Ladakh Flash Point

twineedle said:

So what counts as evidence then? He has presented no evidence to counter my arguements, only Indian media articles from dubious sources.

Click to expand...

Your evidence needs no countering.

Using satellite images from March, analyzed by foreigners to paint a rosy picture for you and your Modi party is your toil.

I provide counters from Indian media which go against these so called evidences of yours.

---

Your insistence that India patrols even after creation of buffer zone of 3km upto winter, using satellite images from March (that shows posts in proximity) and then trying to show that these alleged patrols amount to some victory and furthermore demanding that other members here entertain you by rebutting it is just asinine.

I merely showed Indian media reports of a disengagement completion with 3km buffer zone created.

---

You don't even realize the flaw in your approach using March satellite images -

1. If Indian patrolled after disengagement then that means India violated it.

2. If India patrols for a brief time, as you allege, then that means China also patrolled. You haven't provided evidence to prove China didn't patrol.

3. The reality is, as per disengagement, both India and China can't patrol in the buffer zone.

---

Then there is this article on November, 2020 (winter) -

In the Galwan Valley too, the LAC “was effectively shifted by a kilometre (km) into India”. “The terms of disengagement, negotiated on June 30 between senior military commanders from both sides, regard the LAC as running through the so-called Y-Nallah Junction. This is one km inside India when compared with the LAC’s historical alignment next to Patrolling Point 14 (PP-14). The area in which PP-14 is located—and which the Indian Army has patrolled for decades—now effectively falls inside China’s buffer zone.”



>You view the original source of the above news, Ajai Shukla, a retired military officer as unreliable but is quick to worship foreign analysts whose details you don't know better.

However, I'm discounting the above news dated November 2020 because you are still stuck with arguing about some Satellite images from March-June 2020.

Xsizor said:

Your evidence needs no countering.

Using satellite images from March, analyzed by foreigners to paint a rosy picture for you and your Modi party is your toil.

I provide counters from Indian media which go against these so called evidences of yours.

---

Your insistence that India patrols even after creation of buffer zone of 3km upto winter, using satellite images from March (that shows posts in proximity) and then trying to show that these alleged patrols amount to some victory and furthermore demanding that other members here entertain you by rebutting it is just asinine.

I merely showed Indian media reports of a disengagement completion with 3km buffer zone created.

---

You don't even realize the flaw in your approach using March satellite images -

1. If Indian patrolled after disengagement then that means India violated it.

2. If India patrols for a brief time, as you allege, then that means China also patrolled. You haven't provided evidence to prove China didn't patrol.

3. The reality is, as per disengagement, both India and China can't patrol in the buffer zone.

---

Then there is this article on November, 2020 (winter) -

In the Galwan Valley too, the LAC “was effectively shifted by a kilometre (km) into India”. “The terms of disengagement, negotiated on June 30 between senior military commanders from both sides, regard the LAC as running through the so-called Y-Nallah Junction. This is one km inside India when compared with the LAC’s historical alignment next to Patrolling Point 14 (PP-14). The area in which PP-14 is located—and which the Indian Army has patrolled for decades—now effectively falls inside China’s buffer zone.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

>You view the original source of the above news, Ajai Shukla, a retired military officer as unreliable but is quick to worship foreign analysts whose details you don't know better.

However, I'm discounting the above news dated November 2020 because you are still stuck with arguing about some Satellite images from March-June 2020.

Click to expand...

The fact that you are using a dubious at best source shows your lack of credibility. First of all, Shukla is literally the only person saying that the lac does not run through the galwan river bend(pp14). So apparently he is right, and nearly every other analyst as well as google earth is wrong? And even if it is only temporary, the fact that India had a camp only 500 meters from teh lac disproves Shukla's claims. Obviously, both sides reduce activities in the winter. That should be obvious.

BTW, you are forgetting that the patrolling restrictions on both sides are TEMPORARY. That image I posted was released weeks after the disengagement deal, perhaps that was when India decided to resume normal patrolling ops. It is possible China could have resumed some patrolling as well, although there is no evidence supporting that.

The fact remains both sides moved back permanent camps about 1 km from the lac in Galwan, which means the LAC did not change despite China's attempts. However, it teh satellite imagery appears to show that once the situation there cooled down, it resumed normal patrolling and even set up temporary encampments to support those.

Do you have any hard evidence supporting Shukla's claims? Is there any reason you believe him over most other Indian and foreign analysts? Because like you, he has provided no evidence, and the available evidence clearly contradicts him.

Also, the fact that Abhijit Iyer's analysis of gogra(i assume those are the images from March you are referencing, since the Galwan images were released in July) is corroborated by recent imagery released days ago definitely supports the accuracy of the sources I have been consistently providing.

jfy1155 said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The fact that Indian MoD has not provided an update on this confrontation despite promising it would by the 16th of Feb, indicates that PLA may not disengage. This opens everyone up to more confrontation. Maybe the talks never really included settlement agreements for these other points of contention where India's gov played up the "PLA has left and we won" narrative a little too loudly and now facing some opposition auditing.

They included those points as part of recognising PLA cutting off IA patrol and access to Indian claims but there might be misrepresentation by the Indian gov in the gap between the PLA not even having crossed the LAC but has cut off India from the total extent of its claims. Which is a similar thing to Pangong where India could not access F4 to F8 stretch but claiming it. Could be one of these things anyway. PLA not crossing LAC but still cutting India off from its claims. The difference being no buffer seems to have been established for those zones yet.

twineedle said:

The fact that you are using a dubious at best source shows your lack of credibility. First of all, Shukla is literally the only person saying that the lac does not run through the galwan river bend(pp14). So apparently he is right, and nearly every other analyst as well as google earth is wrong? And even if it is only temporary, the fact that India had a camp only 500 meters from teh lac disproves Shukla's claims. Obviously, both sides reduce activities in the winter. That should be obvious.

BTW, you are forgetting that the patrolling restrictions on both sides are TEMPORARY. That image I posted was released weeks after the disengagement deal, perhaps that was when India decided to resume normal patrolling ops. It is possible China could have resumed some patrolling as well, although there is no evidence supporting that.

Click to expand...

A case of projection perhaps?
Your dated satellite images doesn't show patrols but posts. You insist that India "might" have patrolled before Winter.

Your quarrel is with that Retired Soldier then. You argue that he is wrong while you, a no-one, is right because he has went against the narrative you like based on some Freelance teenage satellite analyst.

You are literally speaking nonsense when you insist India had resumed patrols for a brief time while China didn't.

The shoddy evidence you use for that applies to China too. Pity, you can't see or is it that you chose not to see?
Hopefully, you'll get that cataract treated soon. It's pretty obvious to most here.

twineedle said:

However, it teh satellite imagery appears to show that once the situation there cooled down, it resumed normal patrolling and even set up temporary encampments to support those.

Click to expand...

Which satellite imagery shows resumption of patrols? Both sides have pulled back gradually.

You are insisting that no buffer zone exists. That in turn means no disengagement happened. Which in turn means all those articles talking about a disengagement are lies.

I've realized that there are two big sides in Twitter

• One is @detesfa_ Twitter handle which does OSINT satellite analysis.

• Another is Ajai Shukla (a retired soldier).

Jai Hind / bhakts support @detesfa_ because his minimal analysis and images are a good template to assert China was pushed back somehow (using what threats? War? Threat of more a Indian dead bodies?)

Ajai Shukla is portrayed as Anti Modi party.

However, I think Ajai Skukla is fiercely pro-India. He sees everything as black and white. Even if China stops Indian patrols, he assumes the worst and asserts that India lost land. He also views things along traditional Indian claim lines rather than Pre-Modi claim line or Post-Modi claim line.
So that explains his often irritating claims of 3-4 km lost and thousands of Chinese soldiers etc.

Its weird reading the Twitter threads. Many people disrespect this retired person. I think a case similar to Raj47 (although his case isn't that extreme).

Xsizor said:

Which satellite imagery shows resumption of patrols? Both sides have pulled back gradually.

You are insisting that no buffer zone exists. That in turn means no disengagement happened. Which in turn means all those articles talking about a disengagement are lies.

Click to expand...

You know the random twitter satellite screenshots proving that things move on the ground. Those prove his position despite Indian government and even Indian media are saying Pangong lake disengagement has made the entire disputed finger points as buffer and that PLA has yet to disengage at Depsang, Hot Springs, Gogra. I read that as currently occupying Indian claims at the least, if not occupying possibly beyond the LAC. Will wait until official Indian updates come out of this topic like the Indian government promised to back in mid Feb.

Xsizor said:

Which satellite imagery shows resumption of patrols? Both sides have pulled back gradually.

You are insisting that no buffer zone exists. That in turn means no disengagement happened. Which in turn means all those articles talking about a disengagement are lies.

Click to expand...

When did I say there is no disengagement? Disengagement means both sides pulling back which is what happened. However, the imagery I posted of CHINESE satellites seems to imply that China pulled back more.

And I have said it is possible China could have resumed patrolls like India did. It is just that there seems to be no visible evidence of that, such as the presence of encampments.

And you have hourself admitted the only reason you keep spamming that same blog is because Shukla confirms your preconceived notions. You have discredited sourcess by another former soldier S. Dinny and Indian analysts like Abhijit Iyer and Harsh Pant.

Keep reading Ajai Shukla if it makes you feel better. I prefer to look at actual facts.

And the fact is he has been proven wrong on his claim that the lac shifted multiple times.

ougoah said:

You know the random twitter satellite screenshots proving that things move on the ground. Those prove his position despite Indian government and even Indian media are saying Pangong lake disengagement has made the entire disputed finger points as buffer and that PLA has yet to disengage at Depsang, Hot Springs, Gogra. I read that as currently occupying Indian claims at the least, if not occupying possibly beyond the LAC. Will wait until official Indian updates come out of this topic like the Indian government promised to back in mid Feb.

Click to expand...

I don't know why you are so obsessed with those three, when it is clear that with regards to the former, there has been no changes since 2013, and in the latter two, China is not even occupying Indian claims. The LAC at Hot Springs an gogra is not disputed by India, though a small portion is by China. Disengagement talks there are for a mutual withdrawal of troops and new positions from both sides of the LAC>