India-China Border conflict

[mokoman]

Time to red army March all the way to Beijing and carry the west against China

we will .

if needed our representatives will march all the way to Beijing for LAC talks.

 

[notaname]

we will .

if needed our representatives will march all the way to Beijing for LAC talks.

Chai biscut.

 

[AlphaLegis]

Actually, if you read the book (where more detailed information is given), you will realize both version actually compliments each other. Nothing is "contrary" here, only details have been shifted by time, which is common when you talk to multiple sources (and they will have different time perceptions).

For example, the book mentions that 3rd wave of attack happened somewhere at 9-10 PM, however, the article mentions it being sometime after 11. Book and article also correctly state Col. Santosh Babu's demise in the second wave, and that we won the first wave.

The article also correctly states that 10 of our soldiers were taken captive, and we took some of theirs as well.

1. Did you find anything relating to burning of tents in the book which is clearly mentioned in the article?
2. Sequence of events on timecale denotes the credibility of an article/book. How about intent behind an action? The book conveys that action taken to evict Chinese from the river bent where they were squatting was a well thought one in consonance with the award citation but contrary to what claimed in the article?
3. “The ten soldiers, including two majors, two captains and six men, were sent back across Patrol Point 14 at 5.30 p.m. on 18 June” did we lose control of PP14 post Galwan clashes or am I reading too much into it?

Narrative is a function of too many variable at play, doesn't mean as normal layman we cannot point out such exercise.

 

[mokoman]

1. Did you find anything relating to burning of tents in the book which is clearly mentioned in the article?
2. Sequence of events on timecale denotes the credibility of an article/book. How about intent behind an action? The book conveys that action taken to evict Chinese from the river bent where they were squatting was a well thought one in consonance with the award citation but contrary to what claimed in the article?
3. “The ten soldiers, including two majors, two captains and six men, were sent back across Patrol Point 14 at 5.30 p.m. on 18 June” did we lose control of PP14 post Galwan clashes or am I reading too much into it?

Narrative is a function of too many variable at play, doesn't mean as normal layman we cannot point out such exercise.

wasnt there news we had lost control of pp14 after clash , they put up some tent or something there.

 

[AlphaLegis]

wasnt there news we had lost control of pp14 after clash , they put up some tent or something there.

Yes, based on Satellite pics but it was denied by govt. backed journalists, how and when did we lose is kind of mystery still!

 

[mokoman]

Yes, based on Satellite pics but it was denied by govt. backed journalists, how and when did we lose is kind of mystery still!

the denial was a lie , bad one at that.

hard to say , but seen images with their shit at pp14 on june 16 itself - day after clash.

 

[mist_consecutive]

1. Did you find anything relating to burning of tents in the book which is clearly mentioned in the article?

Burning, no, but "dismantling & pushing back" Chinese positions. Probably missed this detail by mistake, or omitted it intentionally.

2. Sequence of events on timecale denotes the credibility of an article/book. How about intent behind an action? The book conveys that action taken to evict Chinese from the river bent where they were squatting was a well thought one in consonance with the award citation but contrary to what claimed in the article?

Okay, I am not sure if you have read the book, but I will assume you have.

First off, the book does not convey that the decision to evict the Chinese was "pre-planned", that part is narrated by a medic of 16 Bihar Btn, and he mentions Col. Santosh Babu first went with a small team to check/negotiate with Chinese about them re-pitching the tents. Thereafter, for dismantling/pushing back the Chinese, he requests reinforcements from the base camp.

Now, the exact intention or pre-planning of Col. cannot be ascertained, only speculated by the narratives from people around him.

However, I still toe the line, the book and article are consistent in this snippet.

3. “The ten soldiers, including two majors, two captains and six men, were sent back across Patrol Point 14 at 5.30 p.m. on 18 June” did we lose control of PP14 post Galwan clashes or am I reading too much into it?

Yes, we lost control of the Galwan bend, and PP14. Verified by satellite images thereafter.

Yes, based on Satellite pics but it was denied by govt. backed journalists, how and when did we lose is kind of mystery still!

Govt. tried to hide this, and unsurprisingly later, will also hide the fact that Chinese intruded and refused to move back at PP17A (Gogra).

 

[jai jaganath]

Burning, no, but "dismantling & pushing back" Chinese positions. Probably missed this detail by mistake, or omitted it intentionally.



Okay, I am not sure if you have read the book, but I will assume you have.

First off, the book does not convey that the decision to evict the Chinese was "pre-planned", that part is narrated by a medic of 16 Bihar Btn, and he mentions Col. Santosh Babu first went with a small team to check/negotiate with Chinese about them re-pitching the tents. Thereafter, for dismantling/pushing back the Chinese, he requests reinforcements from the base camp.

Now, the exact intention or pre-planning of Col. cannot be ascertained, only speculated by the narratives from people around him.

However, I still toe the line, the book and article are consistent in this snippet.



Yes, we lost control of the Galwan bend, and PP14. Verified by satellite images thereafter.



Govt. tried to hide this, and unsurprisingly later, will also hide the fact that Chinese intruded and refused to move back at PP17A (Gogra).

Isn't pp-14 disengagement done ? Or still in their control

 

[mist_consecutive]

Isn't pp-14 disengagement done ? Or still in their control

Yes, completed last year

 

[AlphaLegis]

Okay, I am not sure if you have read the book, but I will assume you have.

First off, the book does not convey that the decision to evict the Chinese was "pre-planned", that part is narrated by a medic of 16 Bihar Btn, and he mentions Col. Santosh Babu first went with a small team to check/negotiate with Chinese about them re-pitching the tents. Thereafter, for dismantling/pushing back the Chinese, he requests reinforcements from the base camp.

Now, the exact intention or pre-planning of Col. cannot be ascertained, only speculated by the narratives from people around him.

However, I still toe the line, the book and article are consistent in this snippet.

Quoting from the books:
“Over the next week, from 7-14 June, four separate meetings between local commanders in the Galwan Valley would take place, but the Chinese troops and officers refused to budge from Patrol Point 14. In fact, they were reinforcing their position with more tents and equipment on that triangular piece of land circumscribed by the bend in the Galwan River.”

“Dawn on 15 June was like on any other day that week. But there was one addition to the Chinese position at Patrol Point 14 that was seen by the Indian side as a clear attempt to provoke and escalate the situation. The Chinese Army had set up an observation post (OP) at the river bend.”

“Colonel Santosh Babu, the commanding officer had had enough. Summoning his top men to an operations room at the patrolling base, he made it clear that the Chinese could under no circumstances be permitted to maintain an OP.”

“At 3 p.m., we received the orders we were waiting for,’ says Havildar Dharamvir. ‘Colonel Babu said that a group would be proceeding towards the Chinese position, and that their tents and OP were to be dismantled and their soldiers to be pushed back from the area. We were fully pumped up and ready. We decided that we would go as a battalion”

Excerpt From: Shiv Aroor. “India’s Most Fearless 3”. Apple Books. "

As per events narrated in book: they were squatting in area around bend earlier than June 7, the observation post was the trigger which necessitated the action from Indian side. This was a pre-planned operation to remove the OP and the tents, it matches with the citation of Col. Babu

 

[Hari Sud]

Chinese picked up the best time this year to exert pressure on Taiwan as America is busy in a useless war in Ukraine. Unfortunately it did not work out the right way. Chinese were humbled in their intimidation push and America reactivated its naval fleet in the area to return the intimidation favor. Moreover China has to worry about its business interests also. There a trillion dollar exports to US and Europe, they do not wish to jeopardies that. Also they were not sure about the victory as Taiwan armed forces could resist the invading force on land and US Navy will cut off naval resupply hence Chinese could face humiliation as in Vietnam in 1979.

When China had been cut to size in the East then India will have life time opportunity to recover land occupied by Chinese and avenge the 1962 defeat. Since Chinese have retreated from the East hence India will get no new opportunity to recover its land in next 5 to 10 years.

 

[DEV1729]

way chinese are building across depsang , looks like war will start any day

pic is them rebuilding some old heliport

India must be ready with its nukes pointing to Zhongnanhai

 

[mokoman]

India must be ready with its nukes pointing to Zhongnanhai

india strategic command which is in charge of nuke missiles should hire the IAF officer who misfired the brahmos.

that will send strongest possible signal to the CHinese.

 

[Jimih]

india strategic command which is in charge of nuke missiles should hire the IAF officer who misfired the brahmos.

that will send strongest possible signal to the CHinese.

Not a joke man.

 

[DEV1729]

india strategic command which is in charge of nuke missiles should hire the IAF officer who misfired the brahmos.

that will send strongest possible signal to the CHinese.

They are already recruited by brahmos aerospace after successful philipines bid

 

[ninja hattori]

They are already recruited by brahmos aerospace after successful philipines bid

And pak still screaming joint probe.

 

[mist_consecutive]

Quoting from the books:
“Over the next week, from 7-14 June, four separate meetings between local commanders in the Galwan Valley would take place, but the Chinese troops and officers refused to budge from Patrol Point 14. In fact, they were reinforcing their position with more tents and equipment on that triangular piece of land circumscribed by the bend in the Galwan River.”

“Dawn on 15 June was like on any other day that week. But there was one addition to the Chinese position at Patrol Point 14 that was seen by the Indian side as a clear attempt to provoke and escalate the situation. The Chinese Army had set up an observation post (OP) at the river bend.”

“Colonel Santosh Babu, the commanding officer had had enough. Summoning his top men to an operations room at the patrolling base, he made it clear that the Chinese could under no circumstances be permitted to maintain an OP.”

“At 3 p.m., we received the orders we were waiting for,’ says Havildar Dharamvir. ‘Colonel Babu said that a group would be proceeding towards the Chinese position, and that their tents and OP were to be dismantled and their soldiers to be pushed back from the area. We were fully pumped up and ready. We decided that we would go as a battalion”

Excerpt From: Shiv Aroor. “India’s Most Fearless 3”. Apple Books. "

As per events narrated in book: they were squatting in area around bend earlier than June 7, the observation post was the trigger which necessitated the action from Indian side. This was a pre-planned operation to remove the OP and the tents, it matches with the citation of Col. Babu

You have to pay attention to the nuances.

“Dawn on 15 June was like on any other day that week. But there was one addition to the Chinese position at Patrol Point 14 that was seen by the Indian side as a clear attempt to provoke and escalate the situation. The Chinese Army had set up an observation post (OP) at the river bend.”

Information reaches that China has set up OP at PP14.

“Colonel Santosh Babu, the commanding officer had had enough. Summoning his top men to an operations room at the patrolling base, he made it clear that the Chinese could under no circumstances be permitted to maintain an OP.”

CO was clear that China cannot be allowed to set up OP at PP14.

Does that mean CO was determined to kick Chinese out ? => Probably not, if diplomacy works. We know from multiple accounts that CO was impertubable.

Later, as CO with 72 men reaches PP14 -

"Colonel Babu addressed the Chinese counterpart, his voice sober, reassuring, yet firm.
'You and your men go back and we will also go back', he told the Chinese officer.

The reaction from the group of Chinese soldiers were instantaneous and couldn't possibly have been more belligerent-they physically pushed the Indian soldiers. Worse, they tried to push Colonel Babu."

Now, taking stock of the situation -

• Indian soldiers chafe by Chinese encroaching attitude, determined to push them back one way or other.
• Diplomacy instantly fails as Chinese soldiers behave aggressively and shove CO.
• Fight ensures, Chinese are kicked out forcefully.

Was it planned ? Maybe, you can say CO & boys were in a mood to break some skulls. But I would say clear Chinese provocation combined with already impatient Indian troops made it inevitable.

 

[AlphaLegis]

You have to pay attention to the nuances.
----



CO was clear that China cannot be allowed to set up OP at PP14.

Does that mean CO was determined to kick Chinese out ? => Probably not, if diplomacy works. We know from multiple accounts that CO was impertubable.

Later, as CO with 72 men reaches PP14 -



Now, taking stock of the situation -

• Indian soldiers chafe by Chinese encroaching attitude, determined to push them back one way or other.
• Diplomacy instantly fails as Chinese soldiers behave aggressively and shove CO.
• Fight ensures, Chinese are kicked out forcefully.

Was it planned ? Maybe, you can say CO & boys were in a mood to break some skulls. But I would say clear Chinese provocation combined with already impatient Indian troops made it inevitable.

----Conveniently ignoring
"At 3 p.m., we received the orders we were waiting for,’ says Havildar Dharamvir. ‘Colonel Babu said that a group would be proceeding towards the Chinese position, and that their tents and OP were to be dismantled and their soldiers to be pushed back from the area. We were fully pumped up and ready. We decided that we would go as a battalion”"

Please find my response starting with "---" in red. I have no axe to grind against you, but simply pointing out the inconsistencies in the article and corresponding book chapter by the same author.

 

[mist_consecutive]

Please find my response starting with "---" in red. I have no axe to grind against you, but simply pointing out the inconsistencies in the article and corresponding book chapter by the same author.

Alright, you are open to interpreting it however you like. To your bolded paragraph, CO can't say - "Yeah, let's go with 72 men to discuss the terms and conditions". It was, "we are evicting the Chinese one way or the other".

 

[vidhwanshak]