India US Relations

[Chimaji Appa]

In simpler words, Keep the fight abroad and keep your domestic stuff stable. India can learn a lesson from this.

Yes. India should invade and do atrocities and regime change everyone who doesn’t bow down to them. Great logic.

 

[srevster]

Yes. India should invade and do atrocities and regime change everyone who doesn’t bow down to them. Great logic.

Yes please. People will stop fucking with us.

 

[Roshan]

Yes. India should invade and do atrocities and regime change everyone who doesn’t bow down to them. Great logic.

i can see what he wants or is tilting at because of his passport, his monochromatic view of the relationship while ironically projecting that others are getting emotional is amusing and something he isn't able to notice himself. He wants there to be a 'pragmatic view' of the situation but also says ignore whatever the US does because we cannot 'impose costs' on them. I don't understand why he can't see the strange and inherent contradiction in that position which is why he keeps getting ridiculed on this thread. You cannot have equal parts of both and it is something our policy makers are wary of with the experience of several decades.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

Yes please. People will stop fucking with us.

Okay. But our soldiers are humans and have families. We won’t toss them to fight wars they have no part in partaking.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

i can see what he wants or is tilting at because of his passport, his monochromatic view of the relationship while ironically projecting that others are getting emotional is amusing and something he isn't able to notice himself. He wants there to be a 'pragmatic view' of the situation but also says ignore whatever the US does because we cannot 'impose costs' on them. I don't understand why he can't see the strange and inherent contradiction in that position which is why he keeps getting ridiculed on this thread. You cannot have equal parts of both and it is something our policy makers are wary of with the experience of several decades.

I can admit I overexxagarated America’s faults, and not all of their interventions like the one in Korea were bad. However, my point is that India should be weary US based on history. That’s it.

 

[Optimistic Nihilist]

I can admit I overexxagarated America’s faults, and not all of their interventions like the one in Korea were bad. However, my point is that India should be weary US based on history. That’s it.

Actually no man. Even Korea was nothing but an inperial adventure to cause total destruction.

Many forgot that the Korean War was in many ways a war against all Koreans. Marxism was the pretext for national liberation among most former colonial subjects, the only way to assure some international backing against the old colonial powers.

Continental Asians seem to have a remarkable lack of racial identity awareness when it comes to Western foreigners helping them slaughter each other in local regional disputes.

Like so many other imperial endeavors, the division of Korea along the 38th parallel was an exercise in arbitrariness and utter disregard for the wishes of the people it affected. The United States, which claimed to champion freedom, denied it to the people of Korea, who very quickly realized that they were merely trading one occupying empire for another.

A survey of Koreans in the summer of 1946 found that 77 percent preferred socialism or communism while only 14 percent favored capitalism. However, the US backed the right-wing dictatorship of Syngman Rhee, a conservative Christian and staunch anti-communist who ruled the South with an iron fist. By early 1950 there were more than 100,000 political prisoners in the South.

Summary executions of leftists, both real and imagined, claimed tens of thousands of lives as the South’s police state reign of terror rivaled the worst outrages of the communist North, which was unifying under the former anti-Japanese guerrilla leader Kim Il-sung.

As efforts to negotiate a unified Korean state failed, a nascent anti-government insurgency grew in the South and was brutally repressed. Brief but bloody border skirmishes escalated; both Rhee and Kim wanted to force unification through invasion. On June 25, 1950, Northern forces launched an all-out invasion of the South. Seoul, the Southern capital, fell three days later.

Although the US initially insisted that no US ground troops would be needed in the fight, MacArthur was soon convinced that American boots on the ground were the key to repulsing Northern aggression. President Harry S. Truman agreed, calling the intervention a "police action."

The US military, strutting with atomic swagger and still puffed up with the pride of victory, expected a short war. Green, flabby GIs, more fit for the pomp and parades of Japanese occupation duty than for the horrors of close combat that awaited them in Korea, imagined they would be back to the bars and bordellos of Tokyo in a matter of weeks, maybe a couple of months at the longest.

However, Northern forces routed both the South’s army and the Americans, who hastily retreated southward toward Busan along with hundreds of thousands of civilian refugees.

One area in which US forces enjoyed near total supremacy was in aerial bombardment. Overcoming initial reluctance from MacArthur, Gen. George Stratemeyer ordered US bombers to “destroy every means of communications and every installation, factory, city, and village" in North Korea. More bombs were dropped on Korea than during the entire World War II Pacific campaign.

The massive US carpet bombing of North Korea included napalm, incendiary and fragmentation bombs that killed and maimed by the thousands and left cities, towns, villages and countryside in scorched and shattered ruins. In the Northern capital of Pyongyang, only around 50,000 people out of a prewar population of 500,000 remained in 1953.

When all the cities and towns were destroyed, US warplanes bombed dams, reservoirs and rice fields, flooding the countryside and destroying the nation’s food supply. Only emergency aid from China, the Soviet Union and other socialist nations averted imminent famine.

US commanders, fearing Northern troops would infiltrate Southern lines disguised as civilians, ordered fighter pilots to bomb and strafe refugees as they fled south. In the most infamous atrocity of the war, Air Force pilots killed hundreds of men, women and children at No Gun Ri over three days in late July 1950.

Retreating US troops also blew up bridges teeming with hundreds of refugees and burned villages, towns and cities to the ground in a scorched earth policy meant to deny the advancing enemy quarter.

At least 100,000 South Koreans were murdered by their own armed forces, who targeted anyone suspected of having leftist sympathies. American commanders approved, and US troops were present at horrific mass slaughters throughout the war.

Most Americans were fed a more sanitized version of the war, although some of its horrors were celebrated – witness John Ford’s propaganda piece This Is Korea! in which footage of a flamethrower attack is accompanied by movie cowboy John Wayne’s chilling voice-over: "Fry ‘em out! Burn ‘em out! Cook ‘em!"

General Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay – who commanded firebombing raids on Japanese cities that killed more civilians than the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – served as strategic air commander during the Korean War. He would later acknowledge that "over a period of three years or so, we killed off 20 percent of the population" of North Korea.

That’s nearly 1.9 million men, women and children. In comparison, the Nazis had murdered 17 percent of Poland’s pre-World War II population just a few years earlier. Speaking of Nazis, the destruction of Korea occurred just a few short years after Germans were convicted at Nuremberg, and subsequently executed, for "wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages."

By the time that North and South Korean, American and Chinese generals – China had intervened when Allied troops approached its borders – signed a ceasefire agreement on July 27, 1953, North Korea was utterly in ruins.

"Everything is destroyed," said US bomber commander Gen. Emmett O’Donnell. "There is nothing standing worthy of the name." Sixty-four years later, President Donald Trump, who was in the process of fulfilling his campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamist militants in the Middle East, threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea over its nuclear missile program.

Such threats, coming as they do from the nation that’s killed more foreign civilians than any other over the past 75 years, are not to be taken lightly. For Koreans of a certain age, total destruction by the United States isn’t just some abstract threat, it is a hellish reality that ranks among the most egregious crimes of a century that witnessed some of the most appalling barbarity in human history.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

Actually no man. Even Korea was nothing but an inperial adventure to cause total destruction.

Many forgot that the Korean War was in many ways a war against all Koreans. Marxism was the pretext for national liberation among most former colonial subjects, the only way to assure some international backing against the old colonial powers.

Continental Asians seem to have a remarkable lack of racial identity awareness when it comes to Western foreigners helping them slaughter each other in local regional disputes.

Like so many other imperial endeavors, the division of Korea along the 38th parallel was an exercise in arbitrariness and utter disregard for the wishes of the people it affected. The United States, which claimed to champion freedom, denied it to the people of Korea, who very quickly realized that they were merely trading one occupying empire for another.

A survey of Koreans in the summer of 1946 found that 77 percent preferred socialism or communism while only 14 percent favored capitalism. However, the US backed the right-wing dictatorship of Syngman Rhee, a conservative Christian and staunch anti-communist who ruled the South with an iron fist. By early 1950 there were more than 100,000 political prisoners in the South.

Summary executions of leftists, both real and imagined, claimed tens of thousands of lives as the South’s police state reign of terror rivaled the worst outrages of the communist North, which was unifying under the former anti-Japanese guerrilla leader Kim Il-sung.

As efforts to negotiate a unified Korean state failed, a nascent anti-government insurgency grew in the South and was brutally repressed. Brief but bloody border skirmishes escalated; both Rhee and Kim wanted to force unification through invasion. On June 25, 1950, Northern forces launched an all-out invasion of the South. Seoul, the Southern capital, fell three days later.

Although the US initially insisted that no US ground troops would be needed in the fight, MacArthur was soon convinced that American boots on the ground were the key to repulsing Northern aggression. President Harry S. Truman agreed, calling the intervention a "police action."

The US military, strutting with atomic swagger and still puffed up with the pride of victory, expected a short war. Green, flabby GIs, more fit for the pomp and parades of Japanese occupation duty than for the horrors of close combat that awaited them in Korea, imagined they would be back to the bars and bordellos of Tokyo in a matter of weeks, maybe a couple of months at the longest.

However, Northern forces routed both the South’s army and the Americans, who hastily retreated southward toward Busan along with hundreds of thousands of civilian refugees.

One area in which US forces enjoyed near total supremacy was in aerial bombardment. Overcoming initial reluctance from MacArthur, Gen. George Stratemeyer ordered US bombers to “destroy every means of communications and every installation, factory, city, and village" in North Korea. More bombs were dropped on Korea than during the entire World War II Pacific campaign.

The massive US carpet bombing of North Korea included napalm, incendiary and fragmentation bombs that killed and maimed by the thousands and left cities, towns, villages and countryside in scorched and shattered ruins. In the Northern capital of Pyongyang, only around 50,000 people out of a prewar population of 500,000 remained in 1953.

When all the cities and towns were destroyed, US warplanes bombed dams, reservoirs and rice fields, flooding the countryside and destroying the nation’s food supply. Only emergency aid from China, the Soviet Union and other socialist nations averted imminent famine.

US commanders, fearing Northern troops would infiltrate Southern lines disguised as civilians, ordered fighter pilots to bomb and strafe refugees as they fled south. In the most infamous atrocity of the war, Air Force pilots killed hundreds of men, women and children at No Gun Ri over three days in late July 1950.

Retreating US troops also blew up bridges teeming with hundreds of refugees and burned villages, towns and cities to the ground in a scorched earth policy meant to deny the advancing enemy quarter.

At least 100,000 South Koreans were murdered by their own armed forces, who targeted anyone suspected of having leftist sympathies. American commanders approved, and US troops were present at horrific mass slaughters throughout the war.

Most Americans were fed a more sanitized version of the war, although some of its horrors were celebrated – witness John Ford’s propaganda piece This Is Korea! in which footage of a flamethrower attack is accompanied by movie cowboy John Wayne’s chilling voice-over: "Fry ‘em out! Burn ‘em out! Cook ‘em!"

General Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay – who commanded firebombing raids on Japanese cities that killed more civilians than the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – served as strategic air commander during the Korean War. He would later acknowledge that "over a period of three years or so, we killed off 20 percent of the population" of North Korea.

That’s nearly 1.9 million men, women and children. In comparison, the Nazis had murdered 17 percent of Poland’s pre-World War II population just a few years earlier. Speaking of Nazis, the destruction of Korea occurred just a few short years after Germans were convicted at Nuremberg, and subsequently executed, for "wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages."

By the time that North and South Korean, American and Chinese generals – China had intervened when Allied troops approached its borders – signed a ceasefire agreement on July 27, 1953, North Korea was utterly in ruins.

"Everything is destroyed," said US bomber commander Gen. Emmett O’Donnell. "There is nothing standing worthy of the name." Sixty-four years later, President Donald Trump, who was in the process of fulfilling his campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamist militants in the Middle East, threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea over its nuclear missile program.

Such threats, coming as they do from the nation that’s killed more foreign civilians than any other over the past 75 years, are not to be taken lightly. For Koreans of a certain age, total destruction by the United States isn’t just some abstract threat, it is a hellish reality that ranks among the most egregious crimes of a century that witnessed some of the most appalling barbarity in human history.

Very interesting way to took at it. However, I have always thought that it was better than South Korea was under a democratic regime now than what the North Koreans are. I will do more research. I think we can agree that right now, South Koreans have ir better than North Koreans.

I think China’s role gets overlooked in this war. When the combined UN forces with their superior chest thumping technology invaded the North, the Chinese inflicted crushing defeats on them in the second phase offensive. It is indeed astonishing how such poorly equipped forces relying on outdated T-34 tanks was able to achieve such success against a highly equipped combined UN force.

 

[Optimistic Nihilist]

Very interesting way to took at it. However, I have always thought that it was better than South Korea was under a democratic regime now than what the North Koreans are. I will do more research. I think we can agree that right now, South Koreans have ir better than North Koreans.

I think China’s role gets overlooked in this war. When the combined UN forces with their superior chest thumping technology invaded the North, the Chinese inflicted crushing defeats on them in the second phase offensive. It is indeed astonishing how such poorly equipped forces relying on outdated T-34 tanks was able to achieve such success against a highly equipped combined UN force.

The point isn't about who is better off or worse now, after aid and sanctions and what not imposed by the Imperial States of America.

The point is that USA had no right to send troops to a nation, with whom they had no treaty, to defend it against attack by another nation, no matter how unprincipled that aggression might be, unless the whole matter was submitted to Congress and a declaration of war or some other direct authority obtained.

The majority of Koreans favored socialism and wanted a unified Korea. This division at the 38th parallel was forcibly imposed on them by USA after massacring millions of Koreans.

You can't even call it Northern Aggression. According to the constitutions of both parts, Korea is a single country. So it was a civil war largely caused by the United States itself, which blocked country-wide elections because it knew that its dictator/candidate would lose.

There was no "good intervention, bad intervention". Every single American military action abroad is illegal, immoral and borders on genocide committed to secure benefits for USA.

 

[Optimistic Nihilist]

Very interesting way to took at it. However, I have always thought that it was better than South Korea was under a democratic regime now than what the North Koreans are. I will do more research. I think we can agree that right now, South Koreans have ir better than North Koreans.

I think China’s role gets overlooked in this war. When the combined UN forces with their superior chest thumping technology invaded the North, the Chinese inflicted crushing defeats on them in the second phase offensive. It is indeed astonishing how such poorly equipped forces relying on outdated T-34 tanks was able to achieve such success against a highly equipped combined UN force.

And you are right, China did quite well in this war despite being the underdogs. They were never going to win, that was obvious. But the US generals who were expecting a short and easy war got a huge shock in return.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

The point isn't about who is better off or worse now, after aid and sanctions and what not imposed by the Imperial States of America.

The point is that USA had no right to send troops to a nation, with whom they had no treaty, to defend it against attack by another nation, no matter how unprincipled that aggression might be, unless the whole matter was submitted to Congress and a declaration of war or some other direct authority obtained.

The majority of Koreans favored socialism and wanted a unified Korea. This division at the 38th parallel was forcibly imposed on them by USA after massacring millions of Koreans.

According to the constitutions of both parts, Korea is a single country. So it was a civil war largely caused by the United States itself, which blocked country-wide elections because it knew that its dictator/candidate would lose.

There was no "good intervention, bad intervention". Every single American military action abroad is illegal, immoral and borders on genocide committed to secure benefits for USA.

That I could agree with hundred percent. The Imperial States of America had tried to impose its will on many smaller, under armed nations. I just assumed that American interventik
was great because of the freedom and benefits south Korea faces, while North Koreans are tragically suffering under Kim’s rule. But, you are 100% correct in saying that their interventions have always been illegal.

I’m just waiting for certain folks to try to make analogies with this and the Indian intervention in Bangladesh or the Annexation of Hyderabad lmao.

 

[srevster]

Okay. But our soldiers are humans and have families. We won’t toss them to fight wars they have no part in partaking.

They are already under siege and poorly funded. An expeditionary force can improve stability at home while destabilizing enemy territory. Defending every square inch of India not practical.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

They are already under siege and poorly funded. An expeditionary force can improve stability at home while destabilizing enemy territory. Defending every square inch of India not practical.

So we should expend our forces in other areas becuase that somehow brings stability to Kashmir?

 

[Super Flanker]

Russia also developed and improved MI 28 N night hunter with omni directional radar and as well as other upgrades. If Apache deal falls MI 28 N is an option for attack helicopter.

To be fair, the best option after Apache would have always been the MI-28. MI-28 is a very capable gunship platform which comes with a wide array of Weopons.

I would have always gone with the MI-28 Helicopter instead of Apache.

Anyways there is recent news that Bangladesh might procure couple of these MI-28 Helicopter, around 16 units reportedly will be acquired it seems

 

[srevster]

So we should expend our forces in other areas becuase that somehow brings stability to Kashmir?

Kashmir is destabilized from PoK and Pakistan. Take out the root of the problem. When Bangladesh was created, india went into Bangladesh, no?

 

[Hari Sud]

The Western Media and India.

The Western media hated Nehru for his leftist policies although he was Eaton and Cambridge graduate. They hated Indira Gandhi for splitting Pakistan into two. They made fun of India for its slow economic growth in eighties and nineties and coined the phrase of Hindu growth of 3.5 to 4%. This was institutionalized by the British media with the help of a few anti-Indian personalities in India itself (Lutyens). It was them who fed their misleading analysis. The British enjoyed their feedback.

The Americans disliked India for being pro Russia/Soviet. Also, a few economic liberalization moves in nineties were not appreciated by them. Americans were China focussed, hence they could not care less.

The Indian victory over Pakistanis in1965, 1971 and 1999 wars were termed as unnecessary. Some authors even criticized India for not handing over Kashmir to Pakistan.

The left oriented rule in India except for a short period 1998 till 2004, continued till 2014. That is when a centre-right party won a landslide victory with a slogan of corruption free India with License Raj vanished. Also, the last governments were not religious enough.

The right wing party leader extended a hand of friendship to the West, which they liked for a short duration only. Modi as a new leader put an end to the black money economy, dealt firmly with corruption, modified the tax code and reinvigorated the slow moving bureaucracy. The results began to show immediately. He also decided to put an end to money induced religious conversion to Christianity and asked states to end the Muslim practice of love Jihad.

All this was a right wing agenda. Support for this new agenda was phenomenal. He was re-elected with a bigger majority, five years later. India, except for the pandemic years, began to register high growth (9%). More foreign money began to pour in, setting the stage for India to become an industrial economy. A year back, it’s GDP data bypassed the British GDP and money is reserve for bad times was all time high of $700 billion. Any lay person would expect that the West would laud India’s effort.

No sir, not true. They searched and invented new topics to be critical, the Brits were unhappy as they had lost much of their captive market in India in 1947. Also, their European Market experience was bad.

The Americans were still unhappy with new government in place for a variety of reasons. Before that, they hated India’s pro Soviet/Russia policy, now their unhappiness spanned a number of reasons including preventing or banning money induced religious conversion in india, not supporting them enough on Afghanistan issue, still sourcing Russian military hardware to supplement previously sourced hardware, etc. On many other issues, there was a huge confluence of interest but they could not care less. They also were not paying enough attention that a growing Indian economy would be an alternative to China.

Recent India’s unhappiness with the new American Administration included President Biden holding off on critical raw material supply to make Covid vaccine in india for three months. It was restored after a huge hue and cry. In the last little while they have made implementation of CAATSA on Indian contest a priority. India has sourced S-400 missile system from Russia. India did this to protect itself from the joint action of Pakistan and China. US have not announced their sanctions but these will be unwelcome. Issues like that are a big headache in Indo-US relations. There was a glimmer of hope when QUAD was reinitiated after 10 years, but hopes died sooner than later. India needed QUAD until India could builds itself to hold off joint action by China and Pakistan. It is again in a slow mode.

Hopefully if handled smartly, and US based news reporters are held in check then these irritations will go away. It was very unpleasant to see American media publishing the funeral pyres burning at a cremation ground last year all due to high Covid casualties. It was a respectful necessary ritual but for American media it was something to laugh at. It irritated india.

Unless US meets halfway, no issues will be solved.

 

[ezsasa]

The Western Media and India.

The Western media hated Nehru for his leftist policies although he was Eaton and Cambridge graduate. They hated Indira Gandhi for splitting Pakistan into two. They made fun of India for its slow economic growth in eighties and nineties and coined the phrase of Hindu growth of 3.5 to 4%. This was institutionalized by the British media with the help of a few anti-Indian personalities in India itself (Lutyens). It was them who fed their misleading analysis. The British enjoyed their feedback.

The Americans disliked India for being pro Russia/Soviet. Also, a few economic liberalization moves in nineties were not appreciated by them. Americans were China focussed, hence they could not care less.

The Indian victory over Pakistanis in1965, 1971 and 1999 wars were termed as unnecessary. Some authors even criticized India for not handing over Kashmir to Pakistan.

The left oriented rule in India except for a short period 1998 till 2004, continued till 2014. That is when a centre-right party won a landslide victory with a slogan of corruption free India with License Raj vanished. Also, the last governments were not religious enough.

The right wing party leader extended a hand of friendship to the West, which they liked for a short duration only. Modi as a new leader put an end to the black money economy, dealt firmly with corruption, modified the tax code and reinvigorated the slow moving bureaucracy. The results began to show immediately. He also decided to put an end to money induced religious conversion to Christianity and asked states to end the Muslim practice of love Jihad.

All this was a right wing agenda. Support for this new agenda was phenomenal. He was re-elected with a bigger majority, five years later. India, except for the pandemic years, began to register high growth (9%). More foreign money began to pour in, setting the stage for India to become an industrial economy. A year back, it’s GDP data bypassed the British GDP and money is reserve for bad times was all time high of $700 billion. Any lay person would expect that the West would laud India’s effort.

No sir, not true. They searched and invented new topics to be critical, the Brits were unhappy as they had lost much of their captive market in India in 1947. Also, their European Market experience was bad.

The Americans were still unhappy with new government in place for a variety of reasons. Before that, they hated India’s pro Soviet/Russia policy, now their unhappiness spanned a number of reasons including preventing or banning money induced religious conversion in india, not supporting them enough on Afghanistan issue, still sourcing Russian military hardware to supplement previously sourced hardware, etc. On many other issues, there was a huge confluence of interest but they could not care less. They also were not paying enough attention that a growing Indian economy would be an alternative to China.

Recent India’s unhappiness with the new American Administration included President Biden holding off on critical raw material supply to make Covid vaccine in india for three months. It was restored after a huge hue and cry. In the last little while they have made implementation of CAATSA on Indian contest a priority. India has sourced S-400 missile system from Russia. India did this to protect itself from the joint action of Pakistan and China. US have not announced their sanctions but these will be unwelcome. Issues like that are a big headache in Indo-US relations. There was a glimmer of hope when QUAD was reinitiated after 10 years, but hopes died sooner than later. India needed QUAD until India could builds itself to hold off joint action by China and Pakistan. It is again in a slow mode.

Hopefully if handled smartly, and US based news reporters are held in check then these irritations will go away. It was very unpleasant to see American media publishing the funeral pyres burning at a cremation ground last year all due to high Covid casualties. It was a respectful necessary ritual but for American media it was something to laugh at. It irritated india.

Unless US meets halfway, no issues will be solved.

we do tend to generalise US for the sake of making a quick point.

Perhaps it is prudent not to look at US as a monolith like CCP, may be it is better to look at it based on interest groups and their motivations towards India. as we know there are nuances involved.

 

[Suryavanshi]

Brown coolie doing the heavy lifting for bipedal pigs never gets old.

At some point u have to realise this guy isn't a well-wisher for us. Other members also live in murica but no one has asked us to measure up to murica or piss off.

He's here to justify why he is there in Murica and why we should follow the dictat by his overlords.

 

[Suryavanshi]

I have said it several time and I will say it again, we as an Indian do not give a shit about what people think outside our border we will stand up on our own feet and do whatever we want.
We do not have a visible plan or policy right now but we have the intention and that is all we need for now.
Every 1/7 person lives in India and that is enough validation and we do not need to look outside.
The trades argument is also retarded, everything under the sun belongs to us, money flowing on either side isn't a sigh of favour. Tell me does every financial transactions you do every day counts as favour.
Jews have their entire business set up on the consumerism culture of Murica but never have they dicksucked as hard as the coolies.
We will strive forward with or without Murica, we might not be successful but that does not matter.

 

[srevster]

I have said it several time and I will say it again, we as an Indian do not give a shit about what people think outside our border we will stand up on our own feet and do whatever we want.

Lol, is that why the Indian Government cows down to international pressure? Is that why Indira returned the gains in PoK and Bangladesh without any gains for India?

o really, you don’t care for what outsiders think. Is that why there is a no gun policy on the China border. What you say sounds good to pat yourself on your back and feel good drinking your own cool aid. A patriotic Indian would actually wake up, smell the coffee and figure how to improve things; not bask in their own shit and reject help.

without outside allies, India is surrounded by enemies like China, Pakistan, With fence sitters Nepal and Sri Lanka. The only reason Nepal and Sri Lanka are not in Chinese camp is Quad and international pressure. So don’t give me this 5 cent bullshit.

 

[Chimaji Appa]

Lol, is that why the Indian Government cows down to international pressure? Is that why Indira returned the gains in PoK and Bangladesh without any gains for India?

o really, you don’t care for what outsiders think. Is that why there is a no gun policy on the China border. What you say sounds good to pat yourself on your back and feel good drinking your own cool aid. A patriotic Indian would actually wake up, smell the coffee and figure how to improve things; not bask in their own shit and reject help.

without outside allies, India is surrounded by enemies like China, Pakistan, With fence sitters Nepal and Sri Lanka. The only reason Nepal and Sri Lanka are not in Chinese camp is Quad and international pressure. So don’t give me this 5 cent bullshit.

India was ruled back then by people with your kiss-ass mentality. Things our changing.