Will China attack India again?

[RedDragon]

the last time we killed around 400 chini soldiers in Nathu la!this time it will be around 400,000!our soldiers will have a target practice with live chini soldiers running around the battlefield like some headless chicken

Anyway, from the record, Indian lost more soliders than China.

 

[illusion8]

No, and here is one good reason.
India hopes to reach 100 billion dollar trade with China by 2015: Krishna - Economic Times

Wrong, they will attack eventually, and everybody who is weaker, the are still in the mindset of the earlier conquest days and want to see chinese dominate the world, and they will go down in flames similar to the german nazis.

 

[Virendra]

Limited conflicts with China can never be ruled out. They have a habit of needling and testing the patience of others.
If they have to determine the plausibility of a full on war with India, eventually they will need to sniff us out via a limited conflict. It would be their simulation testing.
The current peace is for reasons other than many believe.
Peace and War for China is not about hesitation or aggression. It is about calculation.

We should be in the 'talk softly but carry a big stick' mode.

 

[t_co]

Limited conflicts with China can never be ruled out. They have a habit of needling and testing the patience of others.
If they have to determine the plausibility of a full on war with India, eventually they will need to sniff us out via a limited conflict. It would be their simulation testing.
The current peace is for reasons other than many believe.
Peace and War for China is not about hesitation or aggression. It is about calculation.

We should be in the 'talk softly but carry a big stick' mode.

But you have to think--what does China gain for getting a few kms by force along the highest, most barren mountains in the world? Is it logical? China isn't Pakistan, where every kilometer they push the Indian Army back is another kilometer of safety for Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad.

 

[Yusuf]

But you have to think--what does China gain for getting a few kms by force along the highest, most barren mountains in the world? Is it logical? China isn't Pakistan, where every kilometer they push the Indian Army back is another kilometer of safety for Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad.

Wow! Why don't you ask your govt to officially declare all those rocks as India's and stop troubling us.

 

[t_co]

Wow! Why don't you ask your govt to officially declare all those rocks as India's and stop troubling us.

Maybe you could ask the Indian government declare the rocks on the Chinese side of the LOC as China's. It was Nehru's re-interpretation of the McMahon line back in the 1950s that started this whole mess.

 

[Yusuf]

Maybe you could ask the Indian government declare the rocks on the Chinese side of the LOC as China's. It was Nehru's re-interpretation of the McMahon line back in the 1950s that started this whole mess.

Then you go. You just said China is not intended in barren rocks.

Right then, attack India

 

[t_co]

Then you go. You just said China is not intended in barren rocks.

Right then, attack India

No, the logic is still the same. China has no reason to attack the Indian side, but it also has no reason to cede its territory to India. Consequently, there is no reason on the Indian side to assume a Chinese attack.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

This is where most of you are wrong..

there is no reason on the Indian side to assume a Chinese attack.

 

[natarajan]

This Arunachal Pradesh (southern Tibet) belonged to Qing dynasty China, India has no historical claims for occupying this land.

chola ruled till Cambodia.Myanmar,Malaysia,Vietnam belonged to chola dynasty ,so according to your logic India should get back this three countries.Genghis khan was one time controlling most Asia and Europe .So does it mean we all should merge with Mongolia.Please stop this crap and hand over occupied Kashmir to India

 

[t_co]

chola ruled till Cambodia.Myanmar,Malaysia,Vietnam belonged to chola dynasty ,so according to your logic India should get back this three countries.Genghis khan was one time controlling most Asia and Europe .So does it mean we all should merge with Mongolia.Please stop this crap and hand over occupied Kashmir to India

Except India's claim to Kashmir is based on the same historical 'crap'...

 

[t_co]

This is where most of you are wrong..

Again, why? You still haven't shown a good reason for it...

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Don't Expect People to spoon feed you..

Google

Again, why? You still haven't shown a good reason for it...

Except India's claim to Kashmir is based on the same historical 'crap'...

 

[Yusuf]

Except India's claim to Kashmir is based on the same historical 'crap'...

Historical crap? It's based on a signed document. We dont rely on some crazy 12th century map to claim lands or seas!

 

[Daredevil]

Historical crap? It's based on a signed document. We dont rely on some crazy 12th century map to claim lands or seas!

Don't expect 50cent zombies to understand that.

 

[sesha_maruthi27]

chola ruled till Cambodia.Myanmar,Malaysia,Vietnam belonged to chola dynasty ,so according to your logic India should get back this three countries.Genghis khan was one time controlling most Asia and Europe .So does it mean we all should merge with Mongolia.Please stop this crap and hand over occupied Kashmir to India

Sir, when I posted this, not even one chinese answered to the question. I also posted the map of the CHOLA REIGN......

 

[sesha_maruthi27]

Historical crap? It's based on a signed document. We dont rely on some crazy 12th century map to claim lands or seas!

Bhai, if the chinese claim using the 12th century map then Myanmar, Combodi, Vietnam all belong to INDIA.......

 

[Virendra]

But you have to think--what does China gain for getting a few kms by force along the highest, most barren mountains in the world? Is it logical? China isn't Pakistan, where every kilometer they push the Indian Army back is another kilometer of safety for Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad.

That is a simplistic view my friend. Land is not all what China is after.
Even destroying Indian ascend and potential by engaging them in wars or war-prep with China/Pak is enough for China; while she goes to her coming out party unchallenged in Asia.

 

[t_co]

Historical crap? It's based on a signed document. We dont rely on some crazy 12th century map to claim lands or seas!

Signed document? The British wrote their own document and signed it themselves. They even contradicted themselves twice, and neither time did they get a Chinese reply. It's not a valid document if only one party is signing it. The Indian Government never used a signed document to assert sovereignty over Aksai Chin.

In the 1890s Britain and China were allies and Britain was principally concerned that Aksai Chin not fall into Russian hands.[7] In 1899, when China showed an interest in Aksai Chin, Britain proposed a revised boundary, initially suggested by George Macartney,[8] which put most of Aksai Chin in Chinese territory.[7] This border, along the Karakoram Mountains, was proposed and supported by British officials for a number of reasons. The Karakoram Mountains formed a natural boundary, which would set the British borders up to the Indus River watershed while leaving the Tarim River watershed in Chinese control, and Chinese control of this tract would present a further obstacle to Russian advance in Central Asia.[9] The British presented this line to the Chinese in a Note by Sir Claude MacDonald. The Chinese did not respond to the Note, and the British took that as Chinese acquiescence.[7] This line, known as the Macartney-MacDonald line, is approximately the same as the current Line of Actual Control.[7]

Both the Johnson-Ardagh and the Macartney-MacDonald lines were used on British maps of India.[7] Until at least 1908, the British took the Macdonald line to be the boundary,[13] but in 1911, the Xinhai Revolution resulted in the collapse of central power in China, and by the end of World War I, the British officially used the Johnson Line. However they took no steps to establish outposts or assert actual control on the ground.[8] In 1927, the line was adjusted again as the government of British India abandoned the Johnson line in favor of a line along the Karakoram range further south.[8] However, the maps were not updated and still showed the Johnson Line.[8]
When British officials learned of Soviet officials surveying the Aksai Chin for Sheng Shicai, warlord of Xinjiang in 1940-1941, they again advocated the Johnson Line.[7] At this point the British had still made no attempts to establish outposts or control over the Aksai Chin, nor was the issue ever discussed with the governments of China or Tibet, and the boundary remained undemarcated at India's independence.[7][8]

Aksai Chin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note the final line--the boundary remained undemarcated at India's independence.

The Indian position, as stated by Prime Minister Nehru, was that the Aksai Chin was "part of the Ladakh region of India for centuries" and that this northern border was a "firm and definite one which was not open to discussion with anybody".[4]
The Chinese minister Zhou Enlai argued that the western border had never been delimited, that the Macartney-MacDonald Line, which left the Aksai Chin within Chinese borders was the only line ever proposed to a Chinese government, and that the Aksai Chin was already under Chinese jurisdiction, and that negotiations should take into account the status quo.[4]

"Part of the Ladakh Region for centuries" does not equal "signed document implying ownership". In this case, it was the Chinese side which actually cited a real document (the Macartney-MacDonald Line).

Checkmate.

 

[t_co]

That is a simplistic view my friend. Land is not all what China is after.
Even destroying Indian ascend and potential by engaging them in wars or war-prep with China/Pak is enough for China; while she goes to her coming out party unchallenged in Asia.

This doesn't make sense either. The more countries that are actively growing, the more markets there are for China to profit from. China does not want to rule over other nations; China wants to make money off them. Dealing with China becomes much easier when that point is understood.