Is CHINA getting ready to attack INDIA?

[rock127]

Let us hope the BEST from our ARMY and other ARMED FORCES......

Keep aside the UPA and congress which are letting down the whole country.....

We, the people of INDIA always have strong belief on our ARMY and this is not 1962 and we are somewhat better equipped this time and can defend ourselves as we are not the aggressors......

Some of the corrupt politicians should also be taught a lesson(you know what I mean) if a war happens.

 

[cw2005]

From this forum, I have learnt that Chinese military systems are mainly home made and inferior to the Western and Russian ones. It seems to me that China does not preparing for military encounter in the near future. Otherwise, she should have been buying better jet fighters etc. like what India has been doing from whoever willing to sell. But instead, she is making use of this "peaceful" period to build her own military industrial.

The real danger is not now, not in near future. The danger will be there only when China becomes the military and economic giants and that, according to some estimation, could be anytime from 2025 to next Century.

So, I believe the race is on for any country share a border with China for economical and military powers. From what I read in this forum, some Indians are advocating for this preparation but most just laugh at the "Junk" fighters, engines etc. Laughing your opponent's ability does not strengthen yours but down to earth no nonsense hard working does.

 

[Decklander]

Let us hope the BEST from our ARMY and other ARMED FORCES......

Keep aside the UPA and congress which are letting down the whole country.....

We, the people of INDIA always have strong belief on our ARMY and this is not 1962 and we are somewhat better equipped this time and can defend ourselves as we are not the aggressors......

We lost 1962 only bcoz we did not use airpower and we won Kargil only bcoz we used airpower and also Naval power. In next battle with China, the three services will attack together. we will have the seashore from shanghai to SCS, entire tibet, whole of china's east become a battle ground including the muslim dominated west. We will teach these hans a lesson of the lifetime and for their future generations.

 

[Decklander]

here is the latest. This is the state of PLA. Saloon ko pani bhi pilana pad raha hai.
Chinese troops make fresh attempt to violate international border near Leh - The Times of India

 

[Energon]

(Energon, pls allow the partial quote )

ABSOLUTELY ! - via economic mastery prc has greater purchasing power and so purchases the modules and manufactures almost all its weapons - both quantity and sufficient quality

we have to realise that is where the real fight is

what happens at the borders (land or sea) is a direct reflection of the economic warfare fought in the market place
whoever "wins" or has advantage at the marketplace also wins or has advantage on the war-front

can our lokh sabha and other governing bodies please educate themselves enough to realise that ?

Yes, this is precisely the core of my message. The problem with the conflict between China and India is that the latter has always been a step behind in identifying the parameters of the battle itself. What people need to realize is that the root problem lies in the administrative circles and not anywhere else, the military outcome in the case of 1962 was merely a manifestation of the establishment's complete lack of touch with reality... they literally had no clue what was going on.

However much has changed since 1962 particularly in regards to the nature of conflict and the participants involved in it. One new critical addition to the equation are the Indian people themselves. In 1962 India was a nascent state where people were still resigned to a "mai baap" outlook of the colonial era, as in leaving all decisions up to the government. This is no longer true, technology has equalized access to information and now anyone who wants to be aware of global realities has the means to do so. Like it or not India is a democratic nation and it is the responsibility of the people to ensure that their elected officials represent their interests. If the majority of the people keep allowing emotions to cloud their judgment and perpetuate this idea that the conflict is still fundamentally a military one then the entire nation remains vulnerable to yet another defeat. Furthermore now that the battle is economic in nature it automatically involves the entire populace and not just the members of the armed forces. An effective counter strategy now requires input from the general public in the form of discipline, creativity, productivity, innovation and outright ruthlessness at the marketplace to repel China's economic mercantilism. Likewise the government's role in managing this conflict isn't just buying expensive military hardware, but getting their act together and aggressively modernize the infrastructure and implement policies that will enable Indians to optimize their ingenuity and creativity and unleash their entrepreneurial spirit to reclaim "lost land" at the marketplace.

It is pointless to make loud proclamations of "we will not forget 1962" if steps aren't taken to avoid another one.

 

[nirranj]

China and India will both lose many good young men nevertheless... if a full scale war is to happen, the east himalayan snow will be coated red... but a good intelligence network coupled with good surveillance systems will prevent a surprise attack from the chinese... but DBO has shown that things are otherwise... we have to establish more siachen type high altitude presence through out the himalayas...

 

[Energon]

I agree to your statement in part only. The 1962 war with India was not for that reason. It was to teach a lesson to Nehruvian stupidity. The 1979 war with Vietnam was one such case of trying to divert attention from domestic problems. Chinese thought that they will be able to defeat a small nation like Vietnam in no time but they got a bloody nose. This time they are playing with India-The Elephant of the World.
Had it not been for India, Germans wud have enslaved whole of white world in WW1 itself. I do not have to comment about WW2. The chinese got saved from Japs only bcoz of India. Now, India and Japs are together and US monet will not flow in to save China.

I'm not sure what history books you're reading but I can identify many factual and analytical inconsistencies in your narrative. First let's put to rest this overblown importance of India in the outcome of the WWI and WWII. Also the Chinese were not saved from the Japs. It is true that Indian soldiers made some heroic contributions but the overall effect wasn't nearly as significant as you say it is.
You are right about the Chinese wanting to humiliate Nehru for his stupidity, but I don't think you've really looked into the exact nature of that stupidity. The problem with Nehru was that he overestimated India's "greatness." Despite of India's weak economic foundation he thought of India as a "global leader" that could be the spearhead of the "third front" of an increasingly bi polar world. He failed to realize that India's reputation attained from her unparalleled success in peacefully repelling colonial rule could substitute for a functional state with robust institutions. Little did he know that a ruthless enemy which had no qualms sacrificing millions of its own people could annihilate Nehru's delusions through superior preparedness. In short Nehruvian stupidity can be summed up as "all hype no substance."
Ironically India still suffers from this ailment. Sorry to say but this whole "Elephant of the World" rhetoric is a joke; India isn't a global leader like China by any means. Falling for the hype and over estimating India's capabilities is merely a reincarnation of Nehru's stupidity.
In the aftermath of de-colonization, nations in Asia were still fighting tooth and nail over geographic borders, this is no longer a primary concern. Now it is all about exerting dominance through economic expansion and India is miles behind China.

I am at times shocked to read the posts of the members here who state that China has better Infra and so can dominate India.
Well they do have better infra but how much time does it take for us to destroy it and what about terrain? Who has the advantage?We lost 1962 only bcoz we did not use airpower and we won Kargil only bcoz we used airpower and also Naval power. In next battle with China, the three services will attack together. we will have the seashore from shanghai to SCS, entire tibet, whole of china's east become a battle ground including the muslim dominated west. We will teach these hans a lesson of the lifetime and for their future generations.

If we're talking purely military strategy then yes, in any potential face off China still has the upper hand. China's infrastructure does not exist in a vacuum. It is their impressive industrial capacity with which they have rapidly built that infrastructure that is really at the heart of China's conventional advantage over India. India my have some sophisticated equipment mostly of foreign origin, but China has the ability to build complex hardware at an exponential pace with which they can easily overwhelm India if needed. Objectively speaking China maintains a lead over India on land, air, sea and space (lets not forget the importance of space based assets in modern warfare).

Lastly if you read objective analyses of the Indo China war you'll see that the reason India did not use air power in spite of having a slight qualitative advantage was because they knew that it would expand the conflict and lead to an even greater disaster. Also in Kargil even with the sparse LGB interdiction toward the end of the conflict the overall effectiveness of the airforce was minimal. The definitive determinant was the superhuman courage of India's infantry men who scaled uphill under fire (with assistance from their own artillery) and then destroyed enemy positions in close quarters combat. However the overall level of casualties was sobering and this sort of tactic is simply unfeasible when taking on a larger foe.

I'm not doubting your patriotism I do however question the jingoism behind most of your analyses.

 

[p2prada]

If we're talking purely military strategy then yes, in any potential face off China still has the upper hand. China's infrastructure does not exist in a vacuum. It is their impressive industrial capacity with which they have rapidly built that infrastructure that is really at the heart of China's conventional advantage over India.

I would agree with the first half of your post, but not the latter half.

Chinese infrastructure advantages are exaggerated. Btw, the infrastructure advantages mentioned has nothing to do with the Chinese mil-industrial complex, but the road, rail and air network connecting Chengdu with the Tibetan plateau.

Hitting their bridges and airports will kill their logistics. It is much harder to do the same on our side. The logistics chain makes or breaks a war as it did in the Kargil war. Also, the Chinese cannot move their troops into the plateau at the same speed we can. We can advance or retreat faster than they can. We also have more troops in forward areas compared to them and are adding even more troops. The laws of warfighting are in our favour, thankfully. Meaning, the Chinese will need a 12:1 numerical superiority if they want to repeat 1962. We had a similar numerical superiority during Kargil war.

While their mil-industrial complex and infrastructure can handle war, their troops are not ready for it due to human limitations in the adverse conditions.

Studies show that the 1962 war was ours to win, Nehru's indecision in escalating the war took victory or even a stalemate away from us. Yes, we were not prepared, but the Chinese advance was not as overwhelming as suggested. Why else would the Chinese withdraw unilaterally?

India my have some sophisticated equipment mostly of foreign origin, but China has the ability to build complex hardware at an exponential pace with which they can easily overwhelm India if needed.

This is highly subjective and debatable. We have not seen major wars to date which can effectively compare modern weapons systems at their peak. Only a lot of hot air between western weapons and eastern bloc weapons as of today.

Today's warfare is all about using a small amount (subjective and depends on situation) of very advanced weaponry against a foe with a larger assortment of lesser advanced weaponry in a networked environment with minimal losses. Our sophisticated foreign weapons are quite overwhelmingly superior to the what the Chinese military uses as of today.

We have warfighting experience with modern weapons, unlike China, plus in areas that require expertise in high altitude warfare.

Objectively speaking China maintains a lead over India on land, air, sea and space (lets not forget the importance of space based assets in modern warfare).

Land and sea, we are definitely behind but are getting there. However we have more acclimatised troops compared to China, and with fighting experience. We are currently not aware of what's happening with the infantry modernization process since it is still in the development stages, but it is happening as we speak. There will be major changes before 2020. Please do not be surprised if we deploy a system superior to the French FELIN system.

We may take much longer catching up when it comes to the navy. It will obviously remain slow due to our technological and financial inferiority over the Chinese.

Space, we are more or less on par due to our military grade access to Russian navigation satellites.

Air, we are ahead and will consistently remain ahead for the foreseeable future.

 

[no smoking]

I think you are wrong. If china humiliates India, they will not have to fire even a round to get all countries of SCS to kneel down in front of them. But if they get a bloody nose, they will lose SCS forever. Chinese have been that stupid in history.

Listen my freind, india is great but not that great!
India is not the boss or big brother of any country in SCS, USA is!
No one in SCS will be scared shit even if China take India down in a small scale war! On the other hand, defeating USA could make that happen.

 

[TrueSpirit]

Listen my freind, india is great but not that great!
India is not the boss or big brother of any country in SCS, USA is!

No one is contesting this. Our political dispensation & recent economic travails have constrained us.

No one in SCS will be scared shit even if China take India down in a small scale war!

Is this supposed to mean something ?

On the other hand, defeating USA could make that happen.

@no smoking Were you smoking something while posting this...?

 

[TrueSpirit]

I'm not sure what history books you're reading but I can identify many factual and analytical inconsistencies in your narrative. First let's put to rest this overblown importance of India in the outcome of the WWI and WWII. Also the Chinese were not saved from the Japs. It is true that Indian soldiers made some heroic contributions but the overall effect wasn't nearly as significant as you say it is.
You are right about the Chinese wanting to humiliate Nehru for his stupidity, but I don't think you've really looked into the exact nature of that stupidity. The problem with Nehru was that he overestimated India's "greatness." Despite of India's weak economic foundation he thought of India as a "global leader" that could be the spearhead of the "third front" of an increasingly bi polar world. He failed to realize that India's reputation attained from her unparalleled success in peacefully repelling colonial rule could substitute for a functional state with robust institutions. Little did he know that a ruthless enemy which had no qualms sacrificing millions of its own people could annihilate Nehru's delusions through superior preparedness. In short Nehruvian stupidity can be summed up as "all hype no substance."
Ironically India still suffers from this ailment. Sorry to say but this whole "Elephant of the World" rhetoric is a joke; India isn't a global leader like China by any means. Falling for the hype and over estimating India's capabilities is merely a reincarnation of Nehru's stupidity.
In the aftermath of de-colonization, nations in Asia were still fighting tooth and nail over geographic borders, this is no longer a primary concern. Now it is all about exerting dominance through economic expansion and India is miles behind China.

Regarding Indian contribution to British victories in WW's, I would suggest, just have a look over the statistics (manpower employed, expeditionary deployments, theaters, odds, casualities, awards, contribution & impact towards individual battle outcome etc.) & then we can talk.

I agree to some extent regarding Nehru's policies.

If we're talking purely military strategy then yes, in any potential face off China still has the upper hand. China's infrastructure does not exist in a vacuum. It is their impressive industrial capacity with which they have rapidly built that infrastructure that is really at the heart of China's conventional advantage over India. India my have some sophisticated equipment mostly of foreign origin, but China has the ability to build complex hardware at an exponential pace with which they can easily overwhelm India if needed. Objectively speaking China maintains a lead over India on land, air, sea and space (lets not forget the importance of space based assets in modern warfare).

Quite close, but not precise enough.

Lastly if you read objective analyses of the Indo China war you'll see that the reason India did not use air power in spite of having a slight qualitative advantage was because they knew that it would expand the conflict and lead to an even greater disaster

.

Yes, that was the apprehension but the apprehension was utterly unfounded, at best. Not employing air-power was the ultimate folly we had committed, notwithstanding the limited potential of such an endeavor.

Impact of airpower, if deployed, would have been limited is a fact that we have learnt recently on this forum (through personal accounts of erstwhile Indian fighter pilots). Nonetheless, it should have been deployed to our advantage.

Also in Kargil even with the sparse LGB interdiction toward the end of the conflict the overall effectiveness of the airforce was minimal.

The sparse LGB interdiction made a lot of difference & was the pivotal moment in the war.

The definitive determinant was the superhuman courage of India's infantry men who scaled uphill under fire (with assistance from their own artillery) and then destroyed enemy positions in close quarters combat

.

That's a fact but the decisiveness of air-power towards the eventual outcome cannot be snubbed.

However the overall level of casualties was sobering and this sort of tactic is simply unfeasible when taking on a larger foe.

Sobering, yes. But, avoidable (given the situation we were caught in) ? I doubt.

Anyway, against larger foe, multiple tactics would be applied simultaneously & war would be fought at many levels, in multiple theaters. Our forces have been preparing for that since quite some time.

Given the right political leadership (we had a mixed experience in the past- both good & bad), our forces can hold on their on, very well & in fact, surprise the naysayers & high-brow agnostics. Especially, in the NE region (Eastern theater) as well as Middle-frontiers.

Cannot say the same about Western theater, though.

I'm not doubting your patriotism I do however question the jingoism behind most of your analyses.

Being DFI, this is not totally unexpected from an Indian ex-Navy officer

 

[Energon]

This is digressing a bit, but in regards to the contribution of Indian troops in WWI and WWII I have actually looked into the matter albeit quite a while ago. But interestingly in my research I found memos and letters and documented internal dialogue between post independence Indian officers (which I had access to due to special circumstances) to be far more valuable than academic analyses of the war. Here's the bottom line. I still stand by my assertion that considering India's contribution as being the decisive factor in stopping the Germans in both the world wars as suggested by the earlier poster is an overstatement because there were other parties who had far greater contributions albeit due to a specific set of factors. This however does not take anything away from the brave Indian soldiers who were involved in some amazing engagements, or the many who fought and gave their lives and achieved the best results they could given the circumstances.
If you look beyond the mere statistics (especially casualties) and into into the human perspective of most pre independence campaigns fought by Indian soldiers you'll see that the real lesson there is the inherent flaw of colonial powers abusing colonized manpower to fight their wars. However all of this is digression.

In regards to China I think most people are missing the point, it's not the infrastructure itself that matters but China's level of industrialization. We're essentially talking about an industrialized nation facing off against an insufficiently industrialized one, and that's the difference. Military records thus far show that the party with superior industrial capability regardless of its size always holds an advantage over adversaries with inferior industrial capacity even if the latter possess superior weaponry at the onset of the conflict (the Indo-Pak war being the best example).

Having said all this, I must reiterate that I highly doubt there will be open armed hostilities of significance and that the real battle for dominance will be determined by economics and level of industrialization, and so far India is behind in both arenas.

 

[Decklander]

@Energon, India has a decisive advantage of terrain. The better infra is on the side of China and that infra is nor so very close to Indian border. But the toughest areas of India on china border are not very far from plains. I hope you know how it overcomes the infra of China. In a war with china, If India makes a breakthru, we can force our way in as the ability of both forces will continue to diminish but if china makes a breakthru, The ability of Indian forces to defend and counter attack will increase many folds.
I am not a fool to tactics and when I wrote what I did, I was not thumping my chest like third rate muslim armies. The only reason we lost 1962 was bcoz of NEHRU and if we had used our IAF, that whole battle wud have had a very diff outcome.
Regarding your views about WW1 & WW2, The allied forces did not have manpower to fight germans and Japs together who were far superior to allied forces in terms of tech and equipment. Those wars cud be won only bcoz of Indian manpower and American industrial might for which America till date is getting money from UK for the equipment they supplied to UK.
In case of war with china now, we have clear advantage as we have been able to create better units to fight wars in high altitudes due to Pakistan and Siachin and we also now have an offensive capability across LAC. We will not defend like we did in 1962, we will chose the area to retaliate and defend and take chinese into killing field which they won't even realise. On the Indian side of LAC, every person is against China and pro India and unfortunately for China, same is true on their side of LAC in Tibet.
What Tilts the balance in such a case. The industrial might of china to produce weapons is of no use here. It will take them good about two years to ramp up production to make a decisive change on the battle like it happened in WW2. second is NUKE strikes which can have biggest effect. China is no where close to a BMD shield while we in India have already started deploying one. Our own nuke sub armed with nukes will start war patrols within next 12 months and the INS Chakra armed with nukes is already on Patrol. We have overcome the range advantage which China had in terms of nuke missiles. We can strike them at will all across their eastern coast with nukes and reduce them to rubble shud they attack us with nukes. You might laugh when I wrote about Indian Akula having nukes onboard. Please have a drink on my name for this. You will be proved wrong soon.
Lastly, why any misadventure across LAC will cost China dearly? The biggest importer of chinese goods is USA. The economy of USA is on the upswing, when ever US economy performs better, they start exporting and reduce thr imports which is reverse of what happens in EU. The sealanes of nearly all the exports to the second biggest market of China is India and Africa. What will happen to that in case of war?

Now I wish to ask you a few questions,
1. Who controls IOR and Malacca St. other than US Navy?
2. What will be the effect of blockage of fuel supplies to China of this shipping lane?
3. Which economy will get bigger jolt from such a war, Indian-which has four parallel economies or Chinese which is export oriented?
4. In case of a nuke war, when both side kill over 75% of the population of eachother, which nation will have extended lines of communication over inhospitable terrain, India or China?
5. India may be behind in terms of Industrialisation but an ordinary ironsmith of India makes better and more reliable guns than what best of chinese industry can produce till date.
6. India was not at all effected by the sanctions put against us by US after 1998 nuke tests. In fact our economy started growing at over 6% as a result of that which had never grown at even 5% till then. The biggest consumer of indian produce are Indians. We are the industry and also the Market. That is not the case with China.
7. Lastly, every north Indian has seen wars and also their forefathers have fought wars. Just like every American had to fight for survival to claim America. Please do not under estimate our genes.

China needs to understand that they are facing a nation which has lernt its lessons from 1962, 1965, 1971, 1967, 1987 and 1999. Chinese army is illequipped has no battle experience to fight large scale wars. Experience is the cheapest thing to buy provided you get it second hand.

 

[roma]

China and India will both lose many good young men nevertheless... if a full scale war is to happen, the east himalayan snow will be coated red... but a good intelligence network coupled with good surveillance systems will prevent a surprise attack from the chinese... but DBO has shown that things are otherwise... we have to establish more siachen type high altitude presence through out the himalayas...

not many expect the lizard to start a full-scale war - but rather a small objective to "show the world and put India in place " - in order to avoid that, the congress led upa coalition govt would be required to show some guts - the willingness to say "absolutely NO WAY ! - not this time "

that will involve doing and using "whatever it takes "

question:- is our upa coalition willing to do that ?

( on a side issue; energon and someone else wrote about LGB ......(something ) ? whoooo i didnt know the chinese troops were so advanced , they were LGBT even in those days ! wow ! )

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

Romaji, you were a member of BR Forums in an earlier avataar?

Some of those guys refer to China as "lizard", which is a mockery for "dragon".

Jus' sayin'

not many expect the lizard to start a full-scale war

 

[s002wjh]

China may start a war to divert the attention from its internal issues.They did same before.

yea, that will be SCS or diaoyu island not india/china dispute. look at chinese media. did they concentrate anything recently on india/china dispute? NO, its always ScS, japan/china. china will solve SCS/diaoyu island 1st, so india/china dispute is not a high priority right now.

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

No Roma ji, LGB= Laser Guided Bomb, we had only few during Kargil war, Aircraft not equipped for it ,etc....

( on a side issue; energon and someone else wrote about LGB ......(something ) ?

 

[Energon]

Now I wish to ask you a few questions,
1. Who controls IOR and Malacca St. other than US Navy?
2. What will be the effect of blockage of fuel supplies to China of this shipping lane?
3. Which economy will get bigger jolt from such a war, Indian-which has four parallel economies or Chinese which is export oriented?
4. In case of a nuke war, when both side kill over 75% of the population of eachother, which nation will have extended lines of communication over inhospitable terrain, India or China?
5. India may be behind in terms of Industrialisation but an ordinary ironsmith of India makes better and more reliable guns than what best of chinese industry can produce till date.
6. India was not at all effected by the sanctions put against us by US after 1998 nuke tests. In fact our economy started growing at over 6% as a result of that which had never grown at even 5% till then. The biggest consumer of indian produce are Indians. We are the industry and also the Market. That is not the case with China.
7. Lastly, every north Indian has seen wars and also their forefathers have fought wars. Just like every American had to fight for survival to claim America. Please do not under estimate our genes.

I find it very difficult to address these questions because they have little or no relevance in today's world. I could conjure up responses based on a nonexistent reality; however that will only derail this discussion further.
Your assessment of the situation is entirely reminiscent of the 60s and 70s and based on parameters that no longer exist. Fact of the matter is that there has been a major paradigm shift in global realities and I'm sorry to say but your fundamental perceptions are obsolete.
As reality stands today, large scale conventional military conflicts between countries like China and India are no longer feasible; and nuclear war is not even in the running. Any skirmish that could potentially turn into open hostilities would be squashed immediately by the global community because a war between India and China would deal a severe blow to the global economy. The only three potential scenarios of large scale conventional conflicts are:

1. An entirely imbalanced conflict between a powerful country that has an overwhelming military advantage over a weak foe or
2. A war between two economic pariahs in the under developed world that have nothing to lose.
3. If one of the erratic/ unstable countries like North Korea completely lose their minds and attack someone.

India and China do not fit any of these categories. The need for large conventional militaries is no longer related to warring with other nations but rather to ensure parity and project power for the sake of showmanship.
The "conflict" between India and China is now about who develops faster and takes a bigger pie of the global economy, who assumes control over natural resources and raw materials in other parts of the world and who is able to technologically catch up with the developed world and raise the standard of living. The "winner" gets to assert control over the "loser" through economic and geopolitical superiority. The reason your entire line of inquiry is irrelevant is because China is well aware of the new rules and the new theater of war and they're not interested in fighting obsolete wars because they're already winning the one that matters.

One note about question number 7. We have come far enough to realize that all these antiquated ideas of strength and weakness linked to "genes" that were prevalent in India are nonsensical. Nobody's underestimating your genes because that would be completely pointless. The competence of a nation when it comes to military prowess or other more relevant matters has everything to do with designing and implementing intelligent policy and building good institutions. Genes, being North Indian, or having ancestors who fought has nothing to do with it.

 

[naseem]

Pakistan kai saamnai sher banai walai apnai sai bari army jai saamnai bheegi billi ban gayai hai

 

[nirranj]

not many expect the lizard to start a full-scale war - but rather a small objective to "show the world and put India in place " - in order to avoid that, the congress led upa coalition govt would be required to show some guts - the willingness to say "absolutely NO WAY ! - not this time "

that will involve doing and using "whatever it takes "

question:- is our upa coalition willing to do that ?

( on a side issue; energon and someone else wrote about LGB ......(something ) ? whoooo i didnt know the chinese troops were so advanced , they were LGBT even in those days ! wow ! )

I don't think China will do that mistake. they will only try to knit a web around India and try to do some infiltration along Indian borders. If they attack India, India will be forced to make a alliance with the USA or Japan or both, which the Chinese will never want to happen. (just as in 1971 India forged a treaty with the Soviets when the Americans tried to corner us)... I dont think the Chinese are that stupid to invade India, but there will be some border skirmish or more and frequent intrusions to keep India in a check and to put some stress on India's limited economic power... There will be provocations all around, from SL, Pak, Nepal (client states of China)...