in KIND the same way you are doing with Pakistan... First have GUTS to come out of SCS then open you mount... 80 % of Chineese oil goes through Mallaca... remember it...



Now do not cry!!! after 1962 the situation has changed ... when will you understand ???

If I bring Nanjin incident and start saying in that China is no match for Japan even today... will you agree with the same yardstick ??

China is a soft state can not manage even its smaller neoghbours... no one respects you... Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philipines, South Korea ... I am leaving out India and Japan, it is too big for your ugly mouth...



Full of bullsheet & Propaganda from Chineese CCP. Nehru did mistake in 1962 but the situation could have been handled in a different manner by Chineese... They thought otherwise to humilate Nehru and India on Mao's interest... China was jealous of India's poition at that point of time... it was a good oppertunity fro tem to capitalize..,

There is a co ordinated effort By a group Chinese supportd by CCP thugs that 1962 was only of India's making and as if China was a innocent victim of it...



It only tells that you chineese have fear of India somewhere down your gut... Pakistan is no threat to India... even Pakistan itself knows that. Pakistan is fighting for its own survival... Time has come for India to move away from pakistan and focus on the ONLY remaining EVIL in this world that is China...



We showed our intent in 1975 when we snatched Sikkim from you evil Chineese...

We showed our intent in 1987... did you forgot that ?? or CCP did not told you about the border fallout and the how you turned back with your tail between your legs??

Chineese will only attack when they are sure that they have 5 ..1 numerical superiority... that is now gone too ... poor super power China...

You really sucks.

 

[RedDragon]

Except China and India aren't really enemies. China and Pakistan are friends. What happens between Pakistan and India is outside of China's control and hence not really China's business.

Come on, this is a realistic world, isn't it?

 

[t_co]

Come on, this is a realistic world, isn't it?

Exactly...

 

[ice berg]

Ok



Bull crap.

Don't hide behind USA's doings. USA has used/helped Pakistan against Russia invading Afghanistan and to hunt terrorist those attacked them on 9/11 not to make her counter weight India.

US was supporting Pakistan even after Soviet Union collapsed. Long before 9/11. Just because you conveniently forget that, dosnt means it is not true.

Stability in South Asia is of paramount importance. For China that is just as important as a counterweight to India.

China is India's neighbours using Pakistan against India that is more sinister than what USA did. USA made Pakistan the most sanctioned nation on earth when you were sharing designs of nuclear bombs with them.

You forgot that India were sanctioned too.


NAM doesn't mean we became Insulated from help and support offered by others. If it wasn't Nehru's NAM credential then China might have seen Indian army better equipped and victorious at more battle fields.

Dosnt answer your fantasy that US coming to Indias aid during 62.
Chinese wouldn't stop ranting day and night on how CIA and India designed freedom of Tibet during 60s.

China never did. It was the indians who ranting day and night of how they COULD beat PLA and driving them out of Tibet. India tried and failed. End of story

If India wasn't that capable and China was that a hyper power then she wouldn't have used Pakistan to counterweight India, like you have admitted.

Why should China commit her recources if Pakistan is all it takes to balance India?
What happened during visit by our minsters in China is anyone's guess, may be they went to tell Chinese who is daddy here. Now please spare us with what Chinese were planning to do, which never happened. Ask Pakistanis what happened to their NLI exactly after 12 years even when they were able to execute the initial plan very well across the same LOC your were dreaming to cross.

HAHAHAH, more likely begging for peace. You notice they came to China. Not the other way around.

 

[hit&run]

HAHAHAH, more likely begging for peace. You notice they came to China. Not the other way around.

HA HA HA Chinese clown. What kind of planing that was that your were to open front across LOC and our minister somehow got the information. There visit doesn't prove a squat what you are ranting ask Pakistanis do they believe the same when Nawaz Sharrif went to USA during Kargil. Ask the Pakistani troll who just thanked you.

General K.Sundar Ji air lifted a brigade and halted sneaky Chinese movement they did in 1986 winters further into Sumdorong Chu valley, we further forced PLA to move sideways along the Thag La ridge, we achieved our military objective and you Chinese still bluffing that you were to open second front from LOC which never happened.

US was supporting Pakistan even after Soviet Union collapsed. Long before 9/11. Just because you conveniently forget that, dosnt means it is not true.

Long before 9/11, convenient, forget, true.... blah blah blah.

If you know how to type it doesn't mean you can type anything.

USA supported Pakistan because they signed the CENTO SETO. They tried but failed to rescue them during 1971 war. They were not able to get the Indian navy blockade of Pakistan released even.

Stability in South Asia is of paramount importance.

Horse shit, First you make your South China Sea and ASEAN stable then poke your nose in SA. NK rouge is ready to implode, Japanese are ready to sink your fishing boats, Darwin is crawling with US marines, Vietnamese are abusing you on the face.

For China that is just as important as a counterweight to India.

Tell this to OP, we already know it, counterweight my ass.

Even helping Pakistan extensively India alone can rip off skin of both China and Pakistan in one go.

You forgot that India were sanctioned too.

And what is the point of this rant, class room chit chat ? It was you who said USA is using Pakistan to counterweight India. Why USA will sanction Pakistan if they were using her as counterweight against India.

Dosnt answer your fantasy that US coming to Indias aid during 62.

Soon the Cuban crisis was over Chinese ran back with tail in legs with failed military objective. You didn't answered if India and CIA together were helping Tibetan freedom fighters or not.

Though you do not deserve academic pieces with detailed references, here is the link and paragraphs for others to read on How western world (US and UK) were ready to help India.

The new Kennedy administration in 1961 shifted American policy toward the subcontinent. Kennedy felt that Eisenhower's policies had been mistakenly focused on containing communism rather than promoting democracy. He believed that, rather than simply defending democracy, 'America would actively promote it' in countries such as India despite its adherence to socialist ideals. Kennedy did not interpret neutralism/nonalignment as inherently hostile to American interests in the contest between the democratic and socialist blocs.[25] Therefore, he hoped to make up for the lack of American influence among the nonaligned countries by cultivating a tolerant attitude towards neutralism coupled with offers of financial commitments to the economic development plans of those nations.[26]

According to Robert McMahon, 'With tact, patience, and dollars, Kennedy thought that India and other nonaligned states could be
won for the West; at a minimum, communist influence could be arrested and increased support for US policies gained.'[27] But Kennedy would face the same criticisms of aid to India from people within his own party. Democratic Senator Stuart Symington derided aiding India 'whose military plans and programs build up the Soviet economy at the expense of our allies and ourselves, and whose chief leaders constantly threaten with military aggression some of the steadfast and loyal friends the United States has in the free world.' The senator was referring to America's firm friend, Pakistan.[28]

Like Eisenhower, Kennedy, was willing to risk American-Pakistani relations to get closer to India. This was important considering the strategic nature of the American-Pakistani relationship: it provided the US with territory within striking distance of the Sino-Soviet bloc; American listening posts were located in the country; and the Central Intelligence Agency was allowed use of airfields in Peshawar and Lahore for U-2 intelligence-gathering flights.[29] Both the United States and Britain hoped to halt the arms build-up between India and Pakistan. But 'India's importance to Kennedy administration strategists derived also from their fixation with China's presumed threat to the Asian equilibrium.'[30] The Kennedy administration's perception of China as a threat cannot be underestimated. When it was reported that Beijing would soon be capable of a nuclear detonation, the idea was raised in Washington to encourage India to produce its own nuclear detonation to blunt the impact.[31]Thus, 'Kennedy and his senior aides viewed India as a Cold War prize of such magnitude that they were willing to run substantial risk with Pakistan in order to secure India's alignment with the West.'[32]

Despite the pro-Indian tilt of the Kennedy administration, Kennedy disliked Nehru personally. He found his arrogance and sense of superiority offensive.[33] The administration was, however, ready and willing to use the Sino-Indian border conflict for its own ends. This attitude is best reflected in the words of Chester Bowles, appointed by President Truman as the American ambassador to India from 1951 to 1953 and chosen by President Kennedy to replace John Galbraith in 1963 for his second tour of
duty in New Delhi:

In October 1962 we were suddenly confronted with the opportunity that many of us had been hoping for - an overt Chinese Communist action which would bring home to the Indian Government and people some primary facts of life of Asian politics, i.e., the inevitable politicaleconomic rivalry of China and India and the danger that an expansionist China holds for India not only along the 2,200-mile Himalayan frontier but also in Southeast Asia which flanks India's eastern approaches.[34]

This passage indicates that, despite differences in approach, a common thread in American policy since the Truman years was the forlorn hope that India could be convinced that China was the greater threat to its security than Pakistan. The Sino-Indian border conflict not only provided an opportunity to bring this fact home to the Indians, but also appeared to be the right time to put Nehru's nonalignment/neutralism policy to a test.

Neither Macmillan nor Kennedy criticised Nehru for his failure to negotiate the border with China or Nehru's failed forward policy which invited Beijing's attack. Instead, the border conflict was seen through the lens of communist aggression rather than Indian intransigence. From the outset of the Chinese invasion, British and Americans officials agreed that China was pursuing short term goals in India rather than attempting to establish hegemony over the subcontinent. This explains why, in the midst of dealing with the border war between October and November of 1962, the British and American governments began to put into place policies which would result in possible advantages to the West.[35] It was not inevitable that the United States and Great Britain
should join their not inconsiderable clout to deal with the border conflict. The United States acknowledged that Britain's knowledge of South Asia was superior to their own. As one British official noted in the 1940s, 'The British would educate the Americans about the finer points of Asian gamesmanship:

London would supply the brains, Washington the money and the muscle needed to hold South Asia.'[36] American interest in South Asia ebbed and waned depending on other world conditions, but Britain's attention was more constant. Britain had never written off India as anti-West: India was a valued member of the British Commonwealth and Britain continued to be India's largest trading partner and main arms supplier until 1962.[37]

Britain's decline as a world power and its loss of economic clout is underscored by the fact that, by 1959, American private investment surpassed that of Britain.[38] By the 1960s, Britain was not in a position to intervene in the subcontinent in a meaningful way without the United States as its partner. American interest in the region was peaked as a result of the Korean War which signified the spread of the Cold War from Europe to Asia. From this time on, when events caused Washington to focus on the region, the Americans were willing to pursue their own policy with or without the approval of the British. This is evidenced by the signing of bilateral military agreements with Pakistan. Generally, however, the Americans preferred to have the British on board.

For most of 1962 the United States The United States and Britain had long provided humanitarian aid to India but this had not been without strings. The United States first addressed the issue of food aid in response to a famine in India in 1951. At that time, there was a crude attempt to tie this aid to a promise by India to sell to the Americans critical strategic materials such as manganese, monazite, and beryl. Indians were offended that rich, well-fed Americans would haggle in this manner. But
the American Congress was psychologically and philosophically predisposed to question the correctness of aiding socialist India. Ultimately, wheat was sold to India for blocked rupees rather than in a grant. Actually, the Indians preferred to pay for the food, but the episode was followed by similar mistakes and harmed Indo-American relations.[42] Military aid was certain to be even more difficult to negotiate since India had refused military aid because of its policy of nonalignment and Nehru's sensitivities to what may be interpreted as economic imperialism. Nehru and his Defence Minister, Krishna Menon, insisted upon purchasing military hardware from sources of their own choosing. But India's foreign exchange reserves were not sufficient to make this policy practicable once the border war began. Because of the delicacy of the situation, however, Macmillan hesitated to make a public offer of aid to India lest the Indian Prime Minister infer that the British were trying to exploit the situation for Cold War purposes.[43]

Similarly, the Americans waited for Nehru to make a definite request for US military assistance so as not to 'be in the position of running after Nehru to offer aid.'[44] It was important for the Americans and British, therefore, to wait until India made the first request for military aid in order to avoid the appearance of exploiting India's plight. Nehru was initially reluctant to seek aid from the United States so as to protect itself from charges that it was abandoning nonalignment.[45] When Nehru formally requested
aid on 29 November 1962, the Americans were pleased but surprised by the scale of the Indian aid request. It included a dozen squadrons of all-weather fighters, two squadrons of B-47 bombers manned by American crews to attack positions in China, and, finally, American help in constructing a radar shield for India's cities.[46] Before the US could respond, however, the Chinese ended the conflict while retaining control of Indian territory.

Despite the abrupt ending of the conflict, Washington and London were not deterred from their previous decision to use Nehru's aid request to exact a price from India.[47] Within days of Nehru's request British and American officials met in Washington to discuss their objectives. In regard to India's policy of non-alignment, they wanted 'less a public change of policy than a change in emotional attitude.'[48] Their goal was not to destroy Indian non-alignment completely.

http://sas-space.sas.ac.uk/3394/1/Journal_of_International_History_2002_n7_Steele.pdf

GO read it and highlight nitpicks and give it commie twists. I have made my point in previous posts, If I have to write in detail then the cardinal feature of points would be reluctance by part of Nehru for not being quick in asking military support in time because of his NAM credential and understanding on how West might be really looking at this particular conflict.

China never did. It was the indians who ranting day and night of how they COULD beat PLA and driving them out of Tibet. India tried and failed. End of story

I know this CCP brainwashing and fear mongering at work, Quote ''India never tried annex Tibet'' Unquote .

Why should China commit her resources if Pakistan is all it takes to balance India?

Yes we know Pakistan is easy sell who sleeps with foreign powers to destabilize South Asia, what is new in it.

 

[ice berg]

HA HA HA Chinese clown. What kind of planing that was that your were to open front across LOC and our minister somehow got the information. There visit doesn't prove a squat what you are ranting ask Pakistanis do they believe the same when Nawaz Sharrif went to USA during Kargil. Ask the Pakistani troll who just thanked you.

General K.Sundar Ji air lifted a brigade and halted sneaky Chinese movement they did in 1986 winters further into Sumdorong Chu valley, we further forced PLA to move sideways along the Thag La ridge, we achieved our military objective and you Chinese still bluffing that you were to open second front from LOC which never happened.

Cant believe how much nonsense you can write with so little knowledges. I never said a second front through LOC. ROFL. Learn to read first.

Long before 9/11, convenient, forget, true.... blah blah blah.

If you know how to type it doesn't mean you can type anything.

USA supported Pakistan because they signed the CENTO SETO. They tried but failed to rescue them during 1971 war. They were not able to get the Indian navy blockade of Pakistan released even.


Horse shit, First you make your South China Sea and ASEAN stable then poke your nose in SA. NK rouge is ready to implode, Japanese are ready to sink your fishing boats, Darwin is crawling with US marines, Vietnamese are abusing you on the face.

You do know the topic is Why is China allied with Pakistan, right? What does that got anyting to do with ASEAN, NK, etc? You just type anything on your mind without reading the topic? It is useless to talking to you if you cant even stick to the topic. Sorry if I cant bother to read the rest of your rants.

See ablove.

 

[hit&run]

See ablove.

Cant believe how much nonsense you can write with so little knowledges. I never said a second front through LOC. ROFL. Learn to read first.

Do you even know the meaning of second front ?

It was you who asked me if I know China was opening a second front in 1987. Go to your 79# post.

BTW when you talk you talk clear instead of making childish riddles. China was not going to open second front from its ass but from LOC, this is what has been disseminated by reputed China watchers on this very forum and elsewhere.

You do know the topic is Why is China allied with Pakistan, right? What does that got anyting to do with ASEAN, NK, etc?

No it is not the topic but just the heading. The topic is well twisted through out its length and breaths to prove Indian inabilities of posing any threat to China.

It was you who gave shoddy excuse that stability of SA is paramount to China when I specifically asked what is so special with Pakistan that China is so determined to help. I simply showed you the mirror that better you be more concerned about stability of ASEAN and SCS than other region of non of your concern if they are stable or not. This has been repeatedly stated by many western powers that India is not a threat to Pakistan even latest survey in Pakistan has revealed that they do not think India as a main threat to them. It is only Chinese flip flop excuses we read justifying their rouge nuclear proliferation acts sometimes for sake of stability of SA and some times to counterweight India by using Pakistan.

You just type anything on your mind without reading the topic? It is useless to talking to you if you cant even stick to the topic. Sorry if I cant bother to read the rest of your rants.

Good, send someone with better brains, I will hang another head as a trophy on my wall after farhan, in the meantime. Next.

 

[bose]

You really sucks.

There was no other way out except to come down to the person's level...

That person had hate in his heart for Indians... That need a equivalent response...

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Actually India and Pakistan didn't nuke each other then because China told Pakistan to stand down and opened a diplomatic back-channel between the two sides. Again, how would such a move make sense if China was using Pakistan to hold India in check? Wouldn't the correct move then, if holding in check was the goal, to set India back another decade or two by letting Pakistan airburst a few megatons over India's largest cities?

Please don't flatter yourself. Pakistan does not even have 10 kilotons yield.
If Pakistan nukes India China can expect the same from India. If you want to
stick your nose in our part of the world we will chop it off.

 

[Virendra]

Actually India and Pakistan didn't nuke each other then because China told Pakistan to stand down and opened a diplomatic back-channel between the two sides.

You mean Pakistan had assembled nukes and was launch ready in 1999?
China told Pakistan to stand down?
Where do you pick all these stories. Please read the interviews and statements of Pakistani PM, Intellectual Columnists and Army officers.
China leaked the Pak military's intrusion role to US by spying on Musharraf's call with his deputy when the former was visiting China.
Then they quietly informed the Americans about it, because they didn't want to be the bad boy who exposed their friend Pakistan or helped in bringing International pressure on them

 

[gokussj9]

You mean Pakistan had assembled nukes and was launch ready in 1999?
China told Pakistan to stand down?
Where do you pick all these stories. Please read the interviews and statements of Pakistani PM, Intellectual Columnists and Army officers.
China leaked the Pak military's intrusion role to US by spying on Musharraf's call with his deputy when the former was visiting China.
Then they quietly informed the Americans about it, because they didn't want to be the bad boy who exposed their friend Pakistan

Infact, Baki's nukes were not ready at that time as admitted by Musharraf in his memoirs.

Kargil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[LETHALFORCE]

@gokussj9

Pakistani nukes are hype they are low yielding failures with no delivery
system.

 

[farhan_9909]

It took us more than 40 years to come up with out first public tests

assembling nukes?what is this?
Project-706 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kirana Hills - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Project 888 is for developing a 50megaton warhead.(10 such can destory a america size country)


****Give credible links and One link of a 10 kiloton yield nuke. Wiki is not a credible source.****

 

[gokussj9]

It took us more than 40 years to come up with out first public tests

assembling nukes?what is this?
Project-706 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kirana Hills - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Project 888 is for developing a 50megaton warhead.(10 such can destory a america size country)

@farhan_9909

From now on, I give you a new nickname FICB (xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx).
America!!! really you talk about destroying yankland without shit of whom your country will
be back to stone age. Stop eating the shit from your ass and come to reality.

Mod:

 

[LETHALFORCE]

@farhan_9909

From now on, I give you a new nickname FICB (xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx).
America!!! really you talk about destroying yankland without shit of whom your country will
be back to stone age. Stop eating the shit from your ass and come to reality.

Do not feed the troll he has not been able to provide a credible link for a successful 10 kiloton
yielding test.

 

[gokussj9]

Do not feed the troll he has not been able to provide a credible link for a successful 10 kiloton
yielding test.

@LF

please do me a favor. I am in his ignore list and he can't see my posts. Can you please somehow make my posts visible to him.
I will drive this FICB out of this forum.

 

[farhan_9909]

@gokussj9

why this guy even quote me when he already know that he's in my ignore list?

when i dnt give a damn about you.neither do i care about you.
why are you following me like a stalker?even in pdf

your a stalker

 

[gokussj9]

@farhan_9909 alias FICB,

I love throwing shit on FICB's. Got a problem, gtfo.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

NUCLEAR ANXIETY - THE SCIENTISTS - Experts Say Pakistan Test Was Either Small or a Failure - NYTimes.com

THE SCIENTISTS; Experts Say Pakistan Test Was Either Small or a Failure


The global network that tracks earthquakes and underground atomic blasts found only a faint echo from the nuclear test that Pakistan said it conducted yesterday, American experts said.

That could mean the test was successful but small, or that the test was a failure and produced relatively few shock waves. ''It's a small event,'' said Terry C. Wallace, a seismologist at the University of Arizona who works with the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology, a scientific group in Washington.

Dr. Wallace said the blast had a preliminary magnitude of 4.3, equal to about 1,000 tons of high explosive. By contrast, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 had an explosive force of 15,000 tons.

The main Pakistani blast Thursday was monitored as having a magnitude of 4.8, equal to between 8,000 to 15,000 tons of high explosive. Such bombs are considered relatively small by the standards of world arsenals, where the explosive power of warheads can exceed millions of tons of high explosive.

Yesterday's test was too small to show up on the Government's main network for monitoring earthquakes around the world. ''We've searched everything we have and we don't see anything,'' said Waverly Person, a spokesman at the National Earthquake Informational Center, in Golden, Colo. ''We didn't record anything at all.''

Both groups of scientists said they would continue to examine new data as it came in, and held out the possibility that more faint signals from the Pakistani test site might be uncovered.

American experts said a statement attributed to Abdul Qadeer Khan, the architect of Pakistan's nuclear program, suggested that he might be exaggerating the country's atomic prowess. The Associated Press reported that The News, an English-language newspaper in Islamabad, quoted Dr. Qadeer Khan as saying that Pakistan's bomb program was more advanced than India's because it used uranium rather than plutonium. ''They have used the old technology of plutonium from spent fuel, whereas we have used enriched uranium, which is much more sophisticated and a safer process,'' Dr. Qadeer Khan was quoted as saying.

But experts say just the opposite is true if the aim is to put the nuclear weapon atop a missile.

 

[farhan_9909]

@LETHALFORCE

well this is as per western analyst?
your fellow indians nuclear scientist..who was part of indian nuclear program and was present at the site of pokhran II test said this.

*low yield is one thing.
*failure is 2nd


http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article21311.ece

to inform the nation that not only was the yield of the second fusion (H-bomb) stage of the thermonuclear (TN) device tested in May 1998 was not only far below the design prediction made by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), but that it actually failed.