Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If China makes a grab for Arunachal Pradesh/South Tibet, can it win?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If China makes a grab for Arunachal Pradesh/South Tibet, can it win?

    If it wins, how does this improve the Chinese position for further territorial expansion?

  • #2
    Why would China do that?
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

    Comment


    • #3
      How do you define 'win' here ?

      Other side concedes and does not fight back

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DOR View Post
        Why would China do that?
        They claim it

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah, countries always launch major wars over claims ... not.
          Trust me?
          I'm an economist!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DOR View Post
            Why would China do that?
            Originally posted by DOR View Post
            Yeah, countries always launch major wars over claims ... not.
            1962, 1967 - learn the history of the area first. Second is geography. You can always troll later.
            Last edited by Oracle; 17 Sep 20,, 00:50.
            Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

            Comment


            • #7
              The term "South Tibet"...is this considered offensive by Indians?
              TwentyFiveFortyFive

              Comment


              • #8
                ^ Yes. Auranchal Pradesh is not South Tibet, nor is it Chinese territory. More than being offensive, it's a lie that PRC has been repeating over the years. If lies were to become truth, Nazi Germany would be ruling us today. There should be no space for Goebbelistic propaganda in a democratic board.

                This is not directed to the op-ed, he probably doesn't know.
                Last edited by Oracle; 17 Sep 20,, 01:46.
                Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DOR View Post
                  Yeah, countries always launch major wars over claims ... not.
                  Haha. Will they do it is up for conjecture. We plan as if they will.

                  Do bear in mind, in the 60s, the Indian administration stuck to the line that China would not start a war until the very last day.

                  They expected nothing more than minor skirmishes.

                  Any suggestions to the contrary were considered CIA disinformation by Defense minister of the time, Krishna Menon.

                  The Americans really hated that guy considering him a Russian mole in the Indian cabinet.

                  Mao in 1959 said Tibet is the palm from which the five fingers are Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan & Arunachal

                  They've not made much headway since but always threaten to do so.

                  Latest being they are going to start some ethno religious war between the buddhists in the HImalayas

                  Line up all the ducks.
                  Last edited by Double Edge; 17 Sep 20,, 14:40.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                    If it wins, how does this improve the Chinese position for further territorial expansion?
                    In the 60's the plan was the Paks take J&K, PLA takes Sikkim in a two front fight. Not necessarily simultaneously.

                    Then India has to concede Sikkim or Arunachal in exchange for J&K.


                    The trouble is the Paks couldn't keep to their end of the deal in 1965

                    They went crying to Chou for help who fired them for settling too soon.

                    China made no moves on Sikkim in the 1965 war. Why ? they won against India just three years prior

                    No pacts existed between India and the Americans or Soviets

                    They did demand that two Indian posts at the Sikkim border be vacated. One CO complied the other refused.

                    Taking Sikkim by China leaves a 25km corridor linking the mainland with the NE.

                    That leverage by China would ensure India never becomes a hostile power ie. remains neutral.

                    A strategic win.


                    These days it seems as if China will take J&K or parts of it and then settle the border with Pakistan.

                    That would their idea of a win.

                    Commentators i listen to say any moves on Arunachal are a feint or diversion.

                    PLA eyes are on Ladakh.

                    To take Arunachal will require lots of airborne. The roads leading to Arunachal are few and the terrain is harsh.
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 17 Sep 20,, 14:58.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      To take Arunachal will require lots of airborne. The roads leading to Arunachal are few and the terrain is harsh.
                      Assuming Chinese intentions are not only to hold on to their acquisitions, but develop and extend them, the cost-benefit ratio of building roads would seem to tilt in favor of benefits. It's an ancient template repeated over and over.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Terrain ?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Oracle View Post



                          1962, 1967 - learn the history of the area first. Second is geography. You can always troll later.
                          No domestic or geo-political issues involved, huh? just a “claim”?
                          Not good enough, not by a long shot.
                          Trust me?
                          I'm an economist!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                            Assuming Chinese intentions are not only to hold on to their acquisitions, but develop and extend them, the cost-benefit ratio of building roads would seem to tilt in favor of benefits. It's an ancient template repeated over and over.
                            They better get cracking soon then. Here's what they have so far

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              One way to define a China win is India henceforth become neutral.

                              India is no longer hostile to China

                              India has no veto over China policy.

                              India no longer threatens China's route to the Arabian sea, Bay of Bengal or Malacca straits

                              If any territory is to be taken its a means to that end.

                              Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                              If it wins, how does this improve the Chinese position for further territorial expansion?
                              What's your definition of China win ?
                              Last edited by Double Edge; 17 Sep 20,, 17:16.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X