Ceding Aksai Chin not an option for India

ersakthivel

Brilliance
New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,764
Country flag
ROFL I can draw lines on a map too!

Those maps come out of a pro-Indian mapmaker; the Chinese side never agreed to any line like that.

If you want to believe that Xinjiang and Tibet should be independent or pro-India buffers between India and China, I invite you to imagine what New Delhi and Beijing would look like following a few megatons of thermonuclear ordnance. That is the only way you can achieve your point of view.
why are you refraining from unleashing those megatons of thermonuclear ordinance on taiwan and terrotorial disputes with south east asian neighbors?

Tibet has been independent for centuries , always keep that in mind. History is not just confined to 50 years of middle kingdom dream of the CCP types.

Don't bluff.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,764
Country flag
Or really. There was no treaty been signed between India and China regarding the border. The land was claimed by both side. So, technically, it is no one's land. Let's see what indian professional and professional from third country says.

A G Noorani
Nehru's China policy

Quote:
"Para 8 shut the door to negotiations on the boundary - "not open to discussion with anybody". India unilaterally revised its official map. The legend "boundary undefined" in the Western (Kashmir) and middle sectors (Uttar Pradesh) in the official maps of 1948 and 1950 were dropped in the new map of 1954."

In another article, this indian historian also wrote:

"In 1954, Jawaharlal Nehru decided to redraw maps showing firm boundary lines where earlier colour wash reflected an unsettled boundary. Aksai Chin became entirely Indian territory. Nehru further declared that the border was firm and not open to discussion."

Looks like "Indian territory" could change any time and anywhere as long as Indian say so.

Let's check another report by an australian official Dr Gregory Clark:
"When serious fighting broke out on October 20 as Chinese troops moved south across the Thag La Ridge area following Nehru's October 12 order to have Indian troops occupy the Dho La Strip territory, I made it my job immediately to check where the disputed Dho La Strip territory was actually located. Extremely detailed and seemingly objective material coming out of Beijing, including copies of the original McMahon Line agreement, complete with maps, seemed to confirm that both the Dho La Strip and the Thag La Ridge were indeed north of where the McMahon Line was supposed to be. In which case, India was clearly the aggressor. "

Chinese checkers on border board: Will India make the winning move? - Page 2 - Economic Times
A.G.Noorani is soooooooooo left wing also the oublication that mainly pushes his articles, every one knows it. A lot of columnists in indian left leaning journalism are grand chines apologist wordsmiths.
 

Ray

The Chairman
New Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,841
Noorani is another one who is desperate for the limelight to shine on him.

He is a great admirer of JInnah and critical of the Nehrus and the Congress!

He appears to have missed the train to Pakistan!

I have met him and he appeared so consumed in himself!
 

no smoking

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,057
Likes
2,353
Country flag
A.G.Noorani is soooooooooo left wing also the oublication that mainly pushes his articles, every one knows it. A lot of columnists in indian left leaning journalism are grand chines apologist wordsmiths.
Yes, of course.

He must be a left wing historian;
Maxell is a communism lover;
This austrlaian is communism spy;

Perfect explaination.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,764
Country flag
Yes, of course.

He must be a left wing historian;
Maxell is a communism lover;
This austrlaian is communism spy;

Perfect explaination.
Then who are you? Intellectual genius?

Don't you know the legion of leftwing columnists writing in Mount Road Maoist? Every one here know that.

Ofcourse coming from a country that has a media policy of His Master's voice only where everything ever written Global Times is supposed to be the ultimate trurth , may make understanding stuff like this difficult.

may be you may think of Maxwell's ,"India's china war" as a bible in your country.

In a democracy there are many shades of opinion. About MAXWELL , the greaaaaaaaaat author(!?!) once predicted that india will disintegrate after 1962 elections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Maxwell

In the 1960s Maxwell predicted that India would not remain a democracy for much longer, which has been proven wrong. While serving as the South Asia correspondent of The Times of London, Maxwell authored a series of pessimistic reports filed in February 1967.

In the atmosphere leading up to the 4th Lok Sabha elections, he wrote that "The great experiment of developing India within a democratic framework has failed. [Indians will soon vote] in the fourth—and surely last—general election."

An article written in The Guardian in the weeks prior to the election provided a contrary view, noting that "the Delhi correspondent of a British newspaper whose thundering misjudgments in foreign affairs have become a byword has expressed the view that Indian democracy is disintegrating
In a recent interview to outlook , when the reporter asked why his above famous fond prediction failed, you know what he replied,"Point taken" and nothing else.

Is that a reply of a great scholar perhaps? So we all know what would have been his motivation behind painting india as the aggressor.

He was an australian born london educated Times correspondent posted in newdelhi at the time of war. Every one here knows whether he is a left wing sympathiser or not. SO we know petty journalist who masquerades as great scholars are nothing but senile creatures sucking up to communist ideology.

Since india is a free democracy and many kinds of historians peddle many kinds of views here. Continuous reading of their columns over a decade we know what they will write even after death.

The fond wish of Indain communists and left wing intellectual and historians through out the last century was , somehow indai will become weak and disintegrate and communist revolution will be unleashed here.

They oppose indian nuclear bomb program tooth and nail. They oppose india's strategic partner ship with US. They glorify the non existing chinese super power(which even with a veto always abstains at crucial UN security council votes, why?)And oppose entry of multi nationals to india.

They write glossy article on Cuba's economic miracle. They shed tons of tears for the palestians killed in israeli raids(but when it comes to 40000 tamils killed in sri lanka , they strangely keep silent). The Mount road Mahavishnu is the sanctuary of these guys writting all kinds of articles with intellectual word play defending the indefensible.

However after the successful functioning of Indian constitutional democracy these self seving left wing historians and your famous CHINA WAR book(!) writer have nowhere to hide.

These guys know that present day china has nothing to do with communism , but what can they do? Old habits die hard.
 
Last edited:

ersakthivel

Brilliance
New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,764
Country flag
Yes, of course.

He must be a left wing historian;
Maxell is a communism lover;
This austrlaian is communism spy;

Perfect explaination.
"China Was The Aggrieved; India, Aggressor In '62" | Kai Friese

Interviewer: I don't want to interview myself but I'm uncomfortable with the suggestion that there's an inherent antipathy to China in the Indian nation state. Obviously we inherited the boundaries or frontiers of the empire just as the Chinese inherited"¦

MAXWELL: No! Sorry! Sorry! Please! You did not inherit any boundaries...

I said frontiers!
So only the chinese inherit the boundary from Ming dynasty, and inherit the right to rape tibet , in the name of liberation,
and no one else in the subcontinent inherits anything


Whenever an inconvenient question that simply exposes his blithe view of china being the aggressor, His reply was nothing but,"Point taken".

When the reporter asks the long absence of china from Tibet , he smartly refuses to answer that.

Interviewer: I don't want to get too distracted from the 1962 war but it seems excessive to me to argue that all China's maritime disputes in the IO/SCS have to do with American instigation. Surely all these nations: Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, Taiwan, have their own interests at heart. It would be hard to make a case that Vietnam is toeing the American line.

Maxwell:I quite see that, so let's not argue about that, Point taken.
And when the interviewer asks if india is the aggressor in 1962 as per his view, does that also makes Vietnam, japan, thailand, and all other esat asian countries that are being threatened by china with border disputes also aggressors now,

he simply says ,
"Point taken".

Is this a boxing match? So that for every exposing question interviewer puts to expose the patently motivated ,false point of view of the author,
the umpire gives a point to the interviewer?
 
Last edited:

Simple_Guy

New Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
938
Likes
578
Old Trade Links between India and Tibet DNAIndia

in 1954, the Panchsheel Agreement designated only 6 passes (in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) as the land ports; myriad other routes were crossed out on the Himalayan maps. The last stroke was the short border war between India and China in 1962. All bridges were then cut between the plateau and the Indian plains. With a new neighbour obsessed with grabbing ever more territory, India's age-old relation with lands across the Himalayas came to an end.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,764
Country flag
I am nobody. I just find funny that our indian friends can't point out which part these people are lying except marking them with certain label, how convenient!
what we meant was truth is not what these guys were saying. Considering the chinese invasion coincided smartly with the cuban missile crisis, we can take their view that it was Nheru's India which started the war with buckets of salt.Since India's military was not prepared even to move logistics , it is hilarious for maxwell and others to say Nheru planned a war and to avoid this Chinese did a pre emptive strike.

And when the reporter asks some pointed questions , dodging it with," points taken" also does not help.
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
what we meant was truth is not what these guys were saying. Considering the chinese invasion coincided smartly with the cuban missile crisis, we can take their view that it was Nheru's India which started the war with buckets of salt.Since India's military was not prepared even to move logistics , it is hilarious for maxwell and others to say Nheru planned a war and to avoid this Chinese did a pre emptive strike.

And when the reporter asks some pointed questions , dodging it with," points taken" also does not help.
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 had been setting up posts inside Aksai Chin even before that, but PRC never had the courage to invade, because they knew that they had built a road across Indian territory, and that they were on weak grounds. They were simply waiting for Nehru to make a mistake along the McMahon line, and Nehru simply gave them that opportunity.

The problem is not at all in the NEFA region. That is just a diversion. The problem is PRC constructed a highway through Indian territory to allow for easy movement of troops and materiel between Tibet and East Turkestan, and the Indian territory of Aksai Chin was coming in the way. The only other way to build a road would be along the Kunlun Range, which would have taken far too much time, and also through formidable terrain. So, they invaded in the NEFA area, while strengthening their hold on Aksai Chin.
 

Ray

The Chairman
New Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,841
Perceptions are honed by relationships the counties have with each other.

The West was inimical to India and so their support to Pakistan on Kashmir was exhibited. Today, it is a different kettle of fish since India has rather excellent relations with the West.

Likewise, in 1962, India was pro USSR and so it is not unnatural to find that western commentators wanting to make India eat humble pie with coloured opinions that are meant to shock!
 

pmaitra

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Perceptions are honed by relationships the counties have with each other.

The West was inimical to India and so their support to Pakistan on Kashmir was exhibited. Today, it is a different kettle of fish since India has rather excellent relations with the West.

Likewise, in 1962, India was pro USSR and so it is not unnatural to find that western commentators wanting to make India eat humble pie with coloured opinions that are meant to shock!
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.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
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.
India was more than pro USSR. The death of Stalin is described by Nehru as if his father had departed. Non aligned movement was, is and will remain a joke and is nothing but an event for some 3rd world countries to eat and feats together.
 

pmaitra

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
India was more than pro USSR. The death of Stalin is described by Nehru as if his father had departed. Non aligned movement was, is and will remain a joke and is nothing but an event for some 3rd world countries to eat and feats together.
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 with CIA to train Tibetan refugees in India.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
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.
There were previous violations by the chinese and more serious ones. Western authors love to hate weaks and that is reason behind their accusing india for starting confrontation. If previous violations by chinese did not result in a war( those violations were accompanied by deaths) how come indian forward march being cause of war?
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
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.
what time period are you referring to?
 

pmaitra

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
There were previous violations by the chinese and more serious ones. Western authors love to hate weaks and that is reason behind their accusing india for starting confrontation. If previous violations by chinese did not result in a war( those violations were accompanied by deaths) how come indian forward march being cause of war?
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 confuse the two things.
 

pmaitra

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
what time period are you referring to?
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
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
A.G.Noorani is soooooooooo left wing also the oublication that mainly pushes his articles, every one knows it. A lot of columnists in indian left leaning journalism are grand chines apologist wordsmiths.
That bastard is primarily apologists of islamic terrorism but also supports communist encirclement of india.
 

MAYURA

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
888
Likes
250
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
All this correct but this does not mean India was not pro USSR what it shows is that cuban missile crisis allowed USSR to not help us and then US tried to move india away from communist nexus( failed attempt unfortunately).

You need to read Kennedy remarks after liberation of Goa to know the bitterness cayused by Nehru in Indo US relations.
 

Articles

Top