Ladakh Flash Point

twineedle · Mar 9, 2021

Galwan isn't one of the areas where India claims beyond the 1962 status quo. Multiple sources support that
And why should one soldier be taken more seriously over the other? Raj is a retired intelligence officer, he definitely knows India's claim lines and different interpretations of lac. And he by no means "supports the governmetn narrative" on all points.

And Brig RJS did not even say pp14 was not at the bend. He simply said they patrolled 5-6 km past the mouth. THe bend is 5 km from the mouth. And he himself isn't even exactly sure where he patrolled(not surpirsingly, considering it has been over 4 decades since he was last there).

There is no old and new pp14, just the pp14 that everyone but Ajai SHukla uses.

And you have still failed to provide evidence of India losing territory it had previously controlled. Following your logic, one could claim that China lost territory, since China says it has always claimed the entire Galwan Valley, including the parts which has always and still is under Indian control.

Xizor · Mar 9, 2021

twineedle said:
China has posts at the y junction since at least 2000. How can India lose what it never controlled? By your logic, China is aloso denied access to 1000 km because China also claims beyond the lac but is blocked by Indian troops from burtse.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1292100480315740160

Bold 1 :

Read it properly.
It says Near the Y-junction.

Many posts have discussed new Chinese construction past decades towards the Y junction.

Bold 2: China expands the claim everytime as India tries to intrude. No intrusion, no expansion.

lgnxz · Mar 9, 2021

Let's just get this clear and finish already, after the clash happened, do you admit that the LAC has "moved" ahead of China's territory of not? @twineedle

Again, same satellite photo from your favorite source maxar. Chinese defensive positions, AHEAD of what indian perceived to be the LAC, or the old LAC, call it whatever you want. How do you still deny it given the existence of such evidence??

And please do not regress the discussion back to muh camp distance or muh PLA withdrawal, we finished that already with the comparison to 1962.

twineedle · Mar 9, 2021

Xsizor said:
Bold 1 :

Read it properly.
It says Near the Y-junction.

Many posts have discussed new Chinese construction past decades towards the Y junction.

Bold 2: China expands the claim everytime as India tries to intrude. No intrusion, no expansion.

Yes, China has expanded upon its previous posts and infrastructure near the Y junction. India responded with a mirror deployment. Shouldn't that be obvious by now?

twineedle · Mar 9, 2021

lgnxz said:
Let's just get this clear and finish already, after the clash happened, do you admit that the LAC has "moved" ahead of China's territory of not? @twineedle View attachment 69669
Again, same satellite photo from your favorite source maxar. Chinese defensive positions, AHEAD of what indian perceived to be the LAC, or the old LAC, call it whatever you want. How do you still deny it given the existence of such evidence??

And please do not regress the discussion back to muh camp distance or muh PLA withdrawal, we finished that already with the comparison to 1962.

Are those camps still there? If not, then that is irrelevant. The only reason I am discussing Galwan pre disengagment is becasue some members seem confused about clearly defined locations.

And are you finally admitting that China claims the entire valley?

And are you saying that China is occupying any territory claimed by India in Galwan? Because that is what is currently being debated, and is something I have alreday disproven

twineedle · Mar 9, 2021

twineedle said:
Galwan isn't one of the areas where India claims beyond the 1962 status quo. Multiple sources support that
And why should one soldier be taken more seriously over the other? Raj is a retired intelligence officer, he definitely knows India's claim lines and different interpretations of lac. And he by no means "supports the governmetn narrative" on all points.

And Brig RJS did not even say pp14 was not at the bend. He simply said they patrolled 5-6 km past the mouth. THe bend is 5 km from the mouth. And he himself isn't even exactly sure where he patrolled(not surpirsingly, considering it has been over 4 decades since he was last there).

There is no old and new pp14, just the pp14 that everyone but Ajai SHukla uses.

Xizor · Mar 9, 2021

twineedle said:
And even if you believe India had patrolled up to f8, it clearly happened much less than China patrolling to finger2/3, meaning that the area was already under the effective control of China, even though China never reinforced that control through physical occupation until last year.

In exchange for getting China to stop violating its claim line through patrols as it had frequently been doing the past decade and destroying strategic infrastructure, India withdrew mirror deployments near finger 4 and gave up patrolling rights it never had.

And what makes you think VK Singh was reffering to Pangong? He was simply refferring to the entire lac. I already said that likely means areas where India enjoys tactical advantages. North Pangong is not one of them. For example recently, there was a video of Indian soldiers on the chinese side of the lac in Arunachal. A purposefully disambiguous statement is by no means evidence of recent Indian patrols to finger 8.

India has not had access to finger 8 because PLA soldiers use the road they build in 2000 to block the botttleneck of finger 4. THere are several videos of confrontations between Indian and Chinese troops there, in 2017 and 2019. But I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that.

BTW, it is interesting that Brig RJS' testimony is taken to be completely true, even though he hasn't served there since the 70s, even though not a single other Indian or non-indian source backs him up, and even when he does not even dispute Indian media claims. Yet Col Dinny, who recently served on Pangong, is accused of lying for the Indian government.

I thought we already agreed and/or agreed to disagree on most of these topics?

Bold 1: Frequency of PA rol doesn't hinge on Patrol agreements. It hinges on ability of the mity to conduct them.

Bold 2: High frequency nch if patrols doesn't mean China effectively controls a region.

Bold 3: So India weak?

Bold 4: Sure He can use that excuse. It was raised in the forum that possibility. But his original remarks were in the backdrop of Ladakh Conflict. So...

Bold 5: OH, you are indeed reading my posts. Good. Go back and read it again. I have posted about the area In South Tibet/Arunachal where they were "intruding".

The fact that Chinese reporters were there photographing them tells that Chinese civilians are there in Arunachal.

Bold 6: Bottlenecks are for armoured columns and mechanized infantry. For troop patrols, if you are intend on reaching a patrol point, you can take other paths (Assuming China indeed "blocked")

Bold 7: Since the 90s. Ajai Shukla does back him up.
Col Dinny may not be lying. Indian government lies for them.
------
Indian government : That dog isn't a dog anymore, it's a cat.

Dinny : Yes. That dog is a cat from now on.

Xizor · Mar 9, 2021

twineedle said:
Are those camps still there? If not, then that is irrelevant. The only reason I am discussing Galwan pre disengagment is becasue some members seem confused about clearly defined locations.

And are you finally admitting that China claims the entire valley?

Bold 1: Better question - does it follow this map?

If 'yes'. Print "Fail".

Bold 2: Members here are confused indeed because Indian government lied to its people to minimize damages so as to survive the democracy hurdles.

Bold 3: China has started hinting about it. Indeed. Indian actions at Galwan has forced China to consider claiming the entirety (since it gained it in 1962 but decided to not embarrass the other side further and
Since it realized that India is belligerent)

lgnxz · Mar 9, 2021

twineedle said:
Are those camps still there? If not, then that is irrelevant. The only reason I am discussing Galwan pre disengagment is becasue some members seem confused about clearly defined locations.

And are you finally admitting that China claims the entire valley?

Really, you want to cope and go back to the 1962 war comparison again??

Please, withdrawal doesn't matter. PLA has voluntarily withdrew itself much further on many occasions despite winning the battle way harder, general consensus still consider it to be the victor. How hard is it for you to grasp this holy moly...?

You admit that June 15 is a win for China, that should be the end of the matter. LAC has changed (or to be more precise, the false perception from India has been busted, China's perception has always been correct and never changes), that's literally it. Noone is challenging you about disengagement that happened.

twineedle · Mar 9, 2021

I am following the map that always existed, and which the Indian government has always followed.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And the maps that almost every Indian and non-Indian source has used

BTW, the bend is between 5-6 km from the mouth, as Brig RJS said.

Ladakh Flash Point

twineedle

Junior Member

Xizor

Captain

lgnxz

Junior Member

twineedle

Junior Member

twineedle

Junior Member

twineedle

Junior Member

Xizor

Captain

Xizor

Captain

lgnxz

Junior Member

twineedle

Junior Member