India deploys 36,000 extra troops on Chinese border

[LaBong]

Any justifications for using "dynasties" for claiming territories because we too have some terrritories like Thailand,Malaysia,Indonesia,Sri Lanka to claim.

No telling them Karthic. I already tried that argument but they are resilient lot!

 

[CardSharp]

Well good luck to you!

How shameful you always fail to see the racist posts of your kinsmen.

The difference here is I stay out of it if I disagree and you active seek to jump in bed with them and all for a grudge. Poor emotional control to be honest. Funny how some people take the internet so seriously.

 

[LaBong]

The difference here is I stay out of it if I disagree and you active seek to jump in bed with them and all for a grudge. Poor emotional control to be honest. :

How am I in bed with them when I didn't mention any race/nationality/ethnicity to begin with. Not sure why you took offence if you consider yourself to be different than him. Since you are not a racist with a serious problem of misplaced identity, then you're not included in 'you lot'.

Funny how some people take the internet so seriously. :rolleyes

Same way you took my comment seriously.

 

[justanobserver]

Any justifications for using "dynasties" for claiming territories because we too have some terrritories like Thailand,Malaysia,Indonesia,Sri Lanka to claim.

Pakistan and Bangladesh as well

 

[KS]

Any justifications for using "dynasties" for claiming territories because we too have some terrritories like Thailand,Malaysia,Indonesia,Sri Lanka to claim.

Still no answer ?

Many of us (Indians,Romans,Greeks) are waiting eagerly so that we can claim our rightful territories

 

[CardSharp]

Still no answer ?

Many of us (Indians,Romans,Greeks) are waiting eagerly so that we can claim our rightful territories

Sure if any of those empires survived into the 20th century (the period when the majority of nation states formed), they'd have a case. The only reason why India is a country is because they stayed a colony into the 1940's. If the British had not been there, there'd be crap loads of tiny nation states on the subcontinent.

 

[topjumper]

"India" is like a junior school bully who will constantly take advantage of the weak around : look at Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Sikkim, Nepal, Bangladesh, Burma, even China. I am almost convinced that the Old British Way is the only time proven effective tactics when dealing with Indians.

Some people you can negotiate with whereas others not. China's wanting for "harmonous peace" alone would probably not be enough to make this "India" peaceful, since they'll ask for 3 or more if you give up 1. They, as an entity, seem incapable of taking any hint of long term orientation ( - IQ matters-) and will almost systemically see your kind gestures as weakness to explore. One can readily witness this group bully behaviour in areas in the US and the UK where some ethnic indians reside & work.

Actually Chairman Mao, rather than the current bunch of CPC nutters, got this indian paper tiger slave mentality right, the Brits aside. It doesn't require too much imagination to see how Mao would "negotiate" with "India" in this case today. In other words, if Master Mao were still alive today, "india" wouldn't have had dared to make a pissing sound, but kissed the ground he walked instead.

Thank you! Without over-generalizing, that's the point I was trying to make to "Jackdaws" and the likes, they do not take their neighbours' restraints on the disputes as a gesture of diplomatic good will, instead they take it as a sign of weakness and laugh at China for "not having the balls" to invade India more, utter childishness.

Have you guys thought about maybe, just maybe the Chinese have no interests in invading India? And maybe China will be happy just to find a way to peacefully settle the land dispute? But I guess anything other than war will be perceived by Jackdaws as weakness.

 

[CardSharp]

Thank you! Without over-generalizing, that's the point I was trying to make to "Jackdaws" and the likes, they do not take their neighbours' restraints on the disputes as a gesture of diplomatic good will, instead they take it as a sign of weakness and laugh at China

This is kind of what happen with Nehru and 1962. He took Chinese restraint early in the border guard clashes as weakness and the ok to implement his militarily retarded forward policy. It looks like we have come full circle in terms of stupidity and failing to learn from history.

I could post the rules of engagement as it was listed for the Chinese during those times but I don't have the source book checked out right now. If I can remember roughly, they mandate that PLA border troops on patrol should alway retreat and deescalate when confronted with an opposing patrol.

It was unfortunate that Nehru saw this as intrinsic weakness.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Thank you! Without over-generalizing, that's the point I was trying to make to "Jackdaws" and the likes, they do not take their neighbours' restraints on the disputes as a gesture of diplomatic good will, instead they take it as a sign of weakness and laugh at China for "not having the balls" to invade India more, utter childishness.

Have you guys thought about maybe, just maybe the Chinese have no interests in invading India? And maybe China will be happy just to find a way to peacefully settle the land dispute? But I guess anything other than war will be perceived by Jackdaws as weakness.

You should not feel strange to some Indians idea , it is very general.

 

[ps80]

Needless to say, it is in India's long term national interest to resolve the dispute quickly. However, it is not in the government's interest to offer any sort of compromise, and hence wouldn't touch the issue with a bargepole (A textbook example where national interest is superceded by political interest in a democracy).

It is abundantly clear that China wants the dispute resolved as quickly as possible. (For one, it doesn't have such a strong and ill-informed public opinion to contend with) It understands that friendly relations between neighbours cannot be fully achieved as long as the mutual border is not clearly demarcated. It has offered significant concessions to India, keeping only the minimum territory which is strategically important to it (because of the Aksai Chin road). It is willing to recognize Indian claims on the populated portion of the disputed territory, keeping only the barren desert land of Aksai Chin, where according to Nehru himself, 'Not even a blade of grass grows'.
But Noooo! The Indian government seems to think that it has a mandate from heaven to keep ALL the disputed territory for itself, and will not offer any concessions whatsoever. It will not accept 74% of the total disputed territory that was part of the deal offered by China (heck, it won't even accept 99.99% of the territory if China offered it!), but wants the whole 100% disputed territory for itself!

Hence, in simple terms, what the Indian government seems to be saying to its Chinese counterpart is, "You can scratch my back all you want, but I am certainly not going to scratch yours".

CardSharp,
In your recent posts on Sino-Indian border disputes, you seem to be trying to put all the blame on the Indian side for not resolving the border disputes with China. I see it as your personal viewpoint on the subject matter. Is the official Chinese viewpoint on this issue available on the net? If so, can somebody please post it here?

 

[topjumper]

This is kind of what happen with Nehru and 1962. He took Chinese restraint early in the border guard clashes as weakness and the ok to implement his militarily retarded forward policy. It looks like we have come full circle in terms of stupidity and failing to learn from history.

I could post the rules of engagement as it was listed for the Chinese during those times but I don't have the source book checked out right now. If I can remember roughly, they mandate that PLA border troops on patrol should alway retreat and deescalate when confronted with an opposing patrol.

It was unfortunate that Nehru saw this as intrinsic weakness.

Which makes me wonder how long it will really take for India and China to overcome the sore points of the humiliating colonial legacies. Some European guy drew a line on a map and nearly a hundred years later the two Asian countries still couldn't get over it, you just have to laugh when you take a step back and look at it.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Everyone knows that the most important is the reality in the negotiations, you need to know own chips, and a variety of assessments, but you know that most Indians (80&#37 there is no sense of reality, based solely on sense of self, Then you will know that all negotiations would be futile, although the Indian government may not necessarily be so, but you know that India is a national election, if voters is this attitude, you really do not have much hope that the Government of India.

 

[LaBong]

Sure if any of those empires survived into the 20th century (the period when the majority of nation states formed), they'd have a case. The only reason why India is a country is because they stayed a colony into the 1940's. If the British had not been there, there'd be crap loads of tiny nation states on the subcontinent.

Sorry failed to get the point. By that yardstick, Pakistan is not a nation either. Neither is China in it's present form.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Have not been here a few days, I seriously look at this thread to see if there have a more surprising ideas for Indians.

 

[CardSharp]

CardSharp,
In your recent posts on Sino-Indian border disputes, you seem to be trying to put all the blame on the Indian side for not resolving the border disputes with China. I see it as your personal viewpoint on the subject matter. Is the official Chinese viewpoint on this issue available on the net? If so, can somebody please post it here?

Well ... when Indians refuse to accept any of the responsibility, one has to try and throw everything... if only to see what will stick. So far it's like throwing butter at teflon.

No official Chinese views exist but the basic Chinese position can be gleaned from the diplomatic exchanges between Nehru and Zhou Enlai.