India-China Border conflict

[Kumaoni]

Your further posts in this thread will be scrutinised from now on.

I will make it sure.

That’s fine, then do examine my other viewpoints where I call the Battle of Chushul a strategic Indian victory as it achieved its goal of keeping Chushul, while China failed to capture it despite a 5:1 superiority in troops.

 

[Kumaoni]

i kinda agree , i think its not completely propaganda . my understanding is border in aksai chin and doklam was not clear cut historically .

of course Chinese dont give a shit , even if there was evidence it was ceded by qing+Tibet to dogras , wont change anything.

best example of this is the ancient fort in pangong tso banks . this is actual border between India and tibet . its why the fort exists in first place . but chinese took over entire area + some more in 1959 itself .

With China now, it’s you have to show them Force for them to actually care. Even Russia gave up a few irrelevant islands for China to recognize Vladivostok. They don’t believe in equals, they’ll eat anyone up just to get back, what they presume, was pre-1839

 

[Jimih]

We are now supposed to adhere to China's Whims and Fancies.

 

[Kumaoni]

Yeah, I’m sure the fact that China failed to take Chusul despite having a 5:1 advanTge is a “chinese whim” as well

 

[mokoman]

We are now supposed to adhere to China's Whims and Fancies.

Chinese are claiming some south china sea islands because some Chinese explorer maybe visited them 100's of years of ago.

they makeup what ever bullshit they need to claim anything .

only remedy is beatings .

 

[Jimih]

Chinese are claiming some south china sea islands because some Chinese explorer maybe visited them 100's of years of ago.

they makeup what ever bullshit they need to claim anything .

only remedy is beatings .

Their own Peking University Atlas published from 1917-33 had shown the boundary in Aksai Chin as per the Johnson line, it runs along the Kunlun mountains. The Chinese Peking University Atlas puts Aksai Chin inside India.

The border along the Kunlun range which gave Princely state of Kashmir not only Aksai Chin but also parts of the present Xinjiang Autonomous Region. Through all these events, Aksai Chin remained uninhabited.

 

[mist_consecutive]

Well this will be quite a long post, but sure.

There are many things Indians simply get wrong about the Chinese. Not due to stupidity, but due to simple ignorance. This is the case with pretty much every country.

Firstly, indians don’t know the reason behind chinas aggression. They believe it’s nothing but blind aggression, but in reality it’s a bit more than that. The century of humiliation is a haunting and recurring subject for many Chinese, hell there are probably people still alive from that century (1839-1950). The Chinaman was plundered, looted, and forced gave up large swathes of land to western imperial powers. The main reason China might seem so aggressive is because it wants to return its borders to pre 1839 status. Not to mentionvarious USA bases that surround China, including South Korea. Not saying china is justified, but it has historical reason for its actions.

So because they have been humiliated for centuries, we ought to accept their aggression ?

And what is pre-XX borders, eh? Going by that, Italy ought to own the whole of Europe, we should be ruling the entire Southeast Asia.

Secondly, many Indians write the PLA off as some conscript army and that it won’t stand against its own Jawans. Let me tell you while that conscripts might guard the borders, the PLA troops that will invade India, if it does chose to do so, won’t be some conscript army, but crack select units from the elite of the PLA. Look at the soldiers faces in Galwan videos on the PLA side, they are visibly older and look quite tough, as do their Indian counterparts. Also, that video of PLA soldierscrying while going to the LaC. just stop it. Many young soldiers of all armies face homesickness, it’s a common human trait and nothing wrong with it. Next, Indians are quite unaware of the PLA way of fighting, they think that they use futile frontal charges when in reality they infiltrate behind and between their enemy lines and suprise them. They did this numerous times in 1962 and the Korean War, and it worked.

Are you aware that our SIGINT picked up multiple Chinese radio intercepts just after Galwan clash, which revealed that Chinese soldiers were terrified of incoming Indian retaliation, also that our suicidal charge and ruthless fighting even in the face of complete defeat made the PLA soldiers deathly afraid?

Lol and regarding human wave tactics, they did exactly that in Galwan.

Thirdly, Indian media describes border infrastructure and PLA aircraft flying to close as “provocative” when it’s mere work beinf done on the Chinese side. Anything the Chinese does on their side is not provocative, they are simply doing mind games with the Indian media, as they see Indian media’s obsession with China. India is falling right into the China trap. A forward policy with strong logistic support is the only way to foil them from attacking.

I wonder why China is not so open-minded about us building infrastructure and "work beinf done" as you said, on our side ?

After bloodshed, Army engineers toil 72 hours to finish Galwan bridge that triggered China

Just hours after the brutal June 15 night brawl in the Galwan Valley, Indian Army's combat engineers received orders to leave no stone unturned to accelerate and finish the construction of a bridge over the Galwan River.

www.indiatoday.in

But wait, are you suggesting that China building a "bridge", a bridge over a lake 4500m above sea level, where the only population that of mountain goats, is some kind of "infrastructure development" ?

Fourthly, Indians are quite unaware of the actual history of this conflict. They have been fed for generations that China simply backstabbed innocent India. What I say might come up as uncomfortable for many reading, but it’s a simple truth. The truth is that, while China indeed started the military hostilities and built a road into Aksai, we also provided covert support to the CIA in the tibet uprising and pushed a forward policy in 1960. Mao just waited for the time to “teach infia a lesson”,that’s all. Similarly, in the middle of the conflict, they again offered to negotiate with India, but this was rejected. China is more at fault, but india isn’t innocent either. Infia should have prepared more instead of getting overconfident after 1961 GoaAlso, indians are quite unaware of the military mistakes made, Esp at Namka Chu and squarely blame it on politicians.

First, stop legitimizing the illegal occupation of Tibet by China.

Second, list of neighbouring countries that provided/are providing covert and/or overt support to our enemy nations -

• Myanmar
• Sri Lanka
• Nepal
• Bangladesh
• Afghanistan

So how many have we invaded ?

@Kumaoni why don't you reveal your original identity ?

 

[Kumaoni]

So because they have been humiliated for centuries, we ought to accept their aggression ?

And what is pre-XX borders, eh? Going by that, Italy ought to own the whole of Europe, we should be ruling the entire Southeast Asia.

Where, in my post, did I say that you need accept their aggression against India? I literally said, the only way to check them is a strong forward policy with solid logistical backing. Anyway, india can’t be compared to poop-rope or other USA vassal states as India has never started a war for most of its
history.

Are you aware that our SIGINT picked up multiple Chinese radio intercepts just after Galwan clash, which revealed that Chinese soldiers were terrified of incoming Indian retaliation, also that our suicidal charge and ruthless fighting even in the face of complete defeat made the PLA soldiers deathly afraid?

Lol and regarding human wave tactics, they did exactly that in Galwan.

Source? This is literally the first time I’m hearing this

But wait, are you suggesting that China building a "bridge", a bridge over a lake 4500m above sea level, where the only population that of mountain goats, is some kind of "infrastructure development" ?

Duh, they need a solid defensive stature so when they go for Taiwan, their western front is all secure. For them, currently, Taiwan is the important strategic territory for them.

First, stop legitimizing the illegal occupation of Tibet by China.

Second, list of neighbouring countries that provided/are providing covert and/or overt support to our enemy nations -

• Myanmar
• Sri Lanka
• Nepal
• Bangladesh
• Afghanistan

So how many have we invaded

Well India is fundementally different in mindset as it doesn’t believe in starting military hostitles, where as China never gave a fuck about human rights

 

[mokoman]

Their own Peking University Atlas published from 1917-33 had shown the boundary in Aksai Chin as per the Johnson line, it runs along the Kunlun mountains. The Chinese Peking University Atlas puts Aksai Chin inside India.

The border along the Kunlun range which gave Princely state of Kashmir not only Aksai Chin but also parts of the present Xinjiang Autonomous Region. Through all these events, Aksai Chin remained uninhabited.


View attachment 163854

my understanding is - aksai chin was always a cold borderless waste land . there werent any border here.

the British tried to create a border between old india and tibet and this is what they came up with this . there were 2 other border lines , british only choose johnson line because it gave them the most land .

the old chinese gov - people who used to run taiwan also seem to have adopted it - which is what u posted. the new commi one dont .

not saying its not ours , we should have build outpost and secured it , we didnt . but its a lot complicated than simply saying 'its part of india that chinese stole'

 

[Jimih]

First, stop legitimizing the illegal occupation of Tibet by China.

Second, list of neighbouring countries that provided/are providing covert and/or overt support to our enemy nations -

• Myanmar
• Sri Lanka
• Nepal
• Bangladesh
• Afghanistan

So how many have we invaded ?

@Kumaoni why don't you reveal your original identity ?

Shilling was next level.

I have noticed the patern, Chinese and their sympathisers actively employ which I call the SBP tactics.

They want to tightly control narratives in their favour by concocting fictional stories which are designed to be 'made believe'.

'Victims will be Aggressors', pure Sun Tzu style of thought process.

 

[Kumaoni]

Bruhhhh wtf

 

[Love Charger]

They use it to stoke hyper nationalism. Their intentions for it are quite diverse and vary.

Well, to be fair, China has seen more political unity than India, and many empires from mainland China often kept tibet as a vassal state.

geopolitics knows no moralities.

The Naxalite movement is quite complex in itself, heck even the communist parties in infia have squabbles between eachother AFAIK. Naxalite leaders are basically castiest fucks who exploit genuine concerns of adivasis and use them as cannon fodder to get power. The movement itself isn’t a Chinese creation, but a variety of factors. Tho I have yet to come across accusations of china supporting it, simply because they were so dirt poor back then they simply didn’t have the money for it.

Finally someone who says this. I was afraid of saying it as I’ll be called a wumao bot and a paki. The truth is that, geographically, Aksai favors china more (evidenced by how easy they captured it). I sometimes thinks brits deliberately drew it to put india Ina weak position against China. The real major battle of Chusul and Rezang La was the first battle in which more than a platoon size of troops fought in this front.

I have read maos book on the long March, interesting
There he was in doubt, about what is China? , a country just like india divided under regional warlords , with emperor authority in name only
More political unity ?, you do realise modern nation states are a European concept, with modern bureaucracy in a average nation like ours a webereian relic !
Chinese adopted the Soviet administrative system wholesale, what you think the purges and cultural revolution of Mao was ?
Even today they speak mutually unintelligible languages, 13 of those and not only Mandarin Chinese, the Beijing standard.
Like here we have arya which denotes a civilised person, similarly in China
Han denoted a civilised person, hua a non civilised barbarian.
Hence there are different kinds of people there too like gujjus marathis etc
We chose to respect thus diversity, it internally makes us more resilient while having a very strong central government safeguarding thus system with relevant checks and balances over the state's
Their culture is different to ours to such a extent thta one doesn't recognize thier own differences.
I don't want 5 crore Indians to die in a couple of years just because a supreme leaders dream can be realised.
China was aggrieved. So was india
But neutrally saying, Nehru was indeed a gentleman and a world states man , he wanted peace
The much demonised forward policy was due the Chinese provocations itself
Plus the government fears of a coup were justified
The military was put in its place early on, costed us 1962 i agree but it was good in long run .
Think before you get into enemy propaganda bro, read our history with a neutral lense and you will agree with i wrote .
@ezsasa

 

[Knowitall]

We should give Chinese the f4 point if they return us Tibet.

 

[Love Charger]

View attachment 163864
Bruhhhh wtf

He was communist, so yes nato arms were a nono
Should have asked for sks

 

[Love Charger]

We should give Chinese the f4 point if they return us Tibet.

Indeed , that's the thing i like

 

[Kumaoni]

I have read maos book on the long March, interesting
There he was in doubt, about what is China? , a country just like india divided under regional warlords , with emperor authority in name only
More political unity ?, you do realise modern nation states are a European concept, with modern bureaucracy in a average nation like ours a webereian relic !
Chinese adopted the Soviet administrative system wholesale, what you think the purges and cultural revolution of Mao was ?
Even today they speak mutually unintelligible languages, 13 of those and not only Mandarin Chinese, the Beijing standard.
Like here we have arya which denotes a civilised person, similarly in China
Han denoted a civilised person, hua a non civilised barbarian.
Hence there are different kinds of people there too like gujjus marathis etc
We chose to respect thus diversity, it internally makes us more resilient while having a very strong central government safeguarding thus system with relevant checks and balances over the state's
Their culture is different to ours to such a extent thta one doesn't recognize thier own differences.
I don't want 5 crore Indians to die in a couple of years just because a supreme leaders dream can be realised.
China was aggrieved. So was india
But neutrally saying, Nehru was indeed a gentleman and a world states man , he wanted peace
The much demonised forward policy was due the Chinese provocations itself
Plus the government fears of a coup were justified
The military was put in its place early on, costed us 1962 i agree but it was good in long run .
Think before you get into enemy propaganda bro, read our history with a neutral lense and you will agree with i wrote .
@ezsasa

India lost 1962 becuz it got to overconfident after 1961, if it would have supplied its troops better, got some sort of Assault rifle, it would’ve probably won.

Also, this “loss” is quite over exaggerated. Fact is China ran away from 70% of their conquered lands (NEFA) in 1962, due to dogged resistance and stands by Indian troops in many locations and Arunachal Pradesh is currently a state in India.

Also india must understand, they are fighting china to fight for their CIVILIZATION, as it’s being attacked by China, not some cheap western political model named “democracy”.

 

[Kumaoni]

He was communist, so yes nato arms were a nono
Should have asked for sks

But didn’t india procure the Mystere aircraft in 1957?

 

[Love Charger]

India lost 1962 becuz it got to overconfident after 1961, if it would have supplied its troops better, got some sort of Assault rifle, it would’ve probably won.

Also, this “loss” is quite over exaggerated. Fact is China ran away from 70% of their conquered lands (NEFA) in 1962, due to dogged resistance and stands by Indian troops in many locations and Arunachal Pradesh is currently a state in India.

Also india must understand, they are fighting china to fight for their CIVILIZATION, as it’s being attacked by China, not some cheap western political model named “democracy”.

Ok i understand, elaborate more
Though its midnight here , let's talk tomorrow about this , shall we ?

 

[Jimih]

my understanding is - aksai chin was always a cold borderless waste land . there werent any border here.

the British tried to create a border between old india and tibet and this is what they came up with this . there were 2 other border lines , british only choose johnson line because it gave them the most land .

Chinese are dubious from the beginning.

British India offered them the more conservative Macartney–MacDonald Line (na tera na mera kind of deal) this line approximately divided the Aksai Chin area between India and China. But did they adhere to it? Until 1958, China unofficially accepted this line. But they further came down the line in 1962, which they now call the "China Claim Line".

If Aksai Chin is a cold borderless wasteland, than why should even China claim it?

When they say they have historical claims, than we too have historical claims of that area.

In 1893, Hung Ta-chen, a senior Chinese official at St. Petersburg, provided a map which coincided with the Ardagh–Johnson line in broad details. It showed the boundary of Xinjiang up to Raskam. In the east, it was similar to the Ardagh–Johnson line, placing Aksai Chin in Kashmir territory.

The GoI clearly knows for a fact that even if they accept the so called dubious "1959 Chinese line", the border dispute will not die down. They will still be claiming ARP and Ladakh.

 

[ym888]

Like here we have arya which denotes a civilised person, similarly in China
Han denoted a civilised person, hua a non civilised barbarian.

Sorry I have never heard of this knowledge in China



Can you explain "han" and "hua"?