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

  • Knowing India we will probably do an emergency procurement of Halberds from Switzerland to counter the Chinese, track the first shipment live on Twitter and TV News and have a grand ceremony when the first lot are delivered.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
      Latest Chinese attempt to circumvent the "No shooting" agreement. Last time they used spiked clubs. Now they have graduated to pole-arms.

      India-China face-off on September 7: Pictures emerge of Chinese soldiers with spears, machete | WION | Sept 08 2020

      This is not going to work anymore , there is a scene that comes to mind

      Please tell me it was us that fired the shots



      In the instant case on 07 September 2020, it was the PLA troops who were attempting to close-in with one of our forward positions along the LAC and when dissuaded by own troops, PLA troops fired a few rounds in the air in an attempt to intimidate own troops. However, despite the grave provocation, own troops exercised great restraint and behaved in a mature and responsible manner.
      You'd think it was us that opened fire but nooo...........
      Last edited by Double Edge; 08 Sep 20,, 20:46.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
        Knowing India we will probably do an emergency procurement of Halberds from Switzerland to counter the Chinese, track the first shipment live on Twitter and TV News and have a grand ceremony when the first lot are delivered.
        I'm hoping to hell that this remains a joke.
        Chimo

        Comment




        • I want to slap the editor of GlobalTimes. Bloody nazi communist liars.
          Last edited by Oracle; 09 Sep 20,, 01:41.
          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




          • PLA on their side of the LAC.
            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
              Vis-a-vi 1979-1989 Sino-VN Combat.

              There are things that needed to be understood that are not explained by those articles and frankly, ignorant of a whole sleuth of things. Sino-VN was an existential crisis for both countries. While VN performed militarily extremely well, it should be noted that they failed to stop the PLA and frankly, had Deng decided (and he clearly had the balls to do it), he could have taken Hanoi. China, however, woke up that they were in no shape to stop the Soviets. What's more, they were surrounded. India, Vietnam, and the USSR. Whatever illusion they were spouting about the Paper Polar Bell was dispelled when the 40th Army crossed into Afghanistan ... in winter ... over mountains ... with armour. (a military feat that has yet to be duplicated even today by the US).

              There was only one strategic objective in the 1979 War and that was to force VN to withdraw from Cambodia. The hope was that Chinese military pressure on the border would relieve Vietnamese military pressure in Cambodia. That did not occurred. The Chinese did not get what they wanted. However, they got what they needed. They destroyed the military threat in the South. VN was in no position to march north had the Soviet Armies marched south. The 1985 2nd Sino-VN War was a much reduced action but showed just how far the Chinese had advanced and how far VN had fallened. The battle was a for a few hills. The Chinese committed a division and held the hills for 2 months before VN could respond and they responded with a single regt. That regt was destroyed in artillery barrage.

              The economic toll on VN cannot be understated. They were relying on Soviet aide more and more. The Soviets were unwilling to pay VN to properly face the Chinese while the Chinese were getting good with their funds (cut 2 million men from the Army and use those funds for training and equipment). By 1989, VN was broke. They had no choice but to leave Cambodia and sue for peace with China.

              Trying to play the enemy's chess game while you're newbie while they're the chess master is a setup for failure.
              Reading this and trying to repackage it in an Indian context. We've got two front to contend with too.

              The bolded part explains how China solved its two front dilemma. A potential attack by Soviets on the North & Viets from the south.

              Pick the weaker one and work them over until they are too weak to respond.

              The bad news is, China was fortunate that Vietnam had been at war for almost 30 years before they entered the picture.

              50s was spent fighting the French, 60-70s Americans. Yet they still managed to resist at the end of the 70s.

              The breaking point comes nearly 35 years later.

              Should India try to replicate this strategem we'd be at it for a decade or longer with the Paks.

              But Pakistan is bankrupt well, we got to see just how long Vietnam continued inspite of nearly constant war.


              What also comes out of this history is how weak the alliances were in the communist world.

              Viets march into Cambodia and topple Pol Pot. What did China do to stop it ? Nothing. Why didn't they try to save their client. Instead of doing it after with a punitive campaign. Pol Pot never came back. Compare with Korea. China didn't let the Americans finish the job, they jumped right in and saved their Korean client. China must have thought the Khmer Rouge could weather the Viets only to find out after the fact that they could not. Oops...

              Same with the Soviets when China was fighting Vietnam. The Soviets might have helped with arms and funding to keep the Viets afloat but were unable to prevent the inevitable. Gorbachev had different priorities.

              One thing is clear though. India does have to apply pressure on Pakistan in a systematic & consistent way over a long period of time.

              Is India going to do this ? if history is any indicator then the answer is a flat no because the Indian public won't allow it.

              We've never made Pakistan pay any price for starting wars with us.

              This means covertly then ? trouble with that is there is no guarantee any subsequent administration will continue the policy so consistency goes out the window.

              And we do we have history here too. Morarji Desai in 1979 and IK Gujral in 1998 who rolled back such operations in the interests of peace.

              Every Indian leader that enters office thinks they can make peace with both China & Pakistan only to be proven wrong by either country over time.

              Modi is the latest example.

              We've started focusing on China more as that is the primary problem and treated the Paks as a secondary problem, they're just a nuisance.

              This takes the pressure of the Paks. So there is a tussle for strategic attention as well.

              Reason I bring this up is should tensions with China continue long term it presents the Paks with opportunities.

              India should not be worrying about a two front situaion but take measures to deal with it before it becomes a reality.

              People can always say but China has been a lousy ally to its partners but these days that line isn't certain and could be dangerous thinking.
              Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Sep 20,, 09:34.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Oracle View Post

                Agree with the bold part. Only God knows, why we have such incompetent people in the Government.
                By non-alignment he means the equidistant policy we've had since the start.

                It has never worked with China as they didn't trust us. They perceive we are talking in two voices. That we're two faced.

                Shakthi Sinha in a recent discussion said the below.

                Must speak to China clearly and in one voice.

                China has told you that your policy of being equidistant is not working.

                China has told India to pick sides.

                It is time to meet with other people and develop issue based partnerships.

                We are not picking fights with China but we will not be a victim.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Oracle View Post


                  I want to slap the editor of GlobalTimes. Bloody nazi communist liars.
                  When she says Chinese media went into meltdown she is only referring to the clickbait GT.

                  The elites read People's Daily and watch CCTV & CGTN

                  What are they saying ? very little

                  They talk about the tension with the US more than the Indian border.
                  Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Sep 20,, 10:09.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                    Don't follow what you mean ?
                    US talks with China, process initiated by Pakistan, sidelines Russia. Taiwan is replaced by China as a permanent member of the P5. (1970-71)

                    Reversible process. Needs a lot of diplomatic wrangling. First, all western democracies should acknowledge Taiwan as heir opponent to people's China.
                    US talks with Russia, process initiated by India, sidelines China. China is replaced by Taiwan as a permanent member of the P5. (20XX-XX)

                    Or, we can hope India is seen as the legitimate country from Asia seeking a P5 seat. Then,
                    US talks with Russia, process initiated by India, sidelines China. China is replaced by India as a permanent member of the P5. (20XX-XX)

                    I have ordered some weed after 2 decades. Maybe this is that weed talking. Not smoked yet. Good sh!t comes from Burma.

                    Peace!!!
                    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


                    • We need a treaty with America to deal with China

                      It is for the first time in its 73 years as an independent nation that India faces the daunting prospect of a two-front threat, from China and Pakistan.

                      Military preparations aside, Indian diplomacy has to work to deal with the situation so brilliantly conducted by Indira Gandhi in 1971, nearly half a century ago.

                      One possible way out of the present crisis is to build alliances with like-minded countries that are affected by Chinese aggressive tactics.

                      A Peace and Friendship Treaty with the US is one such idea whose time has come. We already have a similar treaty (renewed in 1993) with Russia.

                      American help in defending our independence will send a strong signal to the Chinese. The government of the day seems to be cautious for the fear of criticism of a 'sell out' etc by the usual suspects.

                      But history is witness that when faced with the Chinese threat, both Jawaharlal Nehru and later Indira Gandhi had no qualms in seeking American and Soviet help respectively.

                      As time passes, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Chinese have long term strategic objectives (destabilisation of the Indian economy) behind the aggressive moves on the Line of Actual Control with India.

                      The Indian response so far has been tactical, both on the military as well as economic front. Due to this dichotomy, we have failed to get any results.

                      It is time India took certain bold measures to deal with strategic threat posed by China and China-Pakistan combine.

                      China, with its unprovoked actions at the most inopportune time for us as we battle COVID-19, has shown that it is not interested in any long term co-operative relationship with India.

                      The Chinese seem to have come to a conclusion that their power is now adequate to browbeat us and they do not think India as a serious competitor.

                      In short, the nation of 'little emperors' (since the bulk of the young Chinese population are only children) has only disdain for the lumbering Indian elephant!

                      While India does face multiple challenges on the health, economic and military fronts (the China and Pakistan alliance), we are also unique amongst the nations in the world to have friendly relations with the US, Russia, the European Union, the Arab world and Israel.

                      Among these relationships, India-Russia relations stand on a different footing. India signed a 20 year treaty of Peace, Friendship and Co-operation with the erstwhile Soviet Union on August 9, 1971.

                      In the face of the dire threat from a combine of Pakistan-China and the US, this brilliant move made sure that we did not have to fight on two fronts!

                      During the 1971 War for the liberation of Bangladesh that followed, the Soviet Union kept the Chinese in check by deploying 44 mechanised divisions on the Sino-Soviet border that had seen bloody clashes in 1969.

                      It is also believed that Soviet nuclear submarines patrolled the Indian Ocean to deter the US 7th Fleet.

                      For all intents and purposes, the policy of non-alignment was dead in 1971. It is necessary to state this as some bhakts were still dreaming of 'Non-Alignment 2.0' as late as 2012.

                      Historically, even earlier, India has sought help from other countries to deal with the Chinese. On October 28 and 29, 1962, American C-130 transport aircraft airdropped arms and equipment to the beleaguered Indian Army.

                      In a letter on November 19, 1962, then prime minister Nehru wrote to then American President John F Kennedy asking for the deployment of American air power to safeguard Indian cities so that the Indian Air Force could be used against the invading Chinese.

                      The Chinese hastily declared a unilateral ceasefire on November 21, 1962 as the US, free from the Cuban missile crisis, had alerted its strategic bombers based at Subic Bay in the Philippines on November 20, 1962.

                      Both in 1962 and 1971, when it came to the Chinese threat, India had no qualms in seeking help from other countries, the holy grail of non-alignment not withstanding.

                      It is foolhardy to expect the Americans to take on the Chinese for the sake of the Indians. But American help in creating a defensive shield can free the IAF's offensive resources to deal with Chinese aggression.

                      There is unlikely to be any fallout on India-Russia relations since Russia is well aware that ultimately the Chinese aim is to grab vast fertile areas of the Amur basin in the Russian Far East. In the long term, China poses a greater threat to Russia than India.

                      Like in 1971, the ever pragmatic Chinese are likely to become extremely cautious on the Indian border once we have defensive help from the US.

                      After all, once we signed the peace treaty with the then Soviet Union, China did not lift a finger to help its 'Iron Brother' Pakistan during the 1971 War.
                      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


                      • Some inferences:

                        M K Bhadrakumar - Communist stooge, previous IFS, writes anti-America articles.
                        Colonel Anil Athale - Pro-America.
                        Major Ajai Shukla - Congress stooge, writes troll articles even about defence, which hint at Congress is/was better than the BJP.
                        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


                        • 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

                            US talks with China, process initiated by Pakistan, sidelines Russia. Taiwan is replaced by China as a permanent member of the P5. (1970-71)

                            Reversible process. Needs a lot of diplomatic wrangling. First, all western democracies should acknowledge Taiwan as heir opponent to people's China.
                            US talks with Russia, process initiated by India, sidelines China. China is replaced by Taiwan as a permanent member of the P5. (20XX-XX)

                            Or, we can hope India is seen as the legitimate country from Asia seeking a P5 seat. Then,
                            US talks with Russia, process initiated by India, sidelines China. China is replaced by India as a permanent member of the P5. (20XX-XX)
                            Soviets were a superpower. Superpower means able to project power anywhere on the globe. On top of that they had an ideology to spread.

                            China can't project power to the same extent and has no ideology to spread. They aren't the same nature of threat.

                            If the USN can handle China's fleet on its own then the Russians aren't required. Not yet anyway.

                            The part i would like to see is some sort of rapprochement between the US & Russia.

                            But Ukraine is in the way. Vlad isn't going to leave the Crimea. So US - Russia relations are going to be estranged for some time to come.

                            The second problem is Russia's meddling with the US political system. How long will it take the Dems to get over that.

                            Originally posted by Oracle View Post
                            I have ordered some weed after 2 decades. Maybe this is that weed talking. Not smoked yet. Good sh!t comes from Burma.

                            Peace!!!
                            If its anything like Thai then it should be quite gentle : )

                            Comment


                            • This is the part i was waiting for

                              There is unlikely to be any fallout on India-Russia relations since Russia is well aware that ultimately the Chinese aim is to grab vast fertile areas of the Amur basin in the Russian Far East. In the long term, China poses a greater threat to Russia than India.
                              This question needs to be clarified first.

                              Comment


                              • WHAT A LOAD OF CROCK!

                                The Chinese retreated in 1962 because their LOC collapsed. Not because of a pending US threat.

                                Did the idiot forget the USS ENTERPRISE and the Bay of Bengal?

                                Of course, this idiot never considered that the Soviet Treaty, to this day, made India an American nuclear targtet. (Don't jump up and down, it's just standard practice for any nukes not under American leadership ... and that includes Pakistan).

                                Lastly, during the Cold War, no one relied on Chinese products or Chinese money. Does anyone actually think India can do without either? Can India actually fight a trade war with China?
                                Chimo

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X