India, China set to ink border pact to prevent face-off

[Chinese-Dragon]

As for "whining", instead of tent pitching, try to invade into our lands, and you will get an apt response.

Don't you remember 1962?

It was you who started hostilities with the Forward Policy.

In Chumar, you had the opportunity to start them again. By having guts and forcing the invaders out. But you didn't, even though you had several weeks to do so.

Also, you might calling it whining, but we call it being victim to an agressor, and we are rightly raising our voice against it. Just like when you Chinese got raped by Japanese, all you guys could do was "whine" (as per your choice of words).

Its what happens when you are being bullied by someone aggressive, but I dont see this "whining" as a sign of weakness.Just like I dont see the Chinese "whining" in Nanking as a sign of weakness, but something to be respected for someone who raised a voice against wrong.

Again, we never stopped fighting. Which is why we are now sitting on the UNSC as a permanent member and a victor of WW2.

India on the other hand, gave up easily. India was not even a country in 1945, which was why it didn't get a permanent seat.

You gave up without fighting, and now the history books write that the nation of India was first created by the British.

 

[anant_s]

An important point to note here is that unless both parties engage diplomatically with each other, rhetoric will keep going and one army intruding in other's area will not stop. I hope policy makers on both sides are mature enough to understand the importance of each other atleast from trade point of view. The very fact that borders issues have remained unsolved for last 60 odd years does however indicate that neither party is serious about solving them. In context of the chequerred past, it is indeed a postive development that some kind of agreement is being sought, may be both nations can build upon it for future permanent solution to these irritating issues.

 

[JayAtl]

Yes. It was not done on neutral territory, or Indian territory. Despite all the recent incursions, they were the ones who came to Beijing for the border pact.

There is clearly a lot of pressure on India now regarding border incursions.

Since they aren't responding in any other way, they must have realized they couldn't drag their feet on the border pact any longer.

neutral territory or Indian territory? This is not war where you need a neutral territory or a surrender. are you that immature to not know how diplomatic channels work? countries negotiate with each other and have sect. level people always go back and forth to each others countries for meetings that don't get reported i.e. back channels before the final agreement is in place.

as I asked you previously, show us the minutes of the meetings over the last year, travel itineraries and terms within the agreement- since you seem to know what nobody does. "they must have realized..."? where do you get that from? show us your CCP clearance to sit in the meetings and gather these assumptions.

what makes you think that Chinese govt. fully aware of rogue military just doing their own thing( well reported about the Chinese military doing as such) did not hastily agree to avoid an image issue of China that is seeping around the world that it cannot control its military leaders. How many times have we heard of military doing its own agenda from other countries.

childish assumptions only make you look like one.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Yes. It was not done on neutral territory, or Indian territory. Despite all the recent incursions, they were the ones who came to Beijing for the border pact.

There is clearly a lot of pressure on India now regarding border incursions.

Since they aren't responding in any other way, they must have realized they couldn't drag their feet on the border pact any longer.

We rejected chinese terms on freezing infrastructure levels,on freezing troop levels too.And only then we agree.
We sign the pact on satisfactory terms that are mutually acceptable,nothing conceded to china as both objectionable terms removed.

 

[dollarman]

Don't you remember 1962?

It was you who started hostilities with the Forward Policy.

In Chumar, you had the opportunity to start them again. By having guts and forcing the invaders out. But you didn't, even though you had several weeks to do so.



Again, we never stopped fighting. Which is why we are now sitting on the UNSC as a permanent member and a victor of WW2.

India on the other hand, gave up easily. India was not even a country in 1945, which was why it didn't get a permanent seat.

You gave up without fighting, and now the history books write that the nation of India was first created by the British.

1962? You mean the war where you tent-pitchers ran away once Indian re-inforcements were on the way form Northern and Western Commands into the North East? Would hardly call that a victory, more like hit-and-run tactics that terrorists groups like Taliban pull in the modern age, except that was done by a so called professional army of china. You guys ran so fast with your tail between your legs that you forgot to take your beloved South Tibet which you have since been "whining" over

As for history books, dont know what kind of distorted history the communist govt fools you with, but the nation of India was created by Indians. And culturally/religiously/civilizationally, the nation of India was created thousands of years ago.

 

[anant_s]

Don't you remember 1962?

It was you who started hostilities with the Forward Policy.

In Chumar, you had the opportunity to start them again. By having guts and forcing the invaders out. But you didn't, even though you had several weeks to do so.



Again, we never stopped fighting. Which is why we are now sitting on the UNSC as a permanent member and a victor of WW2.

India on the other hand, gave up easily. India was not even a country in 1945, which was why it didn't get a permanent seat.

You gave up without fighting, and now the history books write that the nation of India was first created by the British.

Sir, honestly all this doesnot look good coming from a member of your stature. Besides in todays world where US call all the shots, does permanent membership of UNSC really mean anything.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

1962? You mean the war where you tent-pitchers ran away once Indian re-inforcements were on the way form Northern and Western Commands into the North East? Would hardly call that a victory, more like hit-and-run tactics that terrorists groups like Taliban pull in the modern age, except that was done by a so called professional army of china. You guys ran so fast with your tail between your legs that you forgot to take your beloved South Tibet which you have since been "whining" over

As for history books, dont know what kind of distorted history the communist govt fools you with, but the nation of India was created by Indians. And culturally/religiously/civilizationally, the nation of India was created thousands of years ago.

No, before the British came, the subcontinent was full of independent kingdoms, with no consistent central authority, or path of succession from one central authority to the next. Those separate kingdoms were pretty much separate countries.

East Asian countries had the "mandate of Heaven" to justify the succession of one central authority to the next. The Europeans had the "divine right of kings" for the same purpose. Which is how we formed nation states.

India on the other hand, only became a nation when the British united the independent kingdoms of the subcontinent into a new entity called "British India".

That's why you should have fought back. So that Indians could have been the ones to unite and create India. But it was the British that did that.

 

[dollarman]

No, before the British came, the subcontinent was full of independent kingdoms, with no consistent central authority, or path of succession from one central authority to the next. Those separate kingdoms were pretty much separate countries.

East Asian countries had the "mandate of Heaven" to justify the succession of one central authority to the next. The Europeans had the "divine right of kings" for the same purpose. Which is how we formed nation states.

India on the other hand, only became a nation when the British united the independent kingdoms of the subcontinent into a new entity called "British India".

That's why you should have fought back. So that Indians could have been the ones to unite and create India. But it was the British that did that.

You have a very wierd logic of nationhood to begin with. But even if we take your twisted logic, you might want to read up on Indian history before making such comments. One example that comes to mind:

Maurya Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are a million others like this in the last 3000 years in India. But I dont think simply having an empireor king is enough to unite people (like you claim), the Indian people have been united over centuries through a mix of common bonds in culture/relgion/language/civilization. Just some random CHinese sittting on the internet claiming otherwise does not make it so.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You have a very wierd logic of nationhood to begin with. But even if we take your twisted logic, you might want to read up on Indian history before making such comments. One example that comes to mind:

[video]http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=D8RfYO38nzgjYM&tbnid=cCBQdCR05UPgYM:&ved=0CAgQjRwwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMaurya_ Empire&ei=JU0LUqf3B8S5iwKLt4GwAg&psig=AFQjCNEKjPjC7hH-DWxF9fAinWH_AEqUeA&ust=1376558757182196[/video]

Maurya Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are a million others like this in the last 3000 years in India. But I dont think simply having an empireor king is enough to unite people (like you claim), the Indian people have been united over centuries through a mix of common bonds in culture/relgion/language/civilization. Just some random CHinese sittting on the internet claiming otherwise does not make it so.

The same example of the Maurya empire.

That was a one-off empire, that lasted what, only a hundred years? Complete anomaly, and irrelevant too.

Since the Maurya empire did not succeed any previous central authority, nor was it succeeded by any central authority.

It was nothing more than a one-off empire, and did not have any continuity nor connection with the idea of India as a single nation.

 

[timetravel]

Let the stupid Chinese believe India became a nation only in 1947...

Anyhow Chinese are the most ignorant people in the world, so nothing new that they think like this.

 

[dollarman]

The same example of the Maurya empire.

That was a one-off empire, that lasted what, only a hundred years? Complete anomaly, and irrelevant too.

Since the Maurya empire did not succeed any previous central authority, nor was it succeeded by any central authority.

It was nothing more than a one-off empire, and did not have any continuity nor connection with the idea of India as a single nation.

There are many more of those, like Maratha, Sikh, CHolas, etc. Anyways, he idea that people have to be under the same empire to qualify as a nation is silly, so wouldnt matter to me if the Maurya empire had lasted 3000 years, India would still be the same to me today.

Yes historically India had been multiple kingdoms warring one another (barring a few empires which controlled most of India), but thats usually what happens.

The idea of India as a single nation over time, with all due respect, is much more real than say China. The modern Indians have much more in common with Indians 2000 years ago, when compared to CHina. WHat has held China together for all these years is central authority, while what has held India together all these years is civilization and tradition.

 

[Fattyacids]

If you really want to indulge in the nasty, I didnt see China doing much except crying (and still crying for an apology) when Japanese troops were doing much worse in Nanking.

Learn to be civil and debate, if not, two people can indulge in this behavior.

China were fighting the Japanese when Nanking incident took place. If that's what you called crying, where were you indians?You didn't even have your own country to "cry" for.
Learn the history before you debate, don't make yourself look stupid. Low IQ is not an excuse.

 

[Fattyacids]

You have a very wierd logic of nationhood to begin with. But even if we take your twisted logic, you might want to read up on Indian history before making such comments. One example that comes to mind:

Maurya Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are a million others like this in the last 3000 years in India. But I dont think simply having an empireor king is enough to unite people (like you claim), the Indian people have been united over centuries through a mix of common bonds in culture/relgion/language/civilization. Just some random CHinese sittting on the internet claiming otherwise does not make it so.

Mauryan Empire was 2000 yr ago, it didn't last more than 130 years--that's not even 10% of your historical period. The Mughal empire lasted even longer, LOL. For most part of your history, you were never one kingdom or a country. Get the historical facts right. Low IQ is not an excuse.

 

[Fattyacids]

The idea of India as a single nation over time, with all due respect, is much more real than say China. The modern Indians have much more in common with Indians 2000 years ago, when compared to CHina. WHat has held China together for all these years is central authority, while what has held India together all these years is civilization and tradition.

What are you smoking? China was unified as a country since 220 BC. You're telling that the idea of India as a nation is more real than China? LOL, delusion of grandeur, you don't even have a country until 1947, if there's any legitimate idea of a single nation, it's the British Raj. If not, the Mughal empire.

What has held India together is your constitution. Before 1947, India never existed, so it can't be your civilization and tradition.
What has held China together is the central authority (one country) and our civilization. We have the world's oldest continuous civilization.

 

[Dandpatta]

The new troll factor of the Chinese posters - quoting "low IQ levels" of Indians. Becomes tiring after every other nincompoop of a red-flagger quotes that. Try something new guys, since you are so intelligent.