... someone also took Hypocrisy 101.
Yes, clearly, you're the only non-arrogant one here.
Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
... someone also took Hypocrisy 101.
Yes, clearly, you're the only non-arrogant one here.
Firstly there is zero proof of 1000 sq km is lost as 900 of that is in Depsang and so far despite dozens of satellite images no proof has emerged of any presence of Chinese troops in those 900 sq km in Depsang (between PP10-14)
As for the other 100 Galwan valley and hotsprings has been cleared as both agreed to buffer zones. That only leave Pangong F4-F8 which was never controlled by India. The fact that China builg a wide metalled road in F4-F8 in 1999 proves my claims.
I agree. My last 2 cents before I move on.
It is public opinion that has to be motivated to fight a war. Russia could afford to loose 20 million lives in World War 2 and China lost 15 million lives during the Japanese occupation and civil war. India is trying to build exactly such a public opinion to fight a war.
Agree. There is a difference. India wants to be like Israel where a limited production capacity is bolstered by a massive infusion of war material from a powerful ally, Britain relied on the USA to fight Germany and North Korea relied on the Soviet Union and China in a similar manner. So ideology + manpower + a powerful ally ensuring unlimited supplies is a potent combination.
A good assessment. No nation survives very long on extremist ideology. India is no exception.
Any distorted radical religious ideology whether it is Islam, Hinduism, or the Buddhist based Code of the Bushido spells disaster. Which is why an atheist secular state is the best solution to stability . This is some thing India is not likely to achieve in the foreseeable future.
All you need to do is look at Chinese official maps of the area in any Chinese atlas. You will see that Mukhpari, Rechin La ridges on which India now has troops are within Chinese side of border as per Chinese maps published prior to 2020 too.
I agree with your assessment about public opinion, but I think there is a major difference to be addressed... the problem with using Russia/soviets in WW2 and China during Japanese occupation as comparison, is that there was a massive impetus in the form of a massive invasion... by Germans and Japanese respectively... it’s unlikely such an invasion scenario will be initiated by China on India, to give the Indians the impetus... no matter how much hate the Indians have for China I don’t see them having the same zealot motivation should India be the aggressor, at least not the majority of Indians.
I agree to some extent... but the problem here is with the powerful ally part... The US isn’t really in that sort of a position at current times and China is too integrated into the world economy. There is also the difference in scenario here... The US joined WW2 because of Japan’s attack on pearl harbour and saw the need to defend itself thus entering the war... in the current state of affairs the US can’t justify the massive give away of war materials if China doesn’t attack the US directly... Plus India doesn’t really have the financial power to buy all the war materials needed...
As for the North Korean scenario it was US hubris that forced China into the war, whereas the Soviet at the time were defending like-minded nations... their motivations were different.
I can see the US providing limited support but not in the scale we are talking about. Perhaps sending some ammo, missiles and guns and checking China on the eastern side and that’s about it. It’s unlikely to be too much and certainly not a direct shooting war...
Again, I agree to large extent, but I don’t think atheist secular state is the only way, just that a religious state requires a lot more management and moderation... tho I do believe a religious state might be too easy to manipulate on religious ground. Btw I am not religious myself.
escobar
Brigadier
That is the goal of every country. It's how everyone tries to reach their goal that differs
I do not waste time talking about thing like "Anti-china" or "pro-china" or "Anti-US" or "pro-India"
All of these things only have value for a certain time because a "anti" of today could become "pro" of tomorrow.
China went from pro-URSS/anti-US to pro-US/anti-URSS to pro-Russia/anti-US now.
I contend that China, US and India are fundamentally in power struggle. All the rest to see who is right or wrong is theater.
India could become pro-china tomorrow if their interests intersect.
China may not fear India's development but China don't want India to become US ally. China don't really like the QUAD thing.
So again power struggle
It's your understanding, not mine.
escobar
Brigadier
Some Indian will tell you that one of the reason China did not settle the land border issue with India is because China first want to be sure that India will not become an US ally. And that China recent military actions on the border are the result of the fact that China sees that India inexorably allies with the USA. So you can have all the arguments you think are right, but it does not matter.
I agree with this analysis. The current standoff is China "stress-testing" Sino-Indian relationship to confirm their hypothesis on the coming U.S.-Indian alliance, and the relationship didn't survive the test. A good idea too. If India will inexorably ally with the U.S., it's better to know it early instead of allowing India to benefit by first playing both sides then later ally with the U.S.
Note that the China-ASEAN ties survived the stress test. China should now push for more China-ASEAN economic cooperation. Chinese tech companies understood this and switched their efforts from India back to ASEAN (well India government certainly helped them in reaching the decision).
Holy crap 30 drones for $3 bil? Is a MQ-9 really as capable as 2 Mig29s?
Different mission sets - you’re comparing a very capable ISR platform with sophisticated technology to a fighter plane that’s been around the block for a while.
Eyes in the sky can transform the battlefield, plus the Reaper drone has proven to be quite effective performing the close air support mission... all while not having to risk a pilot being shot down/captured
- Status