@TrueSpirit1 USSR was an artificial entity and it containing China is a joke.
The only artificial entity I see today is: the PRC superstate. Without USA's role in WWII, Chicoms could never have gained control of territories & nationalities they now do.
China built its nuke bomb by 63 and had a much larger industrial potential.
Do you when USSR made fusion based so called "hydrogen bombs" & by when did USSR amassed massive fleet of bombers that can travel trans-atlantic to bomb USA to antiquity ? That was much before 63.
By the way, how did the Chinese get their hands on nuke tech. in the first place ?
Coming to Industrial potential:
Looks like you are too much in awe of Chinese toys & mobiles sweeping third-world markets. Industrial potential is not just about consumer electronics & goods.
So, find out, whose investment, technology transfers & skilled manpower laid of foundation of a China that has some semblance of modern infrastructure & latest farming techniques.
It was USSR's largesse that transformed the bamboo economy. That was the 50's & 60's. Even the Chinese acknowledge it.
Coming to last 3 decades, again, find out whose technology, consultancy, capital, & project-management skills have created the Western-standard infrastructure in China ? It is the Europeans all the way.
Now, do you have idea that Soviets were rolling out SSBN & SSN by the dozen every year, at the height of Cold-War ? "Niall Ferguson".Chicoms even today cannot make a decent one worth exporting & have completely relied on Russians for decades.
Hell, the Chicoms could not even make a decent working aircraft engine of their own, even today & continue to buy stuff from Russia & CIS nations, even after 6 decades. What does that tells you about USSR ?
Talk about "industrial potential".
USA or Britain did not create Pakistan, it was Islamic refusal to live with polytheist Hindus that was culprit, British would not have made it if Congress did not approve in 1946, blaming british for partition is where Hindu nationalists and secular fanatics come together.
There is word called "fomenting". "Buttressing" is another. Without US connivance & the leverage they had over Atlee administration due to Marshall loans & saving British asses, this voilent unrest was not happening. Read about role of Major Brown & his units in the unified state of J&K & then tell me that US/UK had no hand in any of this. It is USA/UK wily moves owing to which we have lot more than half of J&K state.
Read about violence of 1950 in East Bengal and then talk about USA propping up Mujahideens, they were always there, muslims are fanatic, full of hatred but they have a cause unlike Indians and so when Soviets started brutality in Afghanistan, it was inevitable that they would make jehadis.
Obviously, the religion itself espouses violence & bloodshed. But who is it that props, instigates, equips, trains & directs the insurgency ?
USA all the way, in unholy nexus between UK,Saudi, Isreal, China & co.
USA did ignore nuke transfer to Pak by China but then that is easily matched by USSR supplying arms to China in early 50s.
There is a difference between arming an existential nemesis (who can be cut into pieces by Indian forces on any given day; if not for Chicom supplied nukes under US patronage) & arming a rival who has already whipped our ass even without nukes & could have done much worse, if not for acclimatization & extended supply-line issues.
NE states are fanatic christians
Study the journey before jumping the gun. Where does the money comes from ? CIA & MI6 roles, etc.
US was not there when Syrian christians betrayed the king of Calicut and asked help from Vasco De Gama.
Who blames US for this ?
But, US itself was founded on principle of faith in "Holy Cross". The so-called "pilgrims" who laid the seed of US were all fanatic zealots, who placed faith over state in England. Hence, were prosecuted & driven out.
Finally, USA is responsible for Indians living in free country, if it had not dismantled British empire and had promised aid to British in case of their war with India, we would have still been ruled by British till today. You can live in your dream of "SC Bose freeing India or Indian army was rebellious" thing. If British could defeat Germans and Japanese, to think that they feared Indians who had zero military of their own is nohing but nationalistic stupidity.
Hahaha....joke of the millennium.
Can only advise you to read about European history, their economic decline & the WWII. Look up to "Niall Ferguson".
You know I enjoy debates done in civil manner so feel free to refute me without abusing as I have touched raw nerves of Indians by telling the truth.
Anyone can clearly see you have no idea about WWII, British Indian Army & the world between 1918-1963. "Your version of truth" is based on hearsay, half-baked & amateur theories, which I can only pity. I mean, I expected you to be well-read but looks like your specialization is limited to a different era, altogether.
You seriously need to come prepared when delving in topics you have little clue about. Once again, take help from a British who goes by the name "Niall Ferguson".
As of now, you don't have anything worth debating. Your assertions belong to "jokes thread".
Especially, when you start inventing history & re-writing it putting all the historians of the world to shame by saying that:
1) British defeated the Japanese
What did the USA do then ?
2) British defeated the Germans ? Seriously ? What was the USSR & USA doing then ?
You have just taken the discourse to epic depths of sub-standard fiction.
