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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    That is what surprises me. These dictators are always purging people they suspect of disloyalty.

    If they suspect loyatly is less than 100% then said person gets on the list for the next purge.

    So how then could Mao ever be over ruled ?

    A dictator would have to screw up pretty spectacularly for people to have a change of mind.

    Maybe Great leap forward was just that.



    So Xi can screw up and not get sidelined or have less risk of getting side lined in other words.

    Hmmm...

    One commentator I heard said he expected Xi to quit by years end on the same grounds as Abe.

    Health reasons.

    We'll see but I cannot believe this man is going to survive long into the future, term limits or not.
    Well, there’s about 13 weeks to find out if that commentator should stay on the list of people you consult (I suggest not). Maybe if he could identify the last time any CCP leader voluntarily “quit,” as opposed to hitting the term limit or being ousted...
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

    Comment


    • #32
      On the question of China grabbing AP. The terrain is very tough. There cannot be a comparison wit 62, as there was no large scale Indian troops in AP during that war. For the same reason, terrain. Now there are roads built which allow easier access towards Tawang and is heavily defended.

      Along with the terrain, PLA would be facing a Corp with 3 division, plus another corp nearby. These are dedicated units for AP & East. There is another reserve Corps(2/3 divisions) which will start rushing in to support.

      As soon as PLA moves in to AP, India will invariably launch a counter offensive with two Corps (around 5-6 divisions) across Ladakh, which provide the gateway in to Tibet (Demchok, Chulsul or Depsang). These are armor areas..

      Irrespective of which area PLA wants to capture, it has to face a counter offensive by India, involving 12 divisions all along the LAC. So PLA's offensive would require atleast same number of troops. WTC doesn't have 12 divisions!

      Once the action starts, Indian reserves & troops from the western front will start pouring in.. from the 25 odd divisions...

      In the current standoff reports are saying PLA has mobilised 50K troops from WTC. They are facing off 150K Indian troops all along LAC..
      Last edited by n21; 28 Sep 20,, 21:29.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by n21 View Post
        On the question of China grabbing AP. The terrain is very tough. There cannot be a comparison wit 62, as there was no large scale Indian troops in AP during that war. For the same reason, terrain. Now there are roads built which allow easier access towards Tawang and is heavily defended.

        Along with the terrain, PLA would be facing a Corp with 3 division, plus another corp nearby. These are dedicated units for AP & East. There is another reserve Corps(2/3 divisions) which will start rushing in to support.

        As soon as PLA moves in to AP, India will invariably launch a counter offensive with two Corps (around 5-6 divisions) across Ladakh, which provide the gateway in to Tibet (Demchok, Chulsul or Depsang). These are armor areas..

        Irrespective of which area PLA wants to capture, it has to face a counter offensive by India, involving 12 divisions all along the LAC. So PLA's offensive would require atleast same number of troops. WTC doesn't have 12 divisions!

        Once the action starts, Indian reserves & troops from the western front will start pouring in.. from the 25 odd divisions...

        In the current standoff reports are saying PLA has mobilised 50K troops from WTC. They are facing off 150K Indian troops all along LAC..
        Been missing you in the other topic

        The one idea i had was two offensives on at Sikkim and the other at Arunachal. Some how break through in AP and then head for sikkim and encircle Sikkim on both sides. Goal is to keep Sikkim.

        We have to assume those 9 mountain divisions ( 3 in sikkim and six in Assam who are based there for just this eventuality) , somehow are unable to prevent it.
        Last edited by Double Edge; 29 Sep 20,, 00:06.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
          Dictatorships aren't always what people think they are. The balance of power between minions and dictators shifts unpredictably. That's the reason for random purges. One day you find that you're dictator in name only. The next, you're no longer even dictator in name. And sometime after that, you're shunted off to the gulag, or worse.

          Shoguns ruled Japan for ~700 years, during a time when the Emperor was a mere figurehead. There's an argument to be made that Japan was ruled by an oligarchy of competing interests with the Emperor as their puppet even after the Meiji Restoration supposedly made the Emperor's authority paramount once again.

          The key, ultimately, is who controls the organs of state power. Deng Xiaoping secured the assent of the heads of the relevant units before launching his successful coup against Hua Guofeng. Anyone looking to challenge Xi would have accomplish something similar. Bo Xilai was rumored to have been doing something similar when he was arrested. He obviously failed.
          Was Mao making decisions in the '61 - '63 period ? Here is a chinese source from July 2017 (Doklam standoff) that says he was.

          The biggest difficulty is that China's military deployment on the Sino-Indian border is seriously inadequate. Compared with India's military deployment, it is at a serious quantitative disadvantage. It cannot form a local military advantage and cannot support a small-scale battle victory.

          Those who always say what will happen if Chairman Mao is there, don't think of Chairman Mao as a brave man. Chairman Mao was never afraid of war, but he never made war decisions arbitrarily, and he never made unsure papers. Chairman Mao decided to launch a self-defense counterattack against India in 1962. After more than a year of meticulous preparations, he seized the opportunity of the outbreak of the US-Soviet-Cuban missile crisis before he made up his mind.

          Prior to this, Chairman Mao believed that "China's main focus and strategy of struggle is in the East, in the Western Pacific region, in the vicious aggressive US imperialism, not in India, not in all countries in Southeast Asia and South Asia." "China will not be so stupid. The East makes enemies against the United States, and the West makes enemies against India."

          Beginning in 1961, especially in April 1962, the Indian authorities have implemented a larger-scale "forward policy" along the Sino-Indian border, pushing deeper and deeper into China, and provoking larger armed conflicts.

          In mid-July 1962, Mao Zedong heard the report and said: "India has set up points in our territory. We have every reason to fight, but now we have to restrain ourselves and cannot rush to fight." "Why? It is to further expose Nehru's true face. ".

          In the same July, he also pointed out: We must strive for a correct international understanding of the right and wrong of the Sino-Indian border struggle. Strive for the sympathy and support of the majority of us, especially the centrist; some countries in the world do not have a clear view of the Sino-Indian border issue and cannot figure out who is right and who is wrong.

          Why does Chairman Mao wait? Because at that time, one did not have the strength and confidence to win in the first battle, and the second did not have the best time. When the Cuban missile crisis broke out, the United States and the Soviet Union were busy coping with this incident. China launched a self-defense counterattack against India. When the Cuban missile crisis ended, China immediately declared the war ended
          .

          This is why what DOR said about Mao being sidelined surprised me.

          In India we know just two names Mao and Chou. Nobody has heard of Liu Shaoqui
          Last edited by Double Edge; 29 Sep 20,, 14:54.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
            Mao in 1959 said Tibet is the palm from which the five fingers are Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan & Arunachal
            FYI for anyone who thinks this is apocryphal:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Fingers_of_Tibet

            Comment


            • #36
              This map, which is part of a textbook titled “A Brief History of Modern China”, claims to show nineteen of “the Chinese territories taken by the Imperialists in the old Democratic Revolutionary Era (1840-1919)”. These include Nepal, Bhutan, Burma (Myanmar) and in India the state of Sikkim and territories in the north-east comprising the former states of Assam, NEFA and Nagaland, as well as the Andaman Islands.

              Click image for larger version  Name:	china's territorial claims st.jpg Views:	0 Size:	957.6 KB ID:	1566756

              Almost 70 years later this is what their passports display

              Click image for larger version  Name:	chinese passport 2012.jpg Views:	0 Size:	264.2 KB ID:	1566757

              So the stance seems limited to where opportunities arise.
              Last edited by Double Edge; 12 Oct 20,, 21:49.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                FYI for anyone who thinks this is apocryphal:

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Fingers_of_Tibet
                If they want the 5 fingers we'll think about liberating the palm

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                  So the stance seems limited to where opportunities arise.
                  Always, and not just in China's case. If and when the US pulls back from the Western Pacific, I'd expect a fresh surge of activity, since the potentially high cost - to Chinese expeditionary forces - of a US-backed counter-offensive would no longer be a factor.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by DOR View Post

                    Well, there’s about 13 weeks to find out if that commentator should stay on the list of people you consult (I suggest not). Maybe if he could identify the last time any CCP leader voluntarily “quit,” as opposed to hitting the term limit or being ousted...

                    Chinese President Xi Jinping keeps coughing violently during speech, fuels speculations about coronavirus infection | OpIndia | Oct 16 2020

                    11 Jing Ping excused himself for the rest of the day

                    Might be coincidental but this is about the time that NYPost story on Hunter Biden broke



                    Nobody on the stage with him is wearing any masks either.
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 22 Oct 20,, 22:21.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post

                      Was Mao making decisions in the '61 - '63 period ? Here is a chinese source from July 2017 (Doklam standoff) that says he was.




                      This is why what DOR said about Mao being sidelined surprised me.

                      In India we know just two names Mao and Chou. Nobody has heard of Liu Shaoqui
                      "Nobody has heard of Liu Shaoqui [sic]"

                      And that, sir, is why you consult someone knowledgeable about a subject before rolling out opinions.

                      Liu Shaoqi (刘少奇, 1898-1969) was one of the senior most, and most important, leaders of the Chinese Communist Party and State.
                      • CCP First Vice-Chairman
                      • NPC Chairman
                      • PRC Chairman (i.e., head of state)

                      Most historians rank Liu as third in the hierarchy, but second is more accurate. Zhou Enlai was heavily involved in foreign affairs, and didn't really have the talent for bureaucratic management. Zhou also didn't want the top job, but Liu did.

                      Liu got started in his ideological career in 1920, before the CCP was even formed (1921), and was among the very first class of foreign youth to study communism in Moscow (1921). In other words, as a revolutionary he predates Mao, and the communists think that's really important.

                      By the age of 27 (1925), he was in the top ranks, and 10-20 years younger than other party founders. He was in charge of labor, with about the same political authority as Jimmy Hoffa. Then, he ran provinces. When everyone else ran (the Long March), he stayed behind to run communist underground operations in the eastern cities.

                      Then, he ran groups of provinces: North China, Central Plains, and Central China. Like Deng, he was an army political commissar, so plenty of credibility with the army. He was voted into the top five leadership in 1945, and stayed there until he was the main target of – and the main reason for – the Cultural Revolution.

                      His No. 2 was a little guy named Deng Xiaoping, but nobody ever heard of anyone but Mao and Zhou.

                      ADD: the Chinese article does say "Chairman Mao decided" to fight India in 1962, which it would say about every single subject during his reign. Everything, in public, was Chairman Mao's decision.

                      Yet another reason to consult the experts.

                      Last edited by DOR; 22 Oct 20,, 23:27.
                      Trust me?
                      I'm an economist!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by DOR View Post

                        Liu Shaoqi (刘少奇, 1898-1969) was one of the senior most, and most important, leaders of the Chinese Communist Party and State.
                        The key question is "were Liu or Peng Dehuai ever in a position to remove Mao", the way Deng removed Hua Guofeng? Because if they weren't, then they hadn't quite gotten all their ducks in a row, and Mao was still the country's el jefe. Mao presumably went after them before they could get to that point.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Which expert to trust? One expert said DE and I wanted to kill millions of ordinary Chinese. 'Expert' being the trollest joke of the century. We all have our biases don't we? Some might like and admire Hitler or Stalin or Mao, while continuously dissing about a democratically elected President.

                          I smell something. Yeah, the little Red Book.
                          Last edited by Oracle; 23 Oct 20,, 16:53.
                          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

                          Working...
                          X