Ladakh Flash Point

Status
Not open for further replies.
Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
twineedle said:
So the only arguement to counter the satellite image from late july(not June) well after the disengagement, is that it COULD have been removed before winter? Sounds pretty desperate lol. So far, no evidence has been presented that India did not have a camp 500 meters from pp14. This is supported even more by the network of foot bridges over the river recently constructed by India in the disputed area, facilitating patrols.
Click to expand...
Bold 1 :

The onus is on the claimant. Multiple posts regurgitating the same really gives.

Real desperation is using satellite images long before winter to allege that there is a post 500m from LAC and therefore India patrols. That too during and long after disengagement has been concluded by creating buffer zones (as reported by Indian media).

Using shoddy singular "evidence" to go against the popular narrative means you have an agenda. The best way out is to submit evidence of patrols (by other types of evidences).

Bold 2 : Ah, so it's upto those who disagree to submit evidences for something you speculate.

Nice.

Refer previous posts rather than vomit all over.
 
Last edited:
T

twineedle

Junior Member
Registered Member
The facts speak for themselves. Still no evidence has been presented discrediting the evidence.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281829922168659969


And this was taken in mid july, after the disengagment. So there is no reason why that staus whould change until physical conditions necessitated it, such as during winter.
And yes, the onus is on the accuser. Since other members are accusing the images I presented, of being wrong, the onus is on them to to convincingly discredit them. Yet nobody has.



I guess Indian soldiers simply teleported 500 meters from pp14, set up a camp, built all that infrastructure still lasting today, because according to some, there has been no patrolling despite the fact there is clear eveidence of at least one encampment, Following that logic, Indian patrols could have gone past pp14 and set up a camp tehre before it was detected by satellites.

And at least I am providing evidence. Nobody has provided any evidence of a Chinese victory other than shoddy Indian media articles , which have already been disproven by satellite imagery.
 
Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
twineedle said:
The facts speak for themselves. Still no evidence has been presented discrediting the evidence.


And yes, the onus is on the accuser. Since other members are accusing the images I presented, of being wrong, the onus is on them to to convincingly discredit them. Yet nobody has.



And at least I am providing evidence. Nobody has provided any evidence of a Chinese victory other than shoddy Indian media articles , which have already been disproven by satellite imagery.
Click to expand...
Bold 1: No they don't. Facts and speculations are two different things.

Bold 2: Its for all here to see your attempts to pull something out of thin air. Your original claim is "See the satellite image from June-July? It shows Indian post 500m away . That means India patrols."
Can't you see the errors in your argument? The claimant here needs to provide supporting evidences besides just showing, from what is hinted, as some posts (of unknown status) .

Even if they are active posts, it needs other evidence to prove they are patrolling from them.

I was waiting for you to cité that satellite image again.

Can I claim that Chinese has been patrolling from what is alleged to be Chinese posts 800m away? My claim is good as yours.

All this for what, btw? All it does is muddy the waters regarding Disengagement agreement.

The original claimant hasn't provided enough evidences to substantiate the claims. The claimant merely speculates. And then the claimant proceeds to demand evidences from those that raises suspicion.

How wonderful.

Bold 3 : Your evidences aren't solid. Shoddy evidences can be succinctly countered by shoddy evidences.

Seek medical help.
Refer previous posts (again).
 
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
twineedle said:
The facts speak for themselves. Still no evidence has been presented discrediting the evidence.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281829922168659969


And this was taken in mid july, after the disengagment. So there is no reason why that staus whould change until physical conditions necessitated it, such as during winter.
And yes, the onus is on the accuser. Since other members are accusing the images I presented, of being wrong, the onus is on them to to convincingly discredit them. Yet nobody has.



I guess Indian soldiers simply teleported 500 meters from pp14, set up a camp, built all that infrastructure still lasting today, because according to some, there has been no patrolling despite the fact there is clear eveidence of at least one encampment, Following that logic, Indian patrols could have gone past pp14 and set up a camp tehre before it was detected by satellites.

And at least I am providing evidence. Nobody has provided any evidence of a Chinese victory other than shoddy Indian media articles , which have already been disproven by satellite imagery.
Click to expand...

Why is this supposed to be proof of? That PLA was never in India's side of the Y Junction? Apart from removing India from patrolling and camping at the bend?

Because if that is your point, yes PLA never occupied this part of India for long. This is bilaterally recognised as Indian territory.

China was not happy that Indian Army constantly patrolled here and made camps here. This place was also the site of the violent clash in June. Or at least thereabouts around the Galwan river. Clearly China contends against Indian build up of infrastructure, forces, and increased patrol at this point. Despite it being recognised by China as Indian land, IA's build up in this vicinity is a stone's throw away from China's side.
 
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
India's increased and deeper patrols was what set off China into starting this confrontation with PLA occupying Indian claims at Pangong. The backdrop of increased Indian build up towards the LAC was one of increasing hostility, traveling away from previous agreements to "not antagonise each other", and perfectly summed up with Indian contention with Chinese interests wrt CPEC and bilateral discussions between Bhutan and China.

Galwan valley going towards Y junction is a part of the Indian claim at Pangong. It's that region covered between the light-pink dotted and dotted line + solid blue red line. The entire section was part of the recent conflict and further north at the Y Junction PLA has less room to maneuver. The bend is was first occupied by IA and then PLA. PLA moved out when the riverbank flooded. But what is this proof of exactly?

Aksai_Chin_Sino-Indian_border_map.png
 
W

Waqar Khan

Junior Member
Registered Member
Mt1701d said:
I don’t understand how this is supposed to prove that Indian patrols didn’t go up to finger 8... and the point is not regular patrols... it is that there were patrols and that there was the perceived right to patrol on the Indian side, and Chinese side for that matter, if these 2 conditions have changed since the disengagement agreement then the situation is by definition not status quo ante... I also don’t know why you think Nitin Gokhale is a ‘good’ analyst... his ‘analysis’ if you can even call it that are extremely bias... there is practically no objectivity in his work at all...


Now on to what the retired Col. S. Dinny said and if you go to the video at 7:47 - 8:10 he specifically said and I quote:


Following this they continue to discuss the patrols and how the disengagement which includes the agreement of no patrols will be good for peace and tranquillity etc... and then go on to assert how this will strengthen Indian claim on the area, I assume they mean finger 4-8, without really giving any reason other than the Chinese agreeing to moving back after which they move onto other related topics... I have no idea how this ‘analyst’ can even be considered an analyst he literally just says what his audience wants to hear and find whatever little morsel of info to back it up without really considering the bigger picture whatsoever...

I advice everyone to listen to that little bit on the timestamps I pointed out... the discussion was painful to listen to and you will find yourself asking why a lot... just delusional arguments after delusional arguments...
Click to expand...
Indian army is the 3rd largest in the world,an its crying like a baby between finger 4 and 8,the Godi media thinks Modi has a chest of 56 inch,just absurd
 
W

Waqar Khan

Junior Member
Registered Member
Mt1701d said:
I don’t understand how this is supposed to prove that Indian patrols didn’t go up to finger 8... and the point is not regular patrols... it is that there were patrols and that there was the perceived right to patrol on the Indian side, and Chinese side for that matter, if these 2 conditions have changed since the disengagement agreement then the situation is by definition not status quo ante... I also don’t know why you think Nitin Gokhale is a ‘good’ analyst... his ‘analysis’ if you can even call it that are extremely bias... there is practically no objectivity in his work at all...


Now on to what the retired Col. S. Dinny said and if you go to the video at 7:47 - 8:10 he specifically said and I quote:


Following this they continue to discuss the patrols and how the disengagement which includes the agreement of no patrols will be good for peace and tranquillity etc... and then go on to assert how this will strengthen Indian claim on the area, I assume they mean finger 4-8, without really giving any reason other than the Chinese agreeing to moving back after which they move onto other related topics... I have no idea how this ‘analyst’ can even be considered an analyst he literally just says what his audience wants to hear and find whatever little morsel of info to back it up without really considering the bigger picture whatsoever...

I advice everyone to listen to that little bit on the timestamps I pointed out... the discussion was painful to listen to and you will find yourself asking why a lot... just delusional arguments after delusional arguments...
Click to expand...
This remark about Whole of Government approach adopted by India is absurd,all states use Whole of the Government approach,always in peace,war and crises..so what did India do by adopting an SOP..not understood
 
L

lgnxz

Junior Member
Registered Member
twineedle said:
Sounds pretty desperate lol. So far, no evidence has been presented that India did not have a camp 500 meters from pp14. This is supported even more by the network of foot bridges over the river recently constructed by India in the disputed area, facilitating patrols.
Click to expand...
So you basically have all the statistical advantages at the galwan valley yet still somehow lost the June clash?? Is this supposed to be a good look for india? Another 'W' for india I guess, standard of winning for indians have always been strange, so this one is no exception.

Also who really cares about these distances? This is a typical dick-measuring contest of meaningless numbers that indians love to entertain. The June 15 clash is more than enough of a proof that distance of your camp to pp14 doesn't mean a thing, your soldiers are still dead from hypothermia due do 1, their cowardice during its rout after starting to lose the fight, and 2, bad logistics and overall capability that to noone' surprise is more complex than just muh superior camp distance lmao.

Time and time again it has been shown that PLA and china have modernized, it's all about quality-wise now, not quantity. In fingers area as well you have permanent base in finger 3, way closer to finger 4 compared to China's in finger 8, yet China is able to control most of the contested LAC with faster deployment, better logistics line, better infrastructure build up, and many more. Same goes for the early phase leading to the galwan clash, india has the attacking initiative, PLA's camp to pp14 is farther away, doesn't has numerical advantage, yet still smash you out splendidly.
 
A

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
twineedle said:
And at least I am providing evidence. Nobody has provided any evidence of a Chinese victory other than shoddy Indian media articles , which have already been disproven by satellite imagery.
Click to expand...
Ok I'll bite.

China has produced plenty of evidence of what happened - the 20 dead Indian soldiers including a colonel. 10 Indian soldiers captured. The Chinese felt sorry for your soldiers and saved many of their lives in the middle of a battle.

They released a video showing your soldiers running for their lives from a smaller group of Chinese armed with STICKS.

Indians have claimed they killed 40+ Chinese soldiers. Why haven't the Indians released any video evidence of it? Not a single photo.

No one cares about what bridges you built. You can build all the bridges anywhere you like in India. You lost the fight.

Chinese went easy on you on with the peace treaty. I agree with that.

It's like Germany claiming they won WW2 because the allies didn't punish them as hard as they did in WW1.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top