Search results

@Ray Sir, I take that back. Namka Chu flows North-West to South-East, like a diagonal. I see where Dhola Post was established. From what I can see, it is to the North of the McMahon Line. Let me know if you disagree, or think I am wrong (which I could be).

I am sorry, but the article you presented does not say where the McMahon line is w.r.t. Dhola post. Moreover, the article mentions "Southern bank of Namka Chu river." What exactly is this "southern bank?" Namka Chu flows north-to-south, not east-to-west. There is no such thing as southern bank...

@Ray Sir, Please have a look at the map here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/McMahon_Line_Simla_Accord_Treaty_1914_Map1.jpg/1280px-McMahon_Line_Simla_Accord_Treaty_1914_Map1.jpg I think it is about time to be honest with ourselves, instead of obfuscating. The McMahon...

@Ray Sir, you are completely deviating off the point. I am contending what you and @MAYURA said, that India was pro-USSR. Feel free to continue to view it that way. As a matter of fact, India was working with CIA to train Tibetan refugees. India had a stated policy of not being in any camp...

Your point is well taken, but you are still extremely non-committal and ambiguous on where you stand regarding the Dhola post. Agreed, except that part where you said as far as NAM is concerned, India was pro-USSR (Russia sic.). Either you are non-Aligned, or you are pro-USSR or pro-USA. You...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Nehruvians were living in la-la-land and their assessment of the US was wrong. What is GLF effect? I did not say Dhola post was a reason why PRC invaded India; I said Dhola post gave PRC the casus belli to invade India. Are you getting me or not? Let...

Kennedy's disposition towards India is best testified by the swiftness with which Kennedy agreed to send weapons to India when PLA was still on the outskirts of Tezpur. Aksai Chin was Indian territory, so India had the moral and legal right to send patrols into Aksai Chin. So, morally, it was...

You are over-inflating Kennedy's reaction. The fact is, Portugal tried to invoke NATO alliance's promise of protection from invasion when India tried to liberate Goa, and the US firmly refused, and was supportive of India over Portugal. India was right in whatever it did in Aksai Chin. On Dhola...

I am not referring to 1971-72 Bangladesh Liberation War. The US moved its warships to the Bay of Bengal on two occasions: 1962 - in support of India 1971 - in support of Pakistan

There were previous violations by PLA, yes, and have I denied that? Read my post carefully. I have clearly said they built a road through Indian territory of Aksai Chin. India's Forward Policy in Aksai Chin is different from India setting up Dhola post north of McMahon line. Please don't...

I am sorry but I have to disagree. India was Non-Aligned. If indeed India was pro-USSR, India would not have gone to seek military aid from the US, neither would the US have swiftly sent military aid to India, or even moved its warships to the Bay of Bengal. Even before that, India was working...

First of all, India was not pro-USSR in 1962. India was Non-Aligned. Yes, the USSR was slingtly bent in favour of India, but India was still Non-Aligned. Secondly, Dhola post was to the north of the McMahon line, and there is nothing colourful about that, nor is that an opinion, that is a fact.

Like it or not, most international observers (non-Indian and non-Chinese) maintain that it was indeed Nehru who started the confrontation. The fact of the matter is, Dhola post was erected inside Tibet, north of the McMahon Line. That gave PRC a casus belli to invade India. Keep in mind, India...

No offense @Ray Sir, but that is what I call is underestimating the enemy. PRC does have military superiority over India, and let's not be an arrogant Nehruvian and respect the enemy for what it is. My humble yet firm opinion. P.S.: I know you are not a Nehruvian, but you sure do sound...

Agreed. If PRC keeps nukes in Tibet, it is PRC's headache. No one is stopping them for removing them if they stand threatened. PRC's nukes, PRC's responsibility.

These borders are not Chinese borders, they are Indo-Tibetan and Indo-East-Turkestan borders. China agreeing or not agreeing is only relevant as long as PRC has military superiority. Neither side will use nukes in case of a conflict, so no use using that as a threat. It's not impressive enough.

Why should India sign a treaty with China? India does not share a border with China. India shares a border with Tibet and East Turkestan. Do you know where China is? It is east of Chamdo, south of the several Great Walls that were connected by Huangdi. Now, regarding border with Tibet and...

PRC's stand here is dubious. PRC grabs Indian territory, and then says, "you keep half while I keep the other half." Under sch circumstances, there is never going to be a compromise. We have reached a point that India will eventually have to plan for a full scale war with not only the aim to...

Let me offer another clarification. My point is simple - we are not going to win back Aksai Chin by fighting over the internet. We need a military campaign. For that, we need to prepare, and it will take a couple of decades of preparation, coupled with economic development. The question is...

It was you who replied to my post, but I know you did not understand it. What I said thereafter (in response to your response) is a clarification. Here is the post you replied to. Please read it again...