Lol posting this Chinese vloggers video that's actually BEEN BANNED IN INDIA DUE TO A COMPLAINT BY AN INDIAN is sort of amusing to say the least. I wasn't aware that Indians speak Mandarin as well.
What do you mean by "many little pink Chinese"
Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
What do you mean by "many little pink Chinese"
Mend your eyes, ears, and mind dear. That YouTube link is of Indian origin, from India, and made by Indians like yourself, dear.
There's nothing to "mend" since the link ain't exactly broken.
I refute it in all righteousness.
When taking jibes at someone and coming up with your habitual India-expert essays, it's rather unadvisable to cite rather malicious sources which hold little to no water regarding the actual truth whatsoever. But I guess you have plenty of straws lying around to build your narrative.
Regarding as to why it's obviously not an HGV is the mere absense of official MoD press release and more so that it was in fact a night-time fire, something quite characteristic for Indian ICBM-readiness launches whose NOTAM had been well notified before this recent border flare up and not a cheap show-of-force which you guys do by harming aquatic life.
That's actually an excellent video commentary on this incident. It's impressive how much information can be gleamed from a few seconds of footage.
The video released clearly wasn't serious enough to cause multiple injuries as reported by Indians. It must have been an earlier clash.
That's a rationale and fair response regarding your comment about the alleged HGV tested in India. However, I didn't come with such imagination but rather your own folks, and I posted that video link to show how absurd SOME of your folks think and how persavive, not to mention corrosive it is that actually affects the whole China - India debate.
The statement from officials (retired and non-retired) on both sides show who loves to talk nonsense about the recent unfortunate border scuffle. Your media is already hyperventilating on the need to teach China a lesson with ridiculous and fantastical proposals grounded in fairy tale. Yet, you come here trying to lecture me about making a straw man argument when it's your own country's prevailing and pervasive anti-China attitude that's been calcified during the many decades of b.s. about India gifting China the U.N. seat when it was never India's to give. The b.s. that China back stabbed India in 1962 when the border issue should have been discussed and heard what Zhou Enlai proposed with respect to the UNDEFINED boundaries, a belief that was also held by the prior government of then Republic of China (KMT).
So don't come here and act high and mighty dear, because frankly you don't have any moral authority, the integrity and credibility to stand on.
Best response from China here needs to start with covert support of dozen or so seperatist movements. If India is going to proactively interfere in internal Chinese affairs and territory, it's only fair China responds in kind. Then they need to keep receiving slaps until they improve their behaviour.
The vomit and diarrhea posted here isn't even 0.01% of the shit that goes on there.
The vomit and diarrhea posted here isn't even 0.01% of the shit that goes on there.
To be fair, the PLA Navy has already formulated proper plans for the Chinese carrier programme in the early 2000s through Project 048:
First step - 1st decade (2010s) - 2x conventionally-powered STOBAR large-sized carriers;
Second step - 2nd decade (2020s) - 2x conventionally-powered CATOBAR supercarriers; and
Third step - Afterwards (2030 onwards) - (At least) 4x nuclear-powered CATOBAR supercarriers.
Meanwhile, the Indian Navy has nothing that resembles such planning at this point of time.
Besides, the following:
A - China only started the process of:
1. Retrofiting the former Varyag, i.e. CV-16 Liaoning in 2008, when China already has a GDP of 4.6 trillion USD;
2. Laying down the keel of her first indigenously-built carrier, i.e. CV-17 Shandong in 2015, when China already has a GDP of 11.1 trillion USD; and
3. Laying down the keel of her first CATOBAR supercarrier, i.e. CV-18 Fujian in (probably) 2017, when China already has a GDP of 12.31 trillion USD.
B - Meanwhile, compared to India, as they started the process of:
1. Retrofitting the former Admiral Gorshkov, i.e. Vikramaditya in Russia in 2004, when India has a GDP of 0.71 trillion USD; and
2. Laying fown the keel of her first indigenously-built carrier, i.e. Vikrant in 2009, when India has a GDP of 1.3 trillion USD.
Even if India started laying down IAC-2 Vishal before the end of this year, i.e. 2022, India would have a GDP of 3.4 trillion USD.
In all 3 instances, India has smaller GDPs than China.
Besides, despite not being absolute and definite, the economic size of any country corresponds and correlates well with the its industrial might (and R&D output). As we have seen, the economy of India hasn't even achieved the size of China's economy when they started the work on their carriers.
Simply put, India's industrial might (and R&D output) simply couldn't completely support a proper carrier construction without considerable dependence on (especially key) foreign components and technology, and were unable to completely support a proper carrier construction without facing significant delays and compromises.
To be fair, China has begun their work on aircraft carriers as early as the 1970s with Project 707 (light carrier) and Project 891 (medium carrier). Yet, because the Chinese government had to put the development, growth and modernization of the nation's economy, industry and people's lifelihood as her top priorities with a very limited budget, much of the Chinese treasury had to be directed away from the military.
This resulted in sh1t tons of military projects to be scrapped, including both the 707 and 891 projects.
Why, you asked? Because China of that period simply didn't have enough money to spare for the military. Only from the late 2000s and 2010s onwards, when China finally has enough money in her wallet to allow embarking on massive reform and expansion efforts across the PLA.
There needs to be a step-by-step process of upgrading and enlarging one's military in accordance to the present situation of one's country, taking domestic and foreign conditions into account. You just can't keep yelling "India 5 trillion dollar economy 2025 so India should build a 70 thousand ton nuclear supercarrier" - Simply because that's not how things work.
First step - 1st decade (2010s) - 2x conventionally-powered STOBAR large-sized carriers;
Second step - 2nd decade (2020s) - 2x conventionally-powered CATOBAR supercarriers; and
Third step - Afterwards (2030 onwards) - (At least) 4x nuclear-powered CATOBAR supercarriers.
Meanwhile, the Indian Navy has nothing that resembles such planning at this point of time.
Besides, the following:
A - China only started the process of:
1. Retrofiting the former Varyag, i.e. CV-16 Liaoning in 2008, when China already has a GDP of 4.6 trillion USD;
2. Laying down the keel of her first indigenously-built carrier, i.e. CV-17 Shandong in 2015, when China already has a GDP of 11.1 trillion USD; and
3. Laying down the keel of her first CATOBAR supercarrier, i.e. CV-18 Fujian in (probably) 2017, when China already has a GDP of 12.31 trillion USD.
B - Meanwhile, compared to India, as they started the process of:
1. Retrofitting the former Admiral Gorshkov, i.e. Vikramaditya in Russia in 2004, when India has a GDP of 0.71 trillion USD; and
2. Laying fown the keel of her first indigenously-built carrier, i.e. Vikrant in 2009, when India has a GDP of 1.3 trillion USD.
Even if India started laying down IAC-2 Vishal before the end of this year, i.e. 2022, India would have a GDP of 3.4 trillion USD.
In all 3 instances, India has smaller GDPs than China.
Besides, despite not being absolute and definite, the economic size of any country corresponds and correlates well with the its industrial might (and R&D output). As we have seen, the economy of India hasn't even achieved the size of China's economy when they started the work on their carriers.
Simply put, India's industrial might (and R&D output) simply couldn't completely support a proper carrier construction without considerable dependence on (especially key) foreign components and technology, and were unable to completely support a proper carrier construction without facing significant delays and compromises.
To be fair, China has begun their work on aircraft carriers as early as the 1970s with Project 707 (light carrier) and Project 891 (medium carrier). Yet, because the Chinese government had to put the development, growth and modernization of the nation's economy, industry and people's lifelihood as her top priorities with a very limited budget, much of the Chinese treasury had to be directed away from the military.
This resulted in sh1t tons of military projects to be scrapped, including both the 707 and 891 projects.
Why, you asked? Because China of that period simply didn't have enough money to spare for the military. Only from the late 2000s and 2010s onwards, when China finally has enough money in her wallet to allow embarking on massive reform and expansion efforts across the PLA.
There needs to be a step-by-step process of upgrading and enlarging one's military in accordance to the present situation of one's country, taking domestic and foreign conditions into account. You just can't keep yelling "India 5 trillion dollar economy 2025 so India should build a 70 thousand ton nuclear supercarrier" - Simply because that's not how things work.
Last edited:
Forget about that CCP talk dude...India is well ahead of China and will become the hegemon on the entire region with the help and assistance from America and their bazillion ethnic Indian based C.E.O.s as SOME of the Indian netizens would have us believed. Planning are for Commies, ad hoc and chest thumping are for democracy loving people.
Historically, the Naga ethnic group in Northeast India has worked with China. Insurgent activity in Northeast India has greatly diminished over the past 5 years. I do not believe it would be effective to reignite insurgencies in India's Northeast. The region is a marginal part of India. To Indians in Delhi, the Northeast doesn't feel like India and insurgency in those lands while serious do not feel dangerous and do not hit close to home.
I urge everyone interested in strategy for countering India to spend at least 30 minutes reading about the Khalistan (Sikhs) movement and the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi. Trust me, it will be well worth your time. In the minds of Indian government officials in Delhi, the Khalistan movement is by far the most dangerous out of dozens of secession movements in India. In the 1980s, Sikhs were about a 1/4 of the Indian Army officer corps. It is way lower now, however Sikhs remain an integral part of the Indian Army and are prominent in national affairs and government administration. You can imagine the feeling among Indians of their nation being torn apart in 1984 when thousands of cousins to Sikhs Army officers were slaughtered on the streets of the capital.
The Khalistan movement has been gathering momentum again because so many Punjabis (half of the population of Punjab is Sikh) have moved to Ontario where they have free reign to organize and are helped by Pakistani intelligence. The farm protests that rocked Delhi in 2020-21 were led at first by Punjabi Sikhs and had the effect of driving Sikhs towards Khalistan sympathy. If we want to ignite a secession movement in India, this is definitely the best choice.
Welcome back Richard Santos.