All due respect to your prior experience in the Indian Army notwithstanding, you seem to approach many of the Chinese and Pakistani posters here with a default assumption that they are brainwashed or colored by censorship and hence their views are invalid. What's more, you (and some other DFI posters) sometimes use this as a substitute for reasoned, logical debate.
First off, if someone posts at DFI, chances are they already see enough "uncensored" points of view from this forum alone that the brainwashing argument doesn't hold water. Second, even if they were, the logical fallacy of ad hominem means that you can't just discount someone's views because of their personal characteristics.
Now that I've learned you served as a senior officer in the Indian Army, I know that you're capable of better logic than this. I'd be happy to join you in making these discussions a better place.
I do not take Pakistani to be brainwashed. You assume too much.
In so far as Mainland Chinese are concerned, it is not my view that they are Pavlovianly conditioned. Many articles and commentaries point to that fact. I don't think that you should fault be for accepting the international view.
For instance Nehru was an equally hallowed figure to Indians as Mao to Chinese.
Yet, we never hesitated to give our frank opinion of him and his governance then and even now.
In contrast check this very statement that Chinese state these days when you talk to them of Mao and that is Mao was 30% wrong and 70% right!
How is that such an exact figure is said by the Chinese? How is it that before Mao died none said this exact statistical figure?
It is because For years now, open discussion of the Mao era has been forbidden. Not long after Mao's death the party announced that he had been 70% right, 30% wrong.
BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | China moves on from Mao
In short, the CCP decides and the Chinese parrot in a conditioned mindset like the Pavlovian experiment.
Therefore, the facts on the ground lead to conclusions, which to you appears incorrect and default assumptions.
Chinese posters are not always incorrect. For instance, you were not incorrect on the manner how to stop the self immolation by the Tibetans.
You gave the classical example of the mode how historically the Han have Sincised the other groups. And yet, you may not be aware, it has been denied vigorously by the other Chinese posters. Therefore, when the Chinese posters deny what is universally known, then others would surely doubt their credibility. Therefore, you must accept that the credibility deficit makes people concerned about the veracity of Chinese posters' claims.
Take the issue of Light tanks. It was hotly informed that the tanks being used in Tibet were Light Tanks. Anyone who knows anything about tanks would know that even if Light tanks are used, it would be for areas where there has to be relatively low ground pressure such as marshy ground and so on. Anyone who has any idea of Tibet, would know that the hard ground is ideal for MBTs wherever it is tank country.
And yet, it was the
Mai Dasiya (I have Spoken! Period. I am a Chinese and so I know) attitude of not admitting reality.
You speak of logic?
Check the logic of your own kin!
What was my profession does not in anyway affect the discussion.
The discussions can be educative, if fiction is kept aside.
When fiction is brandished, then someone must correct the facts. I try to do that and you are taking umbrage for my trying to correct the incorrectness being flung around as the reality.