Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops

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

  • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    The tent was the source of the tension.
    Yes.

    The Indians went over to where the Chinese were, not the Chinese who advance into the Indian side.
    Trust but verify. They pitched those tents in Indian land, according to our experts. It was not Chinese territory, even though the Chinese are not willing to settle the boundary issue.

    And if the casualties are to be believed, then the Chinese were not prepared to receive the Indians.
    I want to trust your observation, if the number of PLA casualties are to be believed. But without anything coming from a decent source, I will stick to the GoI position that the PLA were the aggressors. And Sir, the Chinese keep lying too, about almost anything.
    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


    • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
      The tent was the source of the tension. The Indians went over to where the Chinese were, not the Chinese who advance into the Indian side. And if the casualties are to be believed, then the Chinese were not prepared to receive the Indians.
      Its not clear whether we went to their side or whether they were still squatting on our side.

      If they were on our side after agreeing to move out then that would be the starting point.

      Course the PM said they never came to our side. So its all a bit 'grey' : )

      Comment


      • I'm an outsider to this. My interest is not who's right or wrong. The only thing that concerns me is who advanced upon whom. Thing that gets me is that didn't the InA at least keep the area under observation and counted the dead?
        Chimo

        Comment


        • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
          I'm an outsider to this. My interest is not who's right or wrong. The only thing that concerns me is who advanced upon whom. Thing that gets me is that didn't the InA at least keep the area under observation and counted the dead?
          Sir, when an IA patrol goes over to check whether the PLA has dis-engaged, they don't normally expect brawls. Pacts such as no firing on the LAC makes it easy. The GoI says 35-50 PLA died, and I believe these numbers came from the IA commanders present on the spot. And since the fighting went on till late in the night, it would be very difficult to count the dead. IA observation team was in the rear, who advanced upon seeing the IA patrol being attacked.

          Check this FB video.

          Now, check this and this.
          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


          • The world is finally uniting against China’s bully tactics

            Twenty Indian soldiers are murdered in a surprise cross-border attack by the People’s Liberation Army. A Philippine fishing boat is sunk in its own territorial waters by increasingly predatory Chinese ships. Peaceful pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong are beaten bloody by riot police on Beijing’s orders. Australia’s farmers and miners are hit with trade sanctions after Canberra suggests that the virus, which came out of China, may have come from . . . China.

            Chinese President Xi Jinping has apparently decided that now is the time to assert dominance over an economically prostrate post-pandemic world. But instead of just rolling over, a growing number of nations are fighting back.

            India, for one, is clearly not intimidated. In response to China’s unprovoked attack, the largest democracy in the world has moved 30,000 troops to the Himalayan border. Many Indians are now boycotting “Made in China” products, a task made easier because online retailers like Amazon have been ordered by New Delhi to tell buyers where products are made.

            Prime Minister Narendra Modi has also raised tariffs on Chinese goods, restricted Chinese investments and banned TikTok and 58 other Chinese apps from Indian phones.

            Meanwhile, the people of the Philippines are up in arms over China’s expansionism into areas of the South China Sea claimed by Manila. When anti-US President Rodrigo Duterte was elected in 2016, he initially ignored popular sentiment and announced a “pivot to Beijing” on the promise of $24 billion in Chinese investments.

            Four years later, all that has changed. With the Chinese navy sailing ever closer to Philippine shores and few Chinese projects in progress, Duterte has reversed his earlier decision to terminate his country’s Visiting Forces Agreement with the US. Given a choice between having American or Chinese naval vessels anchored in Subic Bay, the decision was pretty obvious.

            The sight of the 7.3 million free people of Hong Kong being crushed under the heel of the Communist boot is one the world will not easily forget. It has already prompted UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to offer British citizenship to 3 million Hong Kongers, not to mention take a tougher line toward China itself. Huawei, for example, can kiss its 5G business in the UK goodbye.

            The Australians are also fed up with Beijing’s bare-knuckle efforts to spy on and disrupt their country’s government, infrastructure and industries. To counter the recent surge in cyberattacks, Canberra has promised to recruit at least 500 cyberwarriors, bolstering the country’s online defenses. Meanwhile, an astonishing 94 percent of Australians say they want to begin decoupling their economy from China’s.

            The same story is being repeated around the globe. From Sweden to Japan to Czechia, more and more nations are coming to understand China’s mortal threat to the postwar democratic, capitalist world order.

            Xi Jinping and the Communist Party that he leads have so badly overplayed their hand that they have, in a mere six months, accomplished what Donald Trump could not in almost four years: They have unified the world against China.

            And Communist leader Xi has only himself to blame.

            On Wednesday, Congress unanimously voted to sanction China for its new security law that would effectively nullify Hong Kong’s legal system and put Beijing in charge. But America cannot fight China alone. And now, thanks to Xi’s aggressive policies, we won’t have to.

            As someone who has been warning about the China threat for decades, I take grim satisfaction in watching this new alliance crystallize with each new misstep by Beijing.

            As Napoleon Bonaparte once remarked, “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
            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


            • Tide is turning in Oz

              Click image for larger version

Name:	Australian government policies towards China.png
Views:	1
Size:	74.9 KB
ID:	1479101

              Xi Jinping and the Communist Party that he leads have so badly overplayed their hand that they have, in a mere six months, accomplished what Donald Trump could not in almost four years: They have unified the world against China.
              That they have
              Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Jul 20,, 03:36.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                I'm an outsider to this. My interest is not who's right or wrong. The only thing that concerns me is who advanced upon whom. Thing that gets me is that didn't the InA at least keep the area under observation and counted the dead?
                It was dark. They have a habit of removing our surveillance gear.

                Article i saw said that we handed over 16 of their dead.

                Whether people die later is out of our view.
                Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Jul 20,, 04:17.

                Comment


                • It also prompted fears about armed conflicts between the nuclear powers becoming a deadly manifestation of the Thucydides Trap.

                  The much-debated concept, which was coined by Harvard professor Graham Allison in reference to the possibility of military confrontations when a rising power threatens a dominant one, is usually reserved to describe the superpower showdown between China and the US.

                  But could it also be the case between China and India?

                  The two countries have shown interest in de-escalation and agreed to disengage this week, but there is little sign so far that heightened tensions will dissipate soon.
                  I've never thought of India & China in a Thucydides Trap

                  Observers generally say that it would be nightmarish scenario for Beijing to ratchet up tensions and further alienate New Delhi in the face of worsening ties with Washington and the biggest international backlash in decades over China’s diplomatic overreach and its culpability in the coronavirus pandemic.
                  Comforting thought but we're dealing with a bunch of morons in Beijing

                  With India’s rise as a regional power, the shifting balance of power between India and Pakistan and the emergence of India’s alliance with the US, India has occupied a higher place in China’s agenda.
                  Careless use of the word 'alliance' there. There isn't any.

                  Incensed by India’s perceived opportunism to explore China’s weakness from Covid-19 and the worsening US-China relations, China may want to “teach India another lesson” as Beijing saw Modi’s salami-slicing border approach as something similar to prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s controversial “forward policy” in the lead-up to the 1962 war.

                  “Tactically, China appears to be aiming for what it achieved in the 1962 war … and believes it needs to stand up to India whatever the cost,” Sun said.
                  Wait...what is Modi's salami slicing approach ?

                  She compares us pushing to get to finger 8 and PP14 as Nehru's forward policy ??

                  Does this woman not realise we used to do that until April ?? WHO stopped us

                  While Beijing may hope to thwart New Delhi’s efforts to catch up with China on infrastructure construction in border areas, the most challenging part for Beijing is to maintain the pressure without triggering an armed conflict, which would lead to the nightmare of a two-front war with both the US and India.

                  “Even if China could defeat and contain India through a war, the pay-off for China would remain minimal because it wouldn’t address China’s key external security challenges in the Pacific,” Sun said. “Instead, a breakdown in ties with New Delhi would only further expose Beijing in its primary theatre vis--vis the US.”
                  So do what General Siwach said over a month go, you can't win a fight with us so stick to the 1993 peace treaty !!

                  This is going to dawn on Beijing sooner or later.

                  That's how Doklam was concluded

                  You were asking where Doval was ? here he is in action

                  He was the one negotiating with hijackers in '99 to reduce their demands of 150 of their guys released from our jails down to 5 (!)
                  Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Jul 20,, 04:24.

                  Comment


                  • China's People's Liberation Army was seen removing tents and structures at patrolling point 14, the sources said in New Delhi, adding rearward movement of vehicles of Chinese troops was seen in the general area of Galwan and Gogra Hot Springs.
                    That's good news so they are not going to threaten the darbuk-DBO road.

                    But what did we agree to in exchange ? no more border infrastructure or much less

                    Nothing about Pangong and the fingers. Wonder if that was the one we gave up.

                    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
                    Engage, disengage, engage, disengage. These are stupid people. Most stupid. What did they achieve? Militarily, politically, economically? These stupid communists gave us a compelling reason to arm up, and arm quickly with the necessary tools. Build infrastructure in the border areas 4X faster now. Whatever argument the Chinese side gives now or later, I'm sure it came from a chapter called fools dream of the stupid red book.
                    We're going to have to be on our guard now. If they see this as the last chance they give us.

                    Assuming these disengagements are not interrupted.
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Jul 20,, 04:38.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      That's good news so they are not going to threaten the darbuk-DBO road.

                      But what did we agree to in exchange ? no more border infrastructure or much less

                      Nothing about Pangong and the fingers. Wonder if that was the one we gave up.


                      We're going to have to be on our guard now. If they see this as the last chance they give us.

                      Assuming these disengagements are not interrupted.
                      No.

                      Behind the Indo-China border de-escalation

                      Same content, different heading - Phone call at 8.45 am, then a video call: The backstory of the PLA’s pullback
                      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


                      • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                        During the Cold War, the Sovet Army routinely occupied Chinese territory, not even disputed territory but two to three miles over the border. Chinese airspace was routinely violated 100 miles in. No such terriotrial occupation nor airspace violation is happening today.

                        The Chinese DID NOT intend to challenge the Soviet Army nor the MiGs at the border. The battlefield was chosen 100 miles into Chinese territory. This was to stretch Soviet LOCs and use geographic strong points to help to contain any Soviet thrust.

                        In short, don't let stupid idiotic nationalistic pride stand in the way of sound military decisions. Both sides are using kung fu for crying out loud. Good men have died over a tent. If the causalties are to be believe, then it is more than likely that it was the Indians who went on the attack and took the Chinese by surprise. You killed men over a tent. Not a machine gun post. Not a minefield. A freaking tent. There is nothing military sound about any of this.
                        There is the matter of that 'structure' which the foreign minister mentioned. We take this structure to mean whatever they made to stop the flow of the Galwan river. There is no water before the Jun 15 incident but it resumes after.

                        That could be a reason to go into the Chinese side.

                        AIM mentioned that more Chinese died because there was a scuffle on the ridge and due to their larger numbers the ridge gave way.

                        Not sure about element of surprise here. From the way the news went it was us that was surprised as the people we encountered that evening were different to the ones we normally saw there. This was in the article Firestorm posted by Shiv Aroor.
                        Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Jul 20,, 05:23.

                        Comment


                        • ^ Water-flow stopped due to earthen (rocks, soil) dam built by the PLA. Then rains happened, and flooded that dam, which eventually burst the dam, and water found its natural course again. This is 'that' structure.

                          Deaths happened because soldiers of the Bihar Regiment were tasked to oversee if the PLA retreated back to their side of the LAC. PLA did not, and attacked the IA patrol, which then was joined by forces of the 2 armies in the rear, kind of free for all brawl.
                          Last edited by Oracle; 07 Jul 20,, 06:43.
                          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


                          • Originally posted by Oracle View Post
                            No.
                            ok, then what did we give the Chinese to withdraw

                            I never get a clear answer to this question on previous disengagements.

                            They show up, we get excited, then they disengage and life goes back to normal.


                            While these are the first steps taken towards disengagement on the LAC leading to de-escalation, Doval and Wang agreed that both sides will have patrolling rights on the contested points, but will avoid any friction or clash in the future.
                            Very good, that's what the 1993 peace treaty says

                            While the PLA were at a disadvantage in Galwan, Gogra and Hot Springs in terms of military positions, the situation at Pangong Tso is in favour of the Chinese, as they have built a road up to Finger 4.
                            Interesting, i thought we were at a disadvantage in the Galwan as well

                            Ultimately, said analysts, it is restoration of Indian patrolling rights on the north banks of Pangong Tso which will determine the success of the Doval-Wang parleys.
                            Right

                            Although Raisina Hill is relieved at the reduction of tension at the border, it is still foxed at the reasons for the Chinese PLA to initiate military aggression on the LAC at the cost of a nuanced and complex relationship between the two countries achieved with 30 years of careful nurturing.

                            “Even if we say that PLA was showcasing the power differential between China and India, it does not make any sense strategically as the move to acquire few kilometres of territory not only riled up all India including Opposition parties but also severely hit the economic ties (between the countries),” said a senior government official who asked not to be named.
                            Exactly

                            The only explanation to the PLA aggression, according to a member of China Study Group, a government body, is that Beijing expected New Delhi to capitulate much the way some ASEAN nations have when it comes to China’s aggression in the South China Sea.
                            They expected us to back off... how could they reach that conclusion after Doklam ?

                            WHO THE HELL IS RUNNING THIS CIRCUS IN BEIJING!!!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                              ok, then what did we give the Chinese to withdraw

                              I never get a clear answer to this question on previous disengagements.

                              They show up, we get excited, then they disengage and life goes back to normal.
                              What was the need to amass 1000s of IA troops on the borders, with artillery, jets, tanks etc? Just to match the PLA? I don't think so. We're ready to go to war, if push came to shove. We issued special visas to Boeing technicians (waived off Corona quarantine) to come to India for maintenance of the Apaches.

                              Honestly, IDK. But let's look at what we did since the face-off and then the fight at Galwan.

                              #1. Opinion about China are at an all time low in India. We ignited those flames through our media and ministers. Good thing, we're getting better.
                              #2. Calls for boycott of Chinese goods.
                              #3. GoI not allowing Chinese telecom companies for bidding in 4G. Not 5G.
                              #4. Some contracts cancelled.
                              #5. Chinese internet companies ban.

                              Not to mention world opinion about China on handling the Corona pandemic. How many fights can China singularly take all at once? 2 USN CBGs in the APAC.

                              Coercive economic-diplomacy maybe. Maybe an assurance that Chinese investments and internet companies will not be blocked. Does it make sense for the politburo to fight a war they cannot win, and get cut off from the 2nd biggest market of the world? Have an enemy on their western border when they fight the USN on the ECS/SCS?

                              Shiv Aroor, AIM - these people talk interesting things, but they are not part of the CCS, and as such I do not wish to speculate on what they say.
                              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


                              • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                                WHO THE HELL IS RUNNING THIS CIRCUS IN BEIJING!!!
                                She Xingping.

                                A civilisation as old as ours, many ancient inventions to their credit. And look at them today, the direction in which they're heading. We all should be disappointed, not angry, at China.
                                Last edited by Oracle; 07 Jul 20,, 06:10.
                                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