# Chinese Foreign Affairs News & Discussions



## Max The Boss

Future China India Relations

Geographical overview - 
China and India are separated by the formidable geographical obstacles of the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayan mountain chain, with Tibet serving as a buffer region between the two. China and India today share a border along the Himalayas and Nepal and Bhutan, two states lying along the Himalaya range, and acting as buffer states. In addition, Indian Kashmir province borders both the India and China.

Two territories are currently disputed between the China and India: Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. Arunachal Pradesh is located near the far east of India, while Aksai Chin is located near the northwest corner of India. However, all sides in the dispute have agreed to respect the Line of Actual Control and this border dispute is not widely seen as a major flashpoint.

From 2000  

With Indian President K. R. Narayanan's visit to China, 2000 marked a gradual re-engagement of Indian and Chinese diplomacy.
In 2002, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji reciprocated by visiting India, with a focus on economic issues.
In 2003 ushered in a marked improvement in Sino-Indian relations following Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's landmark June 2003 visit to China. China officially recognized Indian sovereignty over Sikkim as the two nations moved toward resolving their border disputes.
In 2004 also witnessed a gradual improvement in the international area when the two countries proposed opening up the Nathula and Jelepla Passes in Sikkim which would be mutually beneficial to both countries. 2004 was a milestone in China-India bilateral trade, surpassing the $10 billion mark for the first time.
In April 2005, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited Bangalore to push for increased China-India cooperation in high-tech industries. In a speech, Wen stated "Cooperation is just like two pagodas (temples), one hardware and one software. Combined, we can take the leadership position in the world." Wen stated that the twenty-first century will be "the Asian century of the IT industry." The high-level visit was also expected to produce several agreements to deepen political, cultural and economic ties between the two nations. Regarding the issue of India gaining a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, on his visit, Wen Jiabao initially seemed to support the idea, but had returned to a neutral position on the subject by the time he returned to China.
In 2005 the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit China was granted an observer status. While other countries in the region are ready to consider China for permanent membership in the SAARC, India seems reluctant.
A very important dimension of the evolving China-India relationship is based on the energy requirements of their industrial expansion and their readiness to proactively secure them by investing in the oilfields abroad - in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. On the one hand, these ventures entail competition (which has been evident in oil biddings for various international projects recently). But on the other hand, a degree of cooperation too is visible, as they are increasingly confronting bigger players in the global oil market. This cooperation was sealed in Beijing on January 12, 2006 during the visit of Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, who signed an agreement which envisages ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) and the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) placing joint bids for promising projects elsewhere. This may have important consequences for their international relations.
On July 6, 2006, China and India re-opened Nathula, an ancient trade route which was part of the Silk Road. Nathula is a pass through the Himalayas.
Officials of both countries say that the re-opening of border trade will help ease the economic isolation of the region.
In May 2007, China denied the application for visa from an Indian Administrative Service officer in Arunachal Pradesh.
In December 2007, China appeared to have reversed its policy by granting a visa to Marpe Sora, an Arunachal born professor in computer science.
In January 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited China and met with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao and had bilateral discussions related to trade, commerce, defense, military, and various other issues.
In July 2008, at the 34th G8 summit in Japan, Hu Jintao and Manmohan Singh had a friendly meeting.
In the wake of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, India offered aid to help the earthquake victims.
In 2008 was a milestone in China India bilateral trade, surpassing the $37 billion.
China India bilateral trade expected to reach $60 billion in 2010.
In 2009 China Navy and India Navy joined in an Anti piracy navel mission in off Somalia waters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Max The Boss

Comments welcome


----------



## Chanakyaa

Nice article , sums up many points.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SoulOnIce

Max The Boss said:


> A very important dimension of the evolving China-India relationship is based on the energy requirements of their industrial expansion and their readiness to proactively secure them by investing in the oilfields abroad - in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. On the one hand, these ventures entail competition (which has been evident in oil biddings for various international projects recently). But on the other hand, a degree of cooperation too is visible, as they are increasingly confronting bigger players in the global oil market. This cooperation was sealed in Beijing on January 12, 2006 during the visit of Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, who signed an agreement which envisages ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) and the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) placing joint bids for promising projects elsewhere. This may have important consequences for their international relations.



There goes the neighborhood

but it will make war in the region much less likely

Also if Chinese and Indian IT companies do launch joint ventures, mergers, subsidiaries or even FDI's that could actually change the global source of IT. It would be hard to compete, the product would be so inexpensive compared to its western rivals.

Pakistan in the meantime goes nowhere, doesn't it feel as if Pakistan's leaders have no game plan? No real feasible strategy? Pakistan effectively is more of an oligarchy than a democracy. Things need to change over here, we need a maverick leader to wake up the masses.

But if India is taking advantage of economic opportunities right across the border and thus are strengthened in that regard, should Pakistan look towards Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

*On May 3, 1998*, India Defence Minister George Fenandes has said China is India's "potential treat number one," and the country had often underplayed or even ignored the treat emanating from Beijing.

In an interview to a private TV channel, Mr. Fenandes said China was a bigger treat than Pakistan as Chinese military and naval activity had begun encircling India. The under-playing of the Chinese treat could "create a lot of problems for us in the near future." "I think there's a reluctance to face the reality that China's intentions need to be questioned," he said.

Mr. Fenandes, who spoke on "India's security perspective" at the V K Krishna Menon memorial lecture here on Sunday, said the situation was worsening as China had become the most important power after the US. He
criticized government planners for focussing only on the potential treat from Pakistan for the past 50 years. Quoting from the letters and speeches of Mr. Krishna Menon, former defence minister Y B Chavan and Mr. Ram Moha
Lohia, he said these leaders had expressed concerns about Beijing's growing ambitions ever since China annexed Tibet.

The leaders had also spoken out against the links between China and Pakistan. A Chinese surveillance base on Burma's Coco Islands, located about 40 km from Andaman and Nicobar Islands, was capable of monitoring all Indian missile and defence tests, he said. The Burmese Army has grown from strength 1.6 lakh to 4.5 lakhs with Chinese assistance and 11 airbases in Tibet had been upgraded over the past eight months to facilitate the operation of Sukhoi fighters which could strike targets deep within India, he said. China was holding 38,000 sq. km of Indian
Territory in the Ladakh area while 86,000 sq. km was held by Pakistan, Mr. Fenandes said. Providing evidence of the links between Beijing Islamabad, he said Pakistan had given 4,500 sq. km of Indian territory to China.

*On Mar 31, 2008*, Calling China potential threat number one, former defence minister George Fernandes has criticised the UPA government for being ``bullied by China and said that this was evident from the way Indias ambassador Nirupama Rao was summoned at 2 am by the Chinese foreign ministry. Fernandes again raises China bogey - Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times

*On Mar 3, 2009*, Dr. Sujit Dutta of Indian IDSA (Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses) questioned in Taiwan:  Are your ready to unify with China? Amb. Ranjit Gupta of India representative in Taiwan said:  We dont want to see Taiwan as a part of China. ????????:??????????_????_??? .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeacefulIndian

gpit said:


> *On May 3, 1998*, India Defence Minister George Fenandes has said China is India's "potential treat number one," and the country had often underplayed or even ignored the treat emanating from Beijing.
> 
> In an interview to a private TV channel, Mr. Fenandes said China was a bigger treat than Pakistan as Chinese military and naval activity had begun encircling India. The under-playing of the Chinese treat could "create a lot of problems for us in the near future." "I think there's a reluctance to face the reality that China's intentions need to be questioned," he said.
> 
> Mr. Fenandes, who spoke on "India's security perspective" at the V K Krishna Menon memorial lecture here on Sunday, said the situation was worsening as China had become the most important power after the US. He
> criticized government planners for focussing only on the potential treat from Pakistan for the past 50 years. Quoting from the letters and speeches of Mr. Krishna Menon, former defence minister Y B Chavan and Mr. Ram Moha
> Lohia, he said these leaders had expressed concerns about Beijing's growing ambitions ever since China annexed Tibet.
> 
> The leaders had also spoken out against the links between China and Pakistan. A Chinese surveillance base on Burma's Coco Islands, located about 40 km from Andaman and Nicobar Islands, was capable of monitoring all Indian missile and defence tests, he said. The Burmese Army has grown from strength 1.6 lakh to 4.5 lakhs with Chinese assistance and 11 airbases in Tibet had been upgraded over the past eight months to facilitate the operation of Sukhoi fighters which could strike targets deep within India, he said. China was holding 38,000 sq. km of Indian
> Territory in the Ladakh area while 86,000 sq. km was held by Pakistan, Mr. Fenandes said. Providing evidence of the links between Beijing Islamabad, he said Pakistan had given 4,500 sq. km of Indian territory to China.
> 
> *On Mar 31, 2008*, Calling China potential threat number one, former defence minister George Fernandes has criticised the UPA government for being ``bullied by China and said that this was evident from the way Indias ambassador Nirupama Rao was summoned at 2 am by the Chinese foreign ministry. Fernandes again raises China bogey - Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times
> 
> *On Mar 3, 2009*, Dr. Sujit Dutta of Indian IDSA (Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses) questioned in Taiwan:  Are your ready to unify with China? Amb. Ranjit Gupta of India representative in Taiwan said:  We dont want to see Taiwan as a part of China. ????????:??????????_????_??? .



I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## spsk

PeacefulIndian said:


> I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.



I agree with gpit, Chinese threat is not only approved by last BJP government, present congress government also has agreed China as the biggest threat, Its better Indian Govt does not try anything to trust China and allow another 1961 , Losing / Winning going to be a second thing ,Atleast you should fight the war  ,Better if India prepared always

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Squallmao

PeacefulIndian said:


> I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.



I wonder where did you get this "anti-India policy" if you can not read Chinese, from everyday India propaganda?

I watch/read news everyday in both Chinese and English, it's very very rare to find something about India. No offense to Indian people but in fact, no one in China treats India as a threat, nor at the same level that China at today, most people think India is not worth mentioning about (sorry but that's the truth). We do talk a lot about countries like US, japan and some European countries.


BTW, I occasionally read comments on some Indian forums. Sadly, a lot of people there think India is a much better country and China is going to collapse sooner or later. No body posts any good news about China, even if someone does, he/she will be bashed to hell eventually. I usually do not see those comments on Chinese forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Omar1984

Squallmao said:


> I wonder where did you get this "anti-India policy" if you can not read Chinese, from everyday India propaganda?
> 
> I watch/read news everyday in both Chinese and English, it's very very rare to find something about India. No offense to Indian people but in fact, no one in China treats India as a threat, nor at the same level that China at today, most people think India is not worth mentioning about (sorry but that's the truth). We do talk a lot about countries like US, japan and some European countries.
> 
> 
> BTW, I occasionally read comments on some Indian forums. Sadly, a lot of people there think India is a much better country and China is going to collapse sooner or later. No body posts any good news about China, even if someone does, he/she will be bashed to hell eventually. I usually do not see those comments on Chinese forums.




My friend, there's much more Indian members in this forum than Chinese members. (Indians really love to follow Pakistanis around everywhere, lucky us ).

I tried posting many achievemnts of China in this forum and so have other members. Look at the China economy thread in the Economy & Development section of this forum, and also look at this thread http://www.defence.pk/forums/general-images-multimedia/22531-pictures-china.html

Its true that India cant be compared to China, but a lot of Indians live in dream world.

I guess most Pakistani members are too worried about Pakistan situation, and most Indian members have obsession over China so they post negative stuff about China.

I will post more news about China's achievements

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## spsk

Squallmao said:


> I wonder where did you get this "anti-India policy" if you can not read Chinese, from everyday India propaganda?
> 
> I watch/read news everyday in both Chinese and English, it's very very rare to find something about India. No offense to Indian people but in fact, no one in China treats India as a threat, nor at the same level that China at today, most people think India is not worth mentioning about (sorry but that's the truth). We do talk a lot about countries like US, japan and some European countries.
> 
> 
> BTW, I occasionally read comments on some Indian forums. Sadly, a lot of people there think India is a much better country and China is going to collapse sooner or later. No body posts any good news about China, even if someone does, he/she will be bashed to hell eventually. I usually do not see those comments on Chinese forums.




This is not media propaganda ,Even I have seen news where Chinese Officials claiming Arunachal Pradesh,Sikkim as Part of China.Nobody in India/China going to threat "We are going to engage in war"  . Claiming Indian territory as part of China is called threat. Number border cease fire violation from China into India is more than that of India - Pakistan border . That why India considers China a threat. 

I agree that India does not for a Invasion, You need only one reason for Invasion ,resource . We do not have much natural resource in our country except coal , Iron. But there there are other reasons for China like Tibet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aeneas

_India&#8217;s China War _by Neville Maxwell,plz read this book and find the truth of China-India border conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## indiatech

The future is not India *OR* China,

it is India *AND* China.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Max The Boss

I believe growing economic relations between
China and India will promote peace between 
Both countries.
Even economic analysts believe 
China India bilateral trade will reach $100 billion by 2015.
I hope China and India will promote economic relations & Peace
Because both countries will benefit from good relations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## afriend

Squallmao said:


> I wonder where did you get this "anti-India policy" if you can not read Chinese, from everyday India propaganda?
> 
> I watch/read news everyday in both Chinese and English, it's very very rare to find something about India. No offense to Indian people but in fact, no one in China treats India as a threat, nor at the same level that China at today, *most people think India is not worth mentioning about (sorry but that's the truth).* We do talk a lot about countries like US, japan and some European countries.
> 
> 
> BTW, I occasionally read comments on some Indian forums. Sadly, a lot of people there think India is a much better country and China is going to collapse sooner or later. No body posts any good news about China, even if someone does, he/she will be bashed to hell eventually. I usually do not see those comments on Chinese forums.



Exactly these sentiments where echoed by me in some earlier forums. We dont talk about china as much as we talk about Pakistan. But i can't comment on how other people react or think. But according to my perception most of the world and india consideres china to be way ahead in development as it is the fastest growing economy in the world right..!!!!! But we think chinese are kinda bullies too  and feel can do anything to get what they want, they are threatning taiwan openly, they have marched into tibet and have been calling dalai lama a criminal whom the entire world respects.. have or had problems related to border more than any other country in the world.. like now in india they are now claiming Arunachal Pradesh....!!!! So obviously if defence minister fernandes said that china is a threat that is obviously because chinese are really unpredictable and might do anyting .. and wanted us to prepare ourselves for any eventuality..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Proud2Indian

Squallmao said:


> I wonder where did you get this "anti-India policy" if you can not read Chinese, from everyday India propaganda?
> 
> I watch/read news everyday in both Chinese and English, it's very very rare to find something about India. No offense to Indian people but in fact, no one in China treats India as a threat, nor at the same level that China at today, most people think India is not worth mentioning about (sorry but that's the truth). We do talk a lot about countries like US, japan and some European countries.
> 
> 
> BTW, I occasionally read comments on some Indian forums. Sadly, a lot of people there think India is a much better country and China is going to collapse sooner or later. No body posts any good news about China, even if someone does, he/she will be bashed to hell eventually. I usually do not see those comments on Chinese forums.


China has military ties with Pakistan, BD, Myanmar and Nepal encircling India. 
If China does not have problem with India militarily then they could have taken India in confidence. Its not mandatory for them but it shows ur policy.
They don't need to speak in so many words.....their action talks....

tx

PS: this in interesting that while we have free media and also complete freemdom in e-world, whatever we read is propaganda while in China where there is not free media and restriction on e-world they get all the unbiasd reports.....hmmmm...intresting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vkurian

Max The Boss said:


> I believe growing economic relations between
> China and India will promote peace between
> Both countries.
> Even economic analysts believe
> China India bilateral trade will reach $100 billion by 2015.
> I hope China and India will promote economic relations & Peace
> Because both countries will benefit from good relations.



I agree Max.... good post.

It will benefit the entire subcontinent but we should learn to look thru people like OMAR who want to put a spoke in every moving wheel.


----------



## ever4244

PeacefulIndian said:


> I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.



We tried to contain india in the sub-continent just as US tried to contain us in aisa. No more, No less.

The game of geo-politics have always been like this and will always be 

Nothing personal````````````and hope that we could play it politely and fair.


----------



## dabong1

One thing for sure is that the US will try to play indian off against china.


----------



## PeacefulIndian

ever4244 said:


> We tried to contain india in the sub-continent just as US tried to contain us in aisa. No more, No less.
> 
> The game of geo-politics have always been like this and will always be
> 
> Nothing personal````````````and hope that we could play it politely and fair.




Good that we are accepting that we are playing geo-political games of containment. Now here we can begin our discussion. 

I have series of questions for Chinese. First is, what palpable benefits China will have, by trying to contain India? And what will they lose, if they build a strategic partnership with India? I would like to hear answers from Chinese point of view.


----------



## gpit

Proud2Indian said:


> ...
> PS: this in interesting that while we have free media and also complete freemdom in e-world, whatever we read is propaganda while in China where there is not free media and restriction on e-world they get all the unbiasd reports.....hmmmm...intresting



Chinese official media do cover up, but seldom lie. India democratic free media lie to public, as they are free to lie.

Agreed that it is interesting.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## linkinpark

ever4244 said:


> We tried to contain india in the sub-continent just as US tried to contain us in aisa. No more, No less.
> 
> The game of geo-politics have always been like this and will always be
> 
> Nothing personal````````````and hope that we could play it politely and fair.



You are the most pragmatic Chinese I have come across who said this. Geo-politics will always go, each country will try out maneuver other countries to secure and further their interests, it is as simple as that. China, US and India are doing exactly the same by encircling one another to secure their interests.


----------



## Gabbar

*India-China ties on firm footing despite border dispute: Menon*


NEW DELHI: Ties between India and China are now more evolved and nuanced and the boundary dispute between the two countries has failed to limit 
engagement in other areas. This was the message conveyed by foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon during a book release on India-China relations. 

Menon also cautioned both India and China against resorting to protectionism to deal with the world economic meltdown. He said it would hurt both economies in the long run. "For either of us, India or China, to respond to the economic crisis through protectionism, no matter how attractive it would be in the short term, would only hurt our economies," he said, adding that China was India's single largest trading partner. 

Menon said that despite the differences between India and China over the boundary dispute, both the countries have maintained status quo over the issue. "We have our perceptions and they too have their own perceptions on the boundary and incursions into each other's territories. The important thing is whether or not there is a change in the pattern of incursions to suggest that China is trying to alter the status quo. We can say that there is nothing to suggest that China is doing anything like this," said Menon, while releasing the book, `India China Relations: The Border Issue and Beyond' by Mohan Guruswamy and Zorawar Daulet Singh. 

Menon also sought to clarify that the nature of the boundary dispute with China was different from the dispute with Pakistan. "With China it is not a border dispute but a boundary dispute which is peaceful. In J&K, there is an internal and political process. It is not a territorial or a bounday problem," stated Menon, adding that the global context of the relationship had changed fundamentally. 

He said that the two countries were competing and cooperating at the same time and that they would not allow the boundary dispute to limit other engagements. Asked about the next round of talks on the boundary issue, he said the two sides were trying to fix dates for it. "It is an ongoing process. There are special representatives who have met and will continue to meet. We will make an announcement when we fix up the dates for the next meeting," he said. 

When asked about track II diplomacy with Pakistan a few years ago over the J&K issue and the need for a similar exercise with China, Menon clarified that it wasn't track II at all. "It was actually an official process carried out within the composite dialogue process," he said. He further said that it was difficult to carry forward talks on the boundary dispute publicly as past experiences had shown that "the more you do it in public, less the chances of succeeding".


----------



## ever4244

PeacefulIndian said:


> Good that we are accepting that we are playing geo-political games of containment. Now here we can begin our discussion.
> 
> I have series of questions for Chinese. First is, what palpable benefits China will have, by trying to contain India? And what will they lose, if they build a strategic partnership with India? I would like to hear answers from Chinese point of view.



Firstly, I have to clarify that my words only represent my personal view, which is neither in consistence with the public view of common chinese, nor with the official view. If I say : 'we```', it only means that 'I assume we````'. 

So the first thing we want is leadership in Aisa, or better, leadership of aisa-africa. Can india abide that? If you can, we could form a US-canada relationship----assuming the potential of india, I think you would not agree.

Secondly, for our influence in SE,NE asia and our own energy security, the control over India occean and Southern china sea is essential for China. The basest level should be our own safe passage through the Malacca , the highest level should be the ability of denial to all other passage through the Occean if we dictated it so----Does not mean that we will ever do it, Just like the US, it is not about what you do, but what you can do. 

Once that was achieved, NE nation, like Japan, korea will fall to our camp lilke the apple in autumn.

The first two points is a little bit too far away, but where is our confliction of interests now?

Lets we imaging every country has a globle of influence and a globle of interests. our globle of interests has reached far far to every corner in the world. The most important points is: 1 NE aisa, 2 MEest, 3 africa 4 N america 5 EU. But now our globle of influence are locked inside the NE by US and cannot go further away from our border. And no one outside our influence globle would dare to join us because US has every possible leverage to dictate them--from aid to embargo to invasion. So when the ultimate confliction between us and US came, they will certainly fall to their camp whether they like it or not.

NE, ME EU, NA all are the strongest fortress of US which we cannot take by conventional means. But for NE and ME, there is SE and SA, which has always been chaotic and weak in US influence and that is where we can take. SE asia and S asia connects the world energy pool to the world factory, everyone with the sanity would understand that dominance over these two area would neutralize the US dominance over NE and ME.

So, where is my point?

My point is: can india abide our dominance of south east aisa?
can india share the dominance of india occean with us?
can we trust india as the greater share holder of india occean?
can india trust us as the greater share holder of SE aisa?
can we cooperate to jam US out of these two area?

If we can, then we can be allies, and there can be two leaders in Aisa. But for now, I don t think you would agree, for china now is not yet strong enough to back our deal or threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aeneas

Proud2Indian said:


> China has military ties with Pakistan, BD, Myanmar and Nepal encircling India.



why not tell all truth?India has military ties with US and USSR,how could poor Pakistan do?it is your Indians pressured Pakistan become ally of China.

Myanmar become ally of China because US pressure,you know Myanmar had to move the capitol for fear of US attack,so,how could poor Myanmar do when facing powerful US?why not make friend with China?

Where there is oppression,there is resistance.it's unfair that India ties with US and USSR,while blame Pak make friend with China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karnivore

gpit said:


> Chinese official media do cover up, but seldom lie. India democratic free media lie to public, as they are free to lie.
> 
> Agreed that it is interesting.


What makes you think that something which can do cover ups, can not lie.

Oh wait....you did say "seldom lie". Let me rephrase that.

What makes you think that something which can do cover ups, can not lie more often than not.

And interestingly enough, how does an average Chinese, I mean those fellows living in China and not shooting from the "land of freedom", know that they have been lied to? 

Kinda reminds of that old Pravda joke:
"There is no Pravda in Izvestia, and there is no Izvestia in Pravda". Meaning, "there is no truth in the news, and there is no news in the truth".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karnivore

Aeneas said:


> Where there is oppression,there is resistance.it's unfair that India ties with US and USSR,while blame Pak make friend with China.


It is of course unfair of India to complain about Pakistan's ties with China. But I guess, it is absolutely India's prerogative to consider her enemy's friend, to be a threat (I would not use the term "enemy" vis a vis China. "Competitor" is a better and more accurate term).


----------



## karnivore

ever4244 said:


> My point is: can india abide our dominance of south east aisa?
> can india share the dominance of india occean with us?
> can we trust india as the greater share holder of india occean?
> can india trust us as the greater share holder of SE aisa?
> can we cooperate to jam US out of these two area?


O goody. Cooperation on China's term.

Note to self:
India's attempt to safeguard her interest.....BAD, VERY BAD. PURELY HEGEMONIC.
China's attempt to safeguard her interest.....GOOD, VERY GOOD. PURELY A MATTER OF RIGHT.


----------



## Max The Boss

China and India mainly focusing on their
Economic Development & Energy Security.
So China and India can corporate with each
Other on the issue peacefully.

For example  China and India can sign a
Navel Corporation Agreement.
China can share South China Sea 
With India.
India can share Indian Ocean
With China.

If China and India ready to corporate
With each other peacefully then both
Countries benefit.


----------



## Proud2Indian

gpit said:


> Chinese official media do cover up, but seldom lie. India democratic free media lie to public, as they are free to lie.
> 
> Agreed that it is interesting.



Well I guess you misunderstood my comment.....I was not talking abt media but abt freedom .... If ur media is covering up/lie-ing ...U have no way of knowing because of govt. restriction...here our media surely lie in cases ......but again we can as well get the info from world media without any restrictions....


tx


----------



## Gabbar

*India warships to join Chinese fleet review in April*

New Delhi, Mar 20 (PTI) In a sign of growing defence ties between the two Asian giants, India will send two of its naval ships to China to participate in the International Fleet Review at its port-town of Quingdao this April.
This will be the second occasion in the last two years that India's naval ships would visit a Chinese port.

"Indian warships will be participating in the Chinese fleet review to be held between April 20 and 24. The Navy ships would also carry out a passage exercise with the Chinese navy vessels in the South China sea during the visit," a senior Navy source said here today.

Pakistan too would be joining the fleet review with its Type-21 frigate and another unnamed warship, sources said.

The visit to China would be part of Navy's annual deployment of its warships of the eastern fleet in the Pacific Ocean beginning today and extending up to May 19.

Among the Navy's eastern fleet, Delhi-class guided missile Destroyer INS Mumbai, Rajput-class Destroyer INS Ranvijay, Khukri-class missile Corvette INS Khanjar and Fleet Replenishment Ship INS Jyoti would be part of the deployment in the Pacific, the sources said.

Of these, INS Jyoti and another warship would take part in the fleet review. India had earlier sent its warships to China in early 2007 for a passage exercise. PTI

India warships to join Chinese fleet review in April .


----------



## shabaz

There can only be one Super Power and right now its US and it will remain to be in the near future.But if China and India wats a piece its god to work togather rather then against each other. but that wont happen like i said only one superpower

China and India to me are still relitivy poor.


----------



## dbc

ever4244 said:


> Firstly, I have to clarify that my words only represent my personal view, which is neither in consistence with the public view of common chinese, nor with the official view. If I say : 'we```', it only means that 'I assume we````'.
> 
> So the first thing we want is leadership in Aisa, or better, leadership of aisa-africa. Can india abide that? If you can, we could form a US-canada relationship----assuming the potential of india, I think you would not agree.
> 
> Secondly, for our influence in SE,NE asia and our own energy security, the control over India occean and Southern china sea is essential for China. The basest level should be our own safe passage through the Malacca , the highest level should be the ability of denial to all other passage through the Occean if we dictated it so----Does not mean that we will ever do it, Just like the US, it is not about what you do, but what you can do.
> 
> Once that was achieved, NE nation, like Japan, korea will fall to our camp lilke the apple in autumn.
> 
> The first two points is a little bit too far away, but where is our confliction of interests now?
> 
> Lets we imaging every country has a globle of influence and a globle of interests. our globle of interests has reached far far to every corner in the world. The most important points is: 1 NE aisa, 2 MEest, 3 africa 4 N america 5 EU. But now our globle of influence are locked inside the NE by US and cannot go further away from our border. And no one outside our influence globle would dare to join us because US has every possible leverage to dictate them--from aid to embargo to invasion. So when the ultimate confliction between us and US came, they will certainly fall to their camp whether they like it or not.
> 
> NE, ME EU, NA all are the strongest fortress of US which we cannot take by conventional means. But for NE and ME, there is SE and SA, which has always been chaotic and weak in US influence and that is where we can take. SE asia and S asia connects the world energy pool to the world factory, everyone with the sanity would understand that dominance over these two area would neutralize the US dominance over NE and ME.
> 
> So, where is my point?
> 
> My point is: can india abide our dominance of south east aisa?
> can india share the dominance of india occean with us?
> can we trust india as the greater share holder of india occean?
> can india trust us as the greater share holder of SE aisa?
> can we cooperate to jam US out of these two area?
> 
> If we can, then we can be allies, and there can be two leaders in Aisa. But for now, I don t think you would agree, for china now is not yet strong enough to back our deal or threat.




Expect push back, the Indian Ocean is far too important for anyone to accept Chinese dominion. Besides, you will face significant challenges even in South East Asia with US,Japan, Australia, Russia,India and S. Korea. *I suspect* substantial Chinese military presence is always needed closer to Tiananmen Square to keep Mr Jintao and his buddies company leaving fewer military personnel for force projection or protracted conflict.


----------



## Proud2Indian

Aeneas said:


> why not tell all truth?India has military ties with US and USSR,how could poor Pakistan do?it is your Indians pressured Pakistan become ally of China.
> 
> Myanmar become ally of China because US pressure,you know Myanmar had to move the capitol for fear of US attack,so,how could poor Myanmar do when facing powerful US?why not make friend with China?
> 
> Where there is oppression,there is resistance.it's unfair that India ties with US and USSR,while blame Pak make friend with China.



Its gd if we read response in cntxt....

I am not against China ties with other countries...read my post...i was only replying whether china take india as threat or not...this all is gr8 geo-politcal game going on....its like pre-cold war era...


tx


----------



## ever4244

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Expect push back, the Indian Ocean is far too important for anyone to accept Chinese dominion. Besides, you will face significant challenges even in South East Asia with US,Japan, Australia, Russia,India and S. Korea. *I suspect* substantial Chinese military presence is always needed closer to Tiananmen Square to keep Mr Jintao and his buddies company leaving fewer military personnel for force projection or protracted conflict.



we are not expecting push back, we are currently facing push back, now. 

However, because of geo-political reasons, the US influence in these area is not --invincible. And I see many flaws and crackes in these two areas, where we can ram one or two wedges into. 

As the balancing of power shifts in these decades, China would gradually gain a upper hand in this push and shove game for geographic reason(if things goes well). Then it would trigger a domino offect sooner or later, as china rise to the top.

If things do not go well for china, sooner or later some other country would follow suit.


----------



## Omar1984

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Expect push back, the Indian Ocean is far too important for anyone to accept Chinese dominion. Besides, you will face significant challenges even in South East Asia with US,Japan, Australia, Russia,India and S. Korea. *I suspect* substantial Chinese military presence is always needed closer to Tiananmen Square to keep Mr Jintao and his buddies company leaving fewer military personnel for force projection or protracted conflict.




China helps other Asian countries. India threatens other Asian countries. China and Japan also help each other, it wont be in Japan's interst to turn their backs on China. Japan has always been focused on their economy and good relations with China has always helped Japan's economy.

If the eldest brother (China) helps his younger brothers (smaller Asian countries), and the middle child (India) always threatens the younger brothers, whose side will the younger brothers take?

 to the Indian Ocean China

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proud2Indian

Omar1984 said:


> China helps other Asian countries. India threatens other Asian countries. China and Japan also help each other, it wont be in Japan's interst to turn their backs on China. Japan has always been focused on their economy and good relations with China has always helped Japan's economy.
> 
> If the eldest brother (China) helps his younger brothers (smaller Asian countries), and the middle child (India) always threatens the younger brothers, whose side will the younger brothers take?
> 
> to the Indian Ocean China



Well Japan's PM still goes yearly to pay respect to Soldiers died in WWII....and this pisses china off to no end....so much for the Japan trying for good relation...

And there is far greater scare of Japanies atrocity on Chinese citizen which cann't be healed easily

For China helping brothers...tell that to Taiwan...

tx


----------



## Omar1984

Proud2Indian said:


> Well Japan's PM still goes yearly to pay respect to Soldiers died in WWII....and this pisses china off to no end....so much for the Japan trying for good relation...
> 
> And there is far greater scare of Japanies atrocity on Chinese citizen which cann't be healed easily
> 
> For China helping brothers...tell that to Taiwan...
> 
> tx



I wish there was a Japanese member in this forum to prove you wrong. Chinese and Japanese work well each other, they support each other's economies, they focus a lot on economy. If China shuts down exports into Japan, then Japan will suffer. They have done well working with each other and ill-feelings from the past are not that relevant today the past will not hurt their relationship. Japanese and Chinese are much more smarter than Indians and Pakistanis, they know if they work with each other that will only benefit their countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dbc

Omar1984 said:


> China helps other Asian countries. India threatens other Asian countries. China and Japan also help each other, it wont be in Japan's interst to turn their backs on China. Japan has always been focused on their economy and good relations with China has always helped Japan's economy.
> 
> If the eldest brother (China) helps his younger brothers (smaller Asian countries), and the middle child (India) always threatens the younger brothers, whose side will the younger brothers take?
> 
> to the Indian Ocean China



Omar I am not questioning Chinese character just raising doubts on whether the world will allow China to control the Indian Ocean.


----------



## Omar1984

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Omar I am not questioning Chinese character just raising doubts on whether the world will allow China to control the Indian Ocean.



Countries like India and U.S. may have a problem with it, but a good majority of countries in that region will definately support China because China has always supported the majority of countries in that region. 

Anyways, we all know no one can order China around especially today when the world is going through a recession.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jetLi

India just a pitty slave of America, If China keep the development pace. India , Japan,
not to mention America all will be kicked to the Mars.

But China also have lots of problems .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jetLi

PeacefulIndian said:


> I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.



The premise is that India do not want to occupate other countries's land
(include Sikkim, South Tibet and Kashmir)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Communist

It will be wise decision for China, not to trust the fake smiling friendship face of India. China must not forget the 1962 betrayal by India which is still providing shelter to Dalai Lama. If China again does the same mistake by relying on India's false good posture, never will China have the chance to rise again. US has depended on India and US will one day lament for that. China must continue considering India as an enemy, if China needs to survive.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dbc

Omar1984 said:


> Countries like India and U.S. may have a problem with it, but a good majority of countries in that region will definately support China because China has always supported the majority of countries in that region.
> 
> Anyways, we all know no one can order China around especially today when the world is going through a recession.



The question of accepting Chinese writ over Asia has nothing to do with relations. Pakistan has excellent relations with China  but will Pakistan allow Chinese interest to supersede its own? I think the answer is no..

A bit off topic, but have Pakistan ever considered Chinese assistance in the fight against the Taliban?


----------



## Omar1984

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> The question of accepting Chinese writ over Asia has nothing to do with relations. Pakistan has excellent relations with China &#8211; but will Pakistan allow Chinese interest to supersede its own? I think the answer is no..
> 
> A bit off topic, but have Pakistan ever considered Chinese assistance in the fight against the Taliban?




Sure every nation looks after its own interst first but no nation forgets its relations with other nations. I think it'll be in Pakistan's best interst to have China's prescence in the Indian Ocean.

As for Taliban, China never interferes in Pakistan's personal business. Taliban is a very complicated issue and its an entirely different topic...I have a lot to say about it but I rather not derail this thread.

I just want to add one more thing US shouldn't see China as a threat. China maybe a communist country but it doesn't like to interfere in other countries' personal business. Look at Pakistan, even though China is Pakistan's closest ally Pakistan is the total opposite of communism and China is fine with that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> China must continue considering India as an enemy, if China needs to survive.



India shall do the same and should consider China as a threat. India should develop excellent military relationships with US, Japan and South Korea to counter Chinese aggresion. India is on it's way to develop blue water navy and formidable Air Force.


----------



## Proud2Indian

Omar1984 said:


> I wish there was a Japanese member in this forum to prove you wrong. Chinese and Japanese work well each other, they support each other's economies, they focus a lot on economy. If China shuts down exports into Japan, then Japan will suffer. They have done well working with each other and ill-feelings from the past are not that relevant today the past will not hurt their relationship. Japanese and Chinese are much more smarter than Indians and Pakistanis, they know if they work with each other that will only benefit their countries.


Suggest you check on "Yasukuni_Shrine"...I can post loads of stuff but why waste bandwidth.....Its there ...it hurts China....but there is nothing she can do...

You only look at export numbers...U forget that technologu is something which China needs from Japan and needs badly....


tx


----------



## Max The Boss

	Posted on Monday, January 14, 2008

China & India say growing ties could 'change face of Asia, even the world'

BEIJING  Leaders of the world's two fastest growing major economies, China and India, set out sweeping goals Monday to build trade and put behind them decades of hostility and mistrust. 
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Premier Wen Jiabao of China, after unusually lengthy talks, emerged to say that the two nations would conduct new joint military exercises this year, designed to ease frictions along their once-tense border. 
They signed a six-page accord affirming support for free trade, cooperation in civilian nuclear energy programs, joint efforts to combat climate change and other issues.
Wen praised the "sound momentum" of relations and said that Beijing and New Delhi should "trust each other and work with each other for mutual benefit and win-win progress. We should not ask who will outdo whom."
Aides to Singh and Wen were effusive in casting the talks as a watershed.
"Premier Wen said common development of China and India would change the face of Asia and even the world," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.
Singh's foreign secretary, Shivshankar Menon, said the Indian leader had been "received with great warmth" and paraphrased a Singh statement from the meetings: "The rise of India and the rise of China is a global public good. It's good for us; it's good for the region. It's also good for the world. It helps the world economy."
Trade between India and China began to surge only in 2005 when the two nations established what they called a "strategic partnership." The two sides planned to reach $30 billion in bilateral trade by 2008, a target reached in 2008 when trade soared nearly 50 percent to $38.6 billion.
"We have decided to increase our bilateral trade target from $60 billion by the year 2010" Singh said in a statement.
Earlier in the day, Singh told a business forum that trade is driving bilateral relations, a sign that business has moved faster than bureaucracy.
"This makes me wonder whether our two governments have been underestimating the capabilities of our respective industries and their strong urge to do business with each other," Singh said.
China's economy is growing at double-digit rates, and India has posted nearly 9 percent growth for the past three years.
Indian Commerce Minister Kamal Nath told the Press Trust of India that his Chinese counterpart offered to send buying missions to India frequently to promote a more diversified basket of exports from India to China."
India is seeking permission for its private airlines to fly directly to China and pick up passengers for onward flights to the United States and other countries.
For its part, China complains of barriers to direct investment in India.
From - McClatchy Newspapers
China, India say growing ties could 'change face of Asia, even the world' | McClatchy


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> India shall do the same and should consider China as a threat. India should develop excellent military relationships with US, Japan and South Korea to counter Chinese aggresion. India is on it's way to develop blue water navy and formidable Air Force.




Military competition will lead India to go bankrupt.
This is Both China and Parkistan willing to see.
You India should deal with the gap between the rich and the poor,
improve the industry system and develop your hign-tech.
You say us China just copy other country's high-tech Weapon, but
you even can't copy others.
 Closely Ally
otherwise,South Korea and Japan highly depend China, especially in economic
They could't be the ally like Parkistan and China, Burma and China, Nepal and China, Sri Lanka and China. 
 India

By the way, the only field you can exceed China in 21century maybe in Population, coz your population control is too bad.


----------



## jetLi

Proud2Indian said:


> Suggest you check on "Yasukuni_Shrine"...I can post loads of stuff but why waste bandwidth.....Its there ...it hurts China....but there is nothing she can do...
> 
> You only look at export numbers...U forget that technologu is something which China needs from Japan and needs badly....
> 
> 
> tx



Japan has nothing original invention, japan also copy from others.
China just imitate the model of Japan. we Just copy from others first 
and invent on the base of copy.

but China in some area had exceed Japan a lot, we have our original techlogy.
the other thing is , we have a full scale industry system


----------



## Gabbar

> Military competition will lead India to go bankrupt.



*250 billion in forex reserve, economy growing at 6-9&#37; and spending only 2.3% of GDP. Please elaborate how you came to this conclusion?*


> improve the industry system and develop your hign-tech.



How nice of you tell us how improve our country.



> You say us China just copy other country's high-tech Weapon, but
> you even can't copy others.



Dont need to, we believe in R&D and it's not we saying that Chinese copy things, it's the whole world.



> By the way, the only field you can exceed China in 21century maybe in Population, coz your population control is too bad.



I'll be first one to admit it's bad, but i don't see how is this related to this topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> Japan has nothing original invention, japan also copy from others.
> China just imitate the model of Japan. we Just copy from others first
> and invent on the base of copy.


Provide examples.



> but China in some area had exceed Japan a lot, we have our original techlogy.



In which technology areas China have beaten Japan?


----------



## jetLi

I'll be first one to admit it's bad, but i don't see how is this related to this topic.[/QUOTE]

ha, because India always want to compete with china become the big power
in Asia, in fact, china does not want to compete with inda. We just aim at America.

so, in 21 century, I think India can't exceed China in any field, except the population


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> Provide examples.
> 
> 
> 
> In which technology areas China have beaten Japan?



biotechnology and genic technology
Anti-Satellite Weapon
Space technology

but i think japan can produce Nuclear weapon
so i don't mention this

in fact , China also in a lot small field advance japan,
for example 
Brain-Computer interface in Nerve project
Electric automobile
etc


----------



## Gabbar

jetLi said:


> I'll be first one to admit it's bad, but i don't see how is this related to this topic.





> ha, because India always want to compete with china become the big power
> in Asia, in fact, china does not want to compete with inda. We just aim at America.
> 
> so, in 21 century, I think India can't exceed China in any field, except the population



*You still haven't answered the question.* 

You just threw that statement against the wall and hoped that it will stick to the wall.


----------



## Gabbar

jetLi said:


> biotechnology and genic technology
> Anti-Satellite Weapon
> Space technology


 
What has China developed in Biotechnology and Genic technology?

Japan does not have Anti-Satellite weapon program, so how did you beat them?

I understand that China put a man in the space, kudos to Chinese people, but Japan does not have the space program so how did you beat them?


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> *You still haven't answered the question.*
> 
> You just threw that statement against the wall and hoped that it will stick to the wall.



I see lots of india media just advocate that


----------



## Gabbar

jetLi said:


> I see lots of india media just advocate that



What?


----------



## Gabbar

*Jetli it's ok if you dont the answer, do some diligence and come back later.*


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> What has China developed in Biotechnology and Genic technology?
> 
> 
> If you have interest, you can search the top research journal related
> 
> Japan does not have Anti-Satellite weapon program, so how did you beat them?
> 
> I understand that China put a man in the space, kudos to Chinese people, but Japan does not have the space program so how did you beat them?



Are you joking ? Japan began their space program in 1980s


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> What?



adavote that china's development is the threat of india

so ,India are busying setting the anti-guide-missle system


----------



## Gabbar

jetLi said:


> Are you joking ? Japan began their space program in 1980s



May be I should of explained bit more, Japan does not build it's own man space shuttle crafts, it colaborate with NASA to send astranauts to space. 
Japan does have it's program to send sattelites to space and Japan did launch satelites to space before China.


----------



## Gabbar

jetLi said:


> adavote that china's development is the threat of india
> 
> so ,India are busying setting the anti-guide-missle system



Please read the old posts and read what question I asked.
And who advocated that China's economic development is threat to India?
Yes India is working on Anti-Satelite system but what are you trying to say?


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> May be I should of explained bit more, Japan does not build it's own man space shuttle crafts, it colaborate with NASA to send astranauts to space.
> Japan does have it's program to send sattelites to space and Japan did launch satelites to space before China.



you should make sure first

in 1989, Japan invest 13 billion to research H2 Rocket
and in 2000, Japan invest 3 billion more to continue their space program

but they have lots of failure. even on the help of america


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> Please read the old posts and read what question I asked.
> And who advocated that China's economic development is threat to India?
> Yes India is working on Anti-Satelite system but what are you trying to say?



do yourself, China have succeed 
so India can't have the oppurtiny to exceed


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> May be I should of explained bit more, Japan does not build it's own man space shuttle crafts, it colaborate with NASA to send astranauts to space.
> Japan does have it's program to send sattelites to space and Japan did launch satelites to space before China.



although Japan launch sattelite before china

japan failure at One rocket-two sattelites in 2002

china had already succeed at one-rocket-three sattelites in 1981


----------



## Gabbar

> you should make sure first



OOOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!



> in 1989, Japan invest 13 billion to research H2 Rocket
> and in 2000, Japan invest 3 billion more to continue their space program
> but they have lots of failure. even on the help of america



So that's set backs on Japan's part, how is this success for China?


----------



## Gabbar

> do yourself, China have succeed
> so India can't have the oppurtiny to exceed



*Like I said, if you can't answer it come back with some material.
I did not understand the second part of your statement.*


----------



## jetLi

Gabbar said:


> OOOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> So that's set backs on Japan's part, how is this success for China?



reality is there, China is successful than Japan in space program

btw, China also advance in these field,
China have our own 3-G telecommunication world technology standard. japan doesn't
China have mass-product Crystallite steel(super steel), Japan doesn't
China have vehicle loaded with the solid propellant Four-level carrier rocket,japan doesn't
china research on Homoiothermy superconductivity material advance Japan
China quantum communication research advance Japan

Even in some Japan's traditional suprior field, China have catch up with japan
just like moudle technology. you can see the NHK's report

So what can you say?

does India have any field advance Japan?


----------



## Aeneas

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Omar I am not questioning Chinese character just raising doubts on whether the world will allow China to control the Indian Ocean.


the best part of the foreign policy of China is "never do the things exceed our national strength".so we will not plan to control Indian Ocean.you may think it is stupid for China to plan control Indian Ocean now,facing so many troubles.so,China govt know that clearly at least as well as you.


----------



## Gabbar

China have our own 3-G telecommunication world technology standard. japan doesn't



> China have mass-product Crystallite steel(super steel), Japan doesn't



*Please check again, I think you are wrong.*
Japan chooses advanced 3G phones - Telecommunications - iTnews Australia



> China have vehicle loaded with the solid propellant Four-level carrier
> rocket,japan doesn't



Japan Unveils New Rocket



> china research on Homoiothermy superconductivity material advance Japan



I dont know enough about this technology to comment at this time, may be in future or we can open new thread.



> Please provide link



China quantum communication research advance Japan

But Japan had this technology first. 

*And please try not posts everykind of techonology here. I am sure China is is better in some aspects than Japan but this not this thread is about.*

*I am still waiting for you to answer my first question?*


----------



## UTONY

indiatech said:


> The future is not India *OR* China,
> 
> it is India *AND* China.



I have bunches of India friends and it somehow changed my original images and views about India. It's great country with great potentials. 

However, as I did visit India (Delhi) last year, it surprised me more not b/c its less-development such as in infrastructure, but the naive (sorry for this word) mind of its people. Most of them knew little how the world's going... What impressed me most is the question from a so-called taxi driver, saying, "Look, do you China have any this kind of gas station?" he pointed to a ordinary gas station in Delhi along our way to hotel, with a very proud smile... 

&#22247;RZ

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jetLi

Hah, Enough
I don't know what you have ask.
I just mention it, Japan can survive without India, but can not withour China.
so Japan can not be India's firm ally

and although Russia sell weapon to India.
but Russia have more joint-interest with China, especially face USA


----------



## jetLi

UTONY said:


> I have bunches of India friends and it somehow changed my original images and views about India. It's great country with great potentials.
> 
> However, as I did visited India (Deli) last year, it surprised me more no b/c its less-development such as infrastructure, but the naive (sorry for this word) mind of its people. Most of them knew little how the world's going... What impressed me most is the question from a so-called taxi driver, saying, "Is there any Gas station like this in your China?" he pointed to a poor gas station in Deli along our way to hotel... &#22247;RZ




Hah, India just be independent from British, then They think it is the third
strongest empire in the world. How pitty!

India people extremely conceited and joking.

Btw, Many thanks India's culture contribution to China in history and In the 
world War 2. there is a Chinese troops retreat to india from the Burma battlefield.
But India do not want to get one inch land from south Tibet


----------



## UTONY

gpit said:


> Chinese official media do cover up, but seldom lie. India democratic free media lie to public, as they are free to lie.
> 
> Agreed that it is interesting.



Trenchant


----------



## paritosh

jetLi said:


> reality is there, China is successful than Japan in space program
> 
> btw, China also advance in these field,
> China have our own 3-G telecommunication world technology standard. japan doesn't
> China have mass-product Crystallite steel(super steel), Japan doesn't
> China have vehicle loaded with the solid propellant Four-level carrier rocket,japan doesn't
> china research on Homoiothermy superconductivity material advance Japan
> China quantum communication research advance Japan
> 
> Even in some Japan's traditional suprior field, China have catch up with japan
> just like moudle technology. you can see the NHK's report
> 
> So what can you say?
> 
> does India have any field advance Japan?



japan is a developed nation.period.you are catching up...and really fast at that...china is going to be the US of the future...but like us you've had agrarian roots...we'd like a china that speaks from the wisdom of the ancient culture that it is...and not behave like another bully with limitless resources.
as far as china vs japan is concenred...the most verstaile of all countries is japan...you ccant undermine the fact that with almost no resources and land area...they have produced everything....right from honda toyota to sony...they've made history!
i have a lot of respect for the jap workmanship...there clean lifestyle is responsible for their having the longest lifespan amongst all nations...


----------



## jetLi

India's democracy is that they have caste system: devide people into different class
by their name and career. such as Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya,S&#363;dra
They can't marry each other in different caste.
I think it is just like in the slave system era.

Does it mean democracy ?


----------



## paritosh

jetLi said:


> India's democracy is that they have caste system: devide people into different class
> by their name and career. such as Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya,S&#363;dra
> They can't marry each other in different caste.
> I think it is just like in the slave system era.
> 
> Does it mean democracy ?



that is defintely not a part of our constitution....written nowhere...illegal everywhere.
since the aztecs and the mayans used to sacrifice a large part of their population...would you blame the mexicans and the brazillians of being pagan today?

we got a democratic system in place to rid ourselves of these evils.


----------



## Aeneas

gpit said:


> Chinese official media do cover up, but seldom lie. India democratic free media lie to public, as they are free to lie.
> 
> Agreed that it is interesting.


yes,that is what I want to say too.

to China media,we try to uncover something,to democratic free media,we try to find out which is lie or exaggerate.

because if China media don't cover up something,they will meet trouble from govt.if democratic free media don't lie or exaggerate,they will lost market.


----------



## Aeneas

paritosh said:


> that is defintely not a part of our constitution....written nowhere...illegal everywhere.
> since the aztecs and the mayans used to sacrifice a large part of their population...would you blame the mexicans and the brazillians of being pagan today?
> 
> we got a democratic system in place to rid ourselves of these evils.


sometimes,I really doubt if the democratic system is the right tool to deal with this issue.60 years had past.it seemed India keep using a small knife named "democratic system" cut a huge tree named "caste system" for 60 years,and merely cut off a small part of the tree.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## paritosh

Aeneas said:


> sometimes,I really doubt if the democratic system is the right tool to deal with this issue.60 years had past.it seemed India keep using a small knife named "democratic system" cut a huge tree named "caste system" for 60 years,and merely cut off a small part of the tree.



your observation is quite right my friend....ours is gonna be a long and painfully slow way....we can make a zillion laws.....write editorials but it's in the minds of the common people....that the future of a country truly shapes up...democracy is a small rock hammer but the good thing is that it's in the hands of the right person.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proud2Indian

paritosh said:


> your observation is quite right my friend....ours is gonna be a long and painfully slow way....we can make a zillion laws.....write editorials but it's in the minds of the common people....that the future of a country truly shapes up...democracy is a small rock hammer but the good thing is that it's in the hands of the right person.



But our system allows us to change the govt if we are not satisfiesd with the way solution....result of 2004 elections comes to mind...Atleast you need not watch your back all the time fearing the govt eyes keeping watch on you....


tx


----------



## Proud2Indian

Aeneas said:


> sometimes,I really doubt if the democratic system is the right tool to deal with this issue.60 years had past.it seemed India keep using a small knife named "democratic system" cut a huge tree named "caste system" for 60 years,and merely cut off a small part of the tree.



How will you differentiate between Hidding truth and telling lies...
Also democracy allows us to listen who ever we like to hear and make judgement our self...You are not allowed even to hear the counter view and thats the real difference...


tx


----------



## paritosh

Proud2Indian said:


> But our system allows us to change the govt if we are not satisfiesd with the way solution....result of 2004 elections comes to mind...Atleast you need not watch your back all the time fearing the govt eyes keeping watch on you....
> 
> 
> tx



whatever the chinese have done it works.
we should appreciate their development...rather than finding loop-holes...every country has problems.they have done their bit to solve them..they view deomcracy as an ineffective way to govern a billion people...we think that a single party socialist system of the chinese is not good....different people different opinion...they think that watching **** is bad...and the state censorship is important...china is coming out good...nothing else matters.
although eventually the chinese might take the democratic route...once they exhaust the current 'after-burn' mode of a pseudo-dictatorship...and we might accelerate once we have a larger intelligentia base..
the chinses and indian models are so different yet so fascinating...the world will be watching how 1/2 of humanity seeks to rise and change the existing world order.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proud2Indian

paritosh said:


> whatever the chinese have done it works.
> we should appreciate their development...rather than finding loop-holes...every country has problems.they have done their bit to solve them..they view deomcracy as an ineffective way to govern a billion people...we think that a single party socialist system of the chinese is not good....different people different opinion...they think that watching **** is bad...and the state censorship is important...china is coming out good...nothing else matters.
> although eventually the chinese might take the democratic route...once they exhaust the current 'after-burn' mode of a pseudo-dictatorship...and we might accelerate once we have a larger intelligentia base..
> the chinses and indian models are so different yet so fascinating...the world will be watching how 1/2 of humanity seeks to rise and change the existing world order.



So tell me are you ready to live under the totalitarian system....Will you be happy if people behind incidence Thianman Sq will not be held accountable in India...Modi in Guj is on the same line...WHat you want should he be tried for his faults or in name of progress we don't question him....Its choice you have to make...we move slow but we are allowed to raise your voice....you know all the short coming of India because of Fre Media.....China is all honky Dory because of restriction on Media....even people are not allowed to move freely from Village to City ....do you want to live in that env....I don't and I harldy think that even you will like to live in that env (ANd I can be wrong in that)


tx

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jetLi

in China today, lots of chinese relize that development is first important thing 
in this stage. the survival rights is the most important.

and it is glad to see that we are improve our democracy
in fact, we did not envy your democracy system. 
You can come to china's forum, 
if there is any subject about India, we first laugh at your democracy.
because we think that this system is beyond your economic development stage and population quality


----------



## paritosh

Proud2Indian said:


> So tell me are you ready to live under the totalitarian system....Will you be happy if people behind incidence Thianman Sq will not be held accountable in India...Modi in Guj is on the same line...WHat you want should he be tried for his faults or in name of progress we don't question him....Its choice you have to make...we move slow but we are allowed to raise your voice....you know all the short coming of India because of Fre Media.....China is all honky Dory because of restriction on Media....even people are not allowed to move freely from Village to City ....do you want to live in that env....I don't and I harldy think that even you will like to live in that env (ANd I can be wrong in that)
> 
> 
> tx



i never said that we dont have our privileges...tell me how many times have you cursed the system when the likes of raj thackeray or modi or sri ram sene...or vhp or simi are allowed to spread hate...?
whether you like it or not...india is still a nation of village dwellers and they can be moved easily...to form the righteous opinion you have to be educated...and democracy works on the opinion of the largest homogeneous group...so that way..we all would be burning hay in the middle of the chowk to rid the area of mosquitos...or something like that.
dude...democracy is obviously the best and most modern system...but nothing works the way it is intended to...to comfort you...i agree with your observations...but i have a point.


----------



## paritosh

jetLi said:


> in China today, lots of chinese relize that development is first important thing
> in this stage. the survival rights is the most important.
> 
> and it is glad to see that we are improve our democracy
> in fact, we did not envy your democracy system.
> You can come to china's forum,
> if there is any subject about India, we first laugh at your democracy.
> because we think that this system is beyond your economic development stage and population quality



what you do in your forums is not what we discuss here...it wasnt a part of the indian constitution to make you and your friends laugh...but we dont mind if it did.
you can think that you play all your stages in 'god-mode'...but a democracy is improved/updated through amendments.i've had enough narcissism coming from your side mate...it's practical to accept criticism.


----------



## afriend

jetLi said:


> in China today, lots of chinese relize that development is first important thing
> in this stage. the survival rights is the most important.
> 
> and it is glad to see that we are improve our democracy
> in fact, we did not envy your democracy system.
> You can come to china's forum,
> if there is any subject about India, we first laugh at your democracy.
> because we think that this system is beyond your economic development stage and population quality



Well any sort of restriction on free thinking is a hinderence to the longterm survivial of a country. As i have mentioned in some other posts. I heard a documentry of a hongkong media mogul who once said that,what china lacks is a strong moral ground, their entire life is build and revolves around economy and if that fails.. they dont have nothing to go back too..!!!! It think i mentioned it in this thread itself..!!! Could any of my chinese friends give their opinion on the above statement..!!!!


----------



## jetLi

paritosh said:


> what you do in your forums is not what we discuss here...it wasnt a part of the indian constitution to make you and your friends laugh...but we dont mind if it did.
> you can think that you play all your stages in 'god-mode'...but a democracy is improved/updated through amendments.i've had enough narcissism coming from your side mate...it's practical to accept criticism.



Democracy is a perfect system in theory. I don't deny it
But if put into practise,
we must consider a lots of factors.
such as population quantity and quality, educational level,
economic level and culture etc.

Chinese goverment in very cautious , 
because we have mad lots mistakes in history


----------



## jetLi

afriend said:


> Goverment any sort of restriction on free thinking is a hinderence to the longterm survivial of a country. As i have mentioned in some other posts. I heard a documentry of a hongkong media mogul who once said that,what china lacks is a strong moral ground, their entire life is build and revolves around economy and if that fails.. they dont have nothing to go back too..!!!! It think i mentioned it in this thread itself..!!! Could any of my chinese friends give their opinion on the above statement..!!!!



Government don't put any restriction on our mind, you must be get too many wrong
information and calumniation from the western media. in china you can talk any
thing( except against nation and CPC). 

We admit these 30 years we just focus on development economic and ignore molding our core values. But i think that if citizen break away from the shadle of poority, they will began to pay attention on this.

in fact, recently lots of elits of china have appeal for it, and we believe that we will become better and better


----------



## paritosh

jetLi said:


> Democracy is a perfect system in theory. I don't deny it
> But if put into practise,
> we must consider a lots of factors.
> such as population quantity and quality, educational level,
> economic level and culture etc.
> 
> Chinese goverment in very cautious ,
> because we have mad lots mistakes in history



and i feel that...somewhere down the line...the chinese would embrace democracy....when they'd have a good sustainable growth rate...
the biggest achievement of the chinese system imo hasnt been the growth rate or the economy but the clipping down of the population growth rate..which we through our democratic means haven't been able to do...


----------



## jetLi

paritosh said:


> and i feel that...somewhere down the line...the chinese would embrace democracy....when they'd have a good sustainable growth rate...
> the biggest achievement of the chinese system imo hasnt been the growth rate or the economy but the clipping down of the population growth rate..which we through our democratic means haven't been able to do...



since we learn Marxism and Leninism , We have mad lots of Dogmatism mistakes. So before We learn any thing, we must thing that whether it is 
true for us. so do democracy.

In my oppinion, freedom and human rights is not boundless, it must make sure 
that anyone can't damage the collective interest

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proud2Indian

paritosh said:


> i never said that we dont have our privileges...tell me how many times have you cursed the system when the likes of raj thackeray or modi or sri ram sene...or vhp or simi are allowed to spread hate...?
> whether you like it or not...india is still a nation of village dwellers and they can be moved easily...to form the righteous opinion you have to be educated...and democracy works on the opinion of the largest homogeneous group...so that way..we all would be burning hay in the middle of the chowk to rid the area of mosquitos...or something like that.
> dude...democracy is obviously the best and most modern system...but nothing works the way it is intended to...to comfort you...i agree with your observations...but i have a point.




No sire...I never hated system...atleast not for the reason mentioned by you....Biggest culprit in ur list is Modi and he is still batelling in Courts(And even he has done wonders in gujrat this system will not allow him to come to centre)....and this system make sure that even BJP came to power ...they were not able to implement their "Hindu agenda".....

For villagers...theygave power to BJP for 6 yrs and then they gave it back to Congress....no sir .... I Have heard this argument before that educated socitey is required for democracy to work...no democracy required active society to work.....in our cities where literacy rate is high Manmohan sir lost his election (From south Delhi)....This sytem has given us tool like RTI which help us in improving the system....but if you check this is used more by the people living in the villages than literated city dwellers....

tx


----------



## Super Falcon

i dont see relations will change between india and chine i think attitude of india and attitude of indian poltics in internationally have to be change than some how relations can be improved between the two huge horse powers of millitary in the world


----------



## ever4244

afriend said:


> Well any sort of restriction on free thinking is a hinderence to the longterm survivial of a country. As i have mentioned in some other posts. I heard a documentry of a hongkong media mogul who once said that,what china lacks is a strong moral ground, their entire life is build and revolves around economy and if that fails.. they dont have nothing to go back too..!!!! It think i mentioned it in this thread itself..!!! Could any of my chinese friends give their opinion on the above statement..!!!!



If you have ever read the european history about the religious reform```````````

Sometimes it is better to burn a few 'infidel' on the stakes than have the whole nation fight a bloody religious civil war. Even your british queen was not entirely merciful on this matter.

The free thinking in academic area is good, but the free advocating in public is not always tolerable. Free advocating may tear many hundreds society apart and trigger many thousands of war, history proved this time and time again

There is taboos in any kind kind of society, whether democratic or authoritarian. -- If you don t believe, please try crying loudly on the street of Berlin: 'Hail, Nazi'. The difference is the later use gun to defend the taboo while the former use $ in massmedia to brainwash public away from it. Thus, the word 'socialism' in US became a curse, while the word democracy in china became paradoxical in its meaning.


----------



## ever4244

afriend said:


> Well any sort of restriction on free thinking is a hinderence to the longterm survivial of a country. As i have mentioned in some other posts. I heard a documentry of a hongkong media mogul who once said that,what china lacks is a strong moral ground, their entire life is build and revolves around economy and if that fails.. they dont have nothing to go back too..!!!! It think i mentioned it in this thread itself..!!! Could any of my chinese friends give their opinion on the above statement..!!!!



For one thing: have you ever thought about a question?

why all the early civilization is in a miserable state (China and india may recollect themselves a bit, but are still far from reclaiming their former glory)

why the new-rich like US , those Gothic barbarians(germany), those Vingin pirates(Northern europeans) live such a civilized and wealthy lives?

Every civilization has its peak and valley so does every culture and moral.

You indias are extremely love to braging about '*rich history*', '*colourful culture*' 

but you never realize that it is you 'rich history and colourful culture' prevent you from advancing further. As an old trunk, your culure has already rotten in the core and do not fit in the industrializtion era, let along information age.

You talk about chinese lose value and moral.

Yes, we lose it because we choose it, we systematic destory our old culture and value and we have also succesfully root it out from the rural area.

we destory it because it hinder our development, restrict our freedom, undermine our equality. Old culture was like an organ with cancer, you cant just cut the cancer out without harming the healthy tissue. So the great politician, scientist,artistest, social activist in china conduct this huge social operation from Qing to ROK to PRC and finally make china a uniformed, secular, modern national state with enlightened idea and material mindset. 

And we choose to restore chinese culture and value now , but only to the best part, moded to fit today's world.

Some hunter say: when traped , the king of wolfs is the one who bites his own leg off to get free.

You indian are too soft-hearted to yourself and your culture, so your can never become the wolf king.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## indiatech

ever4244 said:


> For one thing: have you ever thought about a question?
> 
> why all the early civilization is in a miserable state (China and india may recollect themselves a bit, but are still far from reclaiming their former glory)
> 
> why the new-rich like US , those Gothic barbarians(germany), those Vingin pirates(Northern europeans) live such a civilized and wealthy lives?
> 
> Every civilization has its peak and valley so does every culture and moral.
> 
> You indias are extremely love to braging about '*rich history*', '*colourful culture*'
> 
> but you never realize that it is you 'rich history and colourful culture' prevent you from advancing further. *As an old trunk, your culure has already rotten in the core and do not fit in the industrializtion era, let along information age.*
> 
> You talk about chinese lose value and moral.
> 
> Yes, we lose it because we choose it, we systematic destory our old culture and value and we have also succesfully root it out from the rural area.
> 
> we destory it because it hinder our development, restrict our freedom, undermine our equality. Old culture was like an organ with cancer, you cant just cut the cancer out without harming the healthy tissue. So the great politician, scientist,artistest, social activist in china conduct this huge social operation from Qing to ROK to PRC and finally make china a uniformed, secular, modern national state with enlightened idea and material mindset.
> 
> And we choose to restore chinese culture and value now , but only to the best part, moded to fit today's world.
> 
> Some hunter say: when traped , the king of wolfs is the one who bites his own leg off to get free.
> 
> You indian are too soft-hearted to yourself and your culture, so your can never become the wolf king.



to say that indian culture is rotten and all these bullshit shows how narrow ur thinking is. Our religions and culture are very deep rooted and colourful to deep inside the souls. You may not understand or appreciate it if you never tried . At least don't say bad. 

We don't want to be the wolf king. but let me remind you most chinese seems to now have the feeling of "we are the world". 

In india we have a saying, whatever goes up also comes down. May be the force of gravity or something else.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DeathInvader

jetLi said:


> yes ,you are right, your greedy for other countries' land will lead you pitty end



???????.............i don't really understand........it was china who invaded India for Tibet which was a part of India.......it is Pakistan who has eyed Kashmir since 1947.........and tried to capture it 3 times since then ........and u r telling greed for other countries land will lead us to pity end.......ridiculous............

for your kind information India has never Invaded any country in 10000 yrs because we believe in freedom and we never threaten others freedom.......

in 1971 war...Indian army captured a huge part of Pakistan but returned it as a gesture of goodwill..........!

has china or Pakistan ever done it.........


Moreover U still eye on Arunachal Pradesh and claim it ur territory..........inspite Arunachal Pradesh recognized as a constitutional state in India.............


I still think China as full moon and India as crescent moon........... but in the end
A full moon always becomes a crescent one and vice-versa........

coming back to the topic .......India and china are reported to ave a annual trade of $100 billion.....i don't think going on a war will benefit both of them....


----------



## jetLi

it was china who invaded India for Tibet which was a part of India.

-----------------------------------------------------

ridiculus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

British invade in Tibet in the end of 19 century. China had never admit it.

so the south tibet belong to china is undebutable!!!

You Indian Brain are joking

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## taiji

Lots of flames here. Back to topic, China and India don't have to become enemies. Border issue is not unsolvable, since when PRC founded in 1949, China had land border disputes with almost every neighbour, now only China-India border issue remains unsolved. I believe with growing business and more openess to each other, the two nation can learn to respect and appreciate to each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

*This thread has been derailed and there is lot of off topic bs going on here.
Guys/Gals please stick to the topic. If want to discuss something else, please open new thread.*


----------



## Gabbar

If you take 1962 out of the equation and I dont think there is much left other then border issue between India and China. I see these two asian giants making lots of progress in future and there is nothing wrong with being prepared for the worst.


----------



## DarkStar

*Any more off topic will not be tolerated. Lets not make this a slanging match.

Discuss issues with civility, and knowledge. Otherwise, desist.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UTONY

Omar1984 said:


> To my Chinese friends on this forum, please dont fall in the trap of Indian members. They will try to get you angry so they can get you banned..its their plan they have done it with other members and moderators of this forum say they are nationality blind.


----------



## Aeneas

Proud2Indian said:


> How will you differentiate between Hidding truth and telling lies...
> Also democracy allows us to listen who ever we like to hear and make judgement our self...You are not allowed even to hear the counter view and thats the real difference...
> 
> 
> tx


yes,but people always trend to focus on sensational news,even it is not true.that is the bad part of humanity.


----------



## Proud2Indian

Aeneas said:


> yes,but people always trend to focus on sensational news,even it is not true.that is the bad part of humanity.



may be its my bad...can you explain how your comment is linked to what I said....

My point is simple....Chinese Govt restrict the citizen to know the counter-view......Let the people decide them self what if true or false.....

I have seen state controlled media of 70's & 80's in my country....and I have seen media change since 1990's...yes there is sensation news all over the place...but this freedom also allow me to know what other think of India...whats their point-of-view......and now govt cann't assume that we will take what ever they say....


tx


----------



## Aeneas

yes,in fact,I'm not very satisfied about media controll of my govt too.always we said China had many problem of himself.

but I witness the restrict relax step by step in past years. 

and,I don't know there have been state controlled media of 70's & 80's in your country.what about it?


----------



## Proud2Indian

Aeneas said:


> and,I don't know there have been state controlled media of 70's & 80's in your country.what about it?



No... media was not controlled by govt but all news paper well nationalist printing the India\Govt point-Of-View, differences were only in internal matters and on our national channel (I think you also see this on your national channel (I have seen some of it in Singapore couple of years back)... this minister said this...that minister said that....that govt representative vising......nothing more that that...


tx


----------



## Trisonics

jetLi said:


> India's democracy is that they have caste system: devide people into different class
> by their name and career. such as Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya,S&#363;dra
> They can't marry each other in different caste.
> I think it is just like in the slave system era.
> 
> Does it mean democracy ?



Lets assume you work in a corporate setting, no wait lets assume you work any where ..can you please tell me a place of work where there is no division based on skills or labor? heck take your military are all of your military men the same don't you have any ranking? Being an old civilization the ranking system was created that is still followed every where in this world. Obviously when certain men try to interpret this, men always do it to benefit him or his friends, hence in our system the low can't be high! sigh!!! 

Yes we will overtake you to be the nation with the most population!! it may sound alarm bells to most but some believe with India's majority still being young the work force and the low costs will always be rejuvenated while it may become China's biggest worry.

Definitely India has a lot of catching up to do, but the way the two countries work is so different!!! Democracy is a boon and a bane but what is the point if I cant go public with or voice my opinions? 
Interpretation Vs Innovation..sir we are two different sides of a coin!!!! We will never have the infrastructure you have but then why do so many software companies come to us? Im not talking back office work and mostly production and manufacturing go to you? As somebody said it will be India AND China not any single country alone!!!!!


----------



## gpit

paritosh said:


> that is defintely not a part of our constitution....written nowhere...illegal everywhere.
> since the aztecs and the mayans used to sacrifice a large part of their population...would you blame the mexicans and the brazillians of being pagan today?
> 
> we got a democratic system in place to rid ourselves of these evils.





That does not rule out the fact that your massive illiterate subscribe to caste ideas and endorse caste practices. Thus, your constitution is next to nothing in educting your vast mass.


----------



## gpit

Proud2Indian said:


> How will you differentiate between Hidding truth and telling lies...
> Also democracy allows us to listen who ever we like to hear and make judgement our self...You are not allowed even to hear the counter view and thats the real difference...
> 
> 
> tx



I confess that I was wrong when I though you were sufficiently educated&#8230;

Covering-up is telling truth, albeit partial truth. 

Lying is calling black white, or bad good.

Commercial advertisements are propagandas that tell partial truth. If they lie, or calling bad good, the one behind the ads will get prosecuted (perhaps not in India).

Being fundamentally confused with the subject matter, no wonder so many of your media love lying.


----------



## Trisonics

India Vs China: A BBC Documentry
















The video sums it up, its a pretty honest documentary and the key differences in the two countries are well laid out

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## messenger

gpit said:


> That does not rule out the fact that your massive illiterate subscribe to caste ideas and endorse caste practices. Thus, your constitution is next to nothing in educting your vast mass.



sir . you dont live in india and hence you dont know anything about it . the cast system that you are mentioning is almost extinct now . no one talks about it . i have many friends and i dont know to which caste they belong .
it exists only in some parts of rural india . and believe me if you travel to some backwards parts of your country you will also find some practices beyond your imagination .
and regarding literacy india literacy rate was 34% in 1970's and 65% in 2001 . so we are moving in the right direction .

and reagarding china . we dont have to compete with her . there is going to be some time when gov of both the countries will realise that they will have to join hands to dominate the world .


----------



## jetLi

messenger said:


> sir . you dont live in india and hence you dont know anything about it . the cast system that you are mentioning is almost extinct now . no one talks about it . i have many friends and i dont know to which caste they belong .
> it exists only in some parts of rural india . and believe me if you travel to some backwards parts of your country you will also find some practices beyond your imagination .
> and regarding literacy india literacy rate was 34% in 1970's and 65% in 2001 . so we are moving in the right direction .
> 
> and reagarding china . we dont have to compete with her . there is going to be some time when gov of both the countries will realise that they will have to join hands to dominate the world .



Really?

3 killed in Holi festival of colors in India
3 killed in Holi festival of colors in India_English_Xinhua

India poor boy carry elopement with rich girl, whole family be killed
http://news.xmnn.cn/gjxw/200902/t20090212_899127.htm


----------



## Gabbar

*Messenger dont feed the troll!!!*


----------



## Gabbar

Trisonics, Thank you for posting those videos. Very well laid out and fair analysis by the reporter. We have our differences but I am sure in future these two countries will find a way to work together.


----------



## duhastmish

*A great documentary on indian chinese trade relations.*


----------



## messenger

Gabbar said:


> *Messenger dont feed the troll!!!*



sir im sorry but i will have to answer him.


----------



## messenger

jetLi said:


> Really?
> 
> 3 killed in Holi festival of colors in India
> 3 killed in Holi festival of colors in India_English_Xinhua
> 
> India poor boy carry elopement with rich girl, whole family be killed
> &#211;&#161;&#182;&#200;&#199;&#238;&#208;&#161;&#187;&#239;&#208;&#175;&#184;&#187;&#188;&#210;&#197;&#174;&#203;&#189;&#177;&#188; &#210;&#187;&#188;&#210;8&#191;&#218;&#177;&#187;&#197;&#174;&#183;&#189;&#188;&#210;&#200;&#203;&#201;&#177;&#186;&#166;_&#185;&#250;&#188;&#202;&#208;&#194;&#206;&#197;_&#208;&#194;&#206;&#197;&#214;&#208;&#208;&#196;_&#207;&#195;&#195;&#197;&#205;&#248;



oh thanks . you know why you got to know them . becoz it came out .unlike your country which supresses everything against it . 
racial acts take place even in america even now . they too take place in your country but you will never see them in news or tv and you know why . 
before pointing fingers towards other countries take a look at your human rights account .

yes really !


----------



## Aeneas

messenger said:


> oh thanks . you know why you got to know them . becoz it came out .unlike your country which supresses everything against it .
> racial acts take place even in america even now . they too take place in your country but you will never see them in news or tv and you know why .
> before pointing fingers towards other countries take a look at your human rights account .
> 
> yes really !


yes,there are ethnic prejudice in China,but not the kind you know in other nation.

go to China,and ask a pair of husband and wife,if one of them is han,one of them is minority.ask them whether they would let their children sign up hukou as han or minority.


----------



## messenger

Aeneas said:


> yes,there are ethnic prejudice in China,but not the kind you know in other nation.
> 
> go to China,and ask a pair of husband and wife,if one of them is han,one of them is minority.ask them whether they would let their children sign up hukou as han or minority.



dude this is exactly what im trying to say . both india and china had this so called caste system but now it has almost became extinct .


----------



## taiji

Chinese gov's policy of discriminating Han ethnic on college access is quite problematic. The policy does not doing good to either ethnic minorities or Han Chinese. The gov should put more resource on the education system itself rather than discriminating one party of people. 

Similarly, I've heard the Indian gov preserve some positions for people from low caste family, and it's also controversal. Again I believe the Indian gov should put more resource on education and allow more people from all background to have chance to access it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aeneas

messenger said:


> dude this is exactly what im trying to say . both india and china had this so called caste system but now it has almost became extinct .


not exactly,there are no caste system in China in history.the problem is between landlords and peasants and serfs.if a peasant became rich,there would be no problem for him to became landlord as well as other landlords.money talk.no bias for his born.


----------



## noboshi123

Couldn't be any better nor any worse.


----------



## Nihat

> New Delhi: Worried that Tibetans may hold violent protests to observe the 50th year of the Dalai Lama's exile, China on Wednesday thanked India for providing security to their missions but reminded New Delhi of its pledge not to allow Tibetans to indulge in political activities.
> 
> "Tibetans in India have not stopped protests and candle-light demonstrations. The Dalai Lama and his followers have staged many protests in different parts of India, including Delhi, specially since the Tibetan New Year on February 5," China's Ambassador to India Zhang Yan told reporters.
> 
> "The scale is, however, much smaller than we expected. This year they have failed to reach the embassy and stage protests," the envoy said.
> 
> He said Tibetans were planning to stage violent activities in India, including an attack on the Chinese embassy.
> 
> "We are prepared for it, with the help and assistance of the Indian Government and law enforcement agencies," he said.
> 
> "The Indian Government is committed to not allowing the Dalai Lama and his followers to undertake any political activities against China. We expect the Indian Government to fulfil its commitment," the envoy underlined.
> 
> "We are satisfied at the support we have received from the Indian Government," he said when asked whether India had shown enough sensitivity over the Tibetan issue.
> 
> He also lauded India for taking "decisive measures" to ensure the safety of the Indian leg of the Chinese Olympic torch procession in New Delhi last year.
> 
> "It was appreciated not only by the Chinese government but people all over the world. It showed to the world India is capable of handling the security situation," he said. "It was a warming up for the security drill for the Commonwealth Games India will host next year," he said.
> 
> Around 1 lakh Tibetan exiles live in India. India granted refuge to the Dalai Lama after China brutally cracked down on the Tibetan uprising in 1959.
> 
> Tibetan exiles are planning to hold a five-day 'thank you' India festival starting Thursday for generosity and hospitality extended to Tibetan refugees and Dalai Lama during the last 50 years of their stay here. The festival will be inaugurated by Tibetan government-in-exile's Prime Minister Samdhong Rinpoche. The Dalai Lama is expected to attend the closing day of the festival March 31.



India pledged to disallow Tibet protests: China


----------



## Gabbar

Indian Army fears China attack by 2017

The Indian military fears a Chinese aggression in less than a decade. A secret exercise, called Divine Matrix, by the armys military operations directorate has visualised a war scenario with the nuclear-armed neighbour before 2017.

A misadventure by China is very much within the realm of possibility with Beijing trying to position itself as the only power in the region. There will be no nuclear warfare but a short, swift war that could have menacing consequences for India, said an army officer, who was part of the three-day war games that ended on Wednesday.

In the militarys assessment, based on a six-month study of various scenarios before the war games, China would rely on information warfare (IW) to bring India down on its knees before launching an offensive.

The war games saw generals raising concerns about the IW battalions of the Peoples Liberation Army carrying out hacker attacks for military espionage, intelligence collection, paralysing communication systems, compromising airport security, inflicting damage on the banking system and disabling power grids. We need to spend more on developing information warfare capability, he said.

The war games dispelled the notion that China would take at least one season (one year) for a substantial military build-up across Indias northeastern frontiers. The Tibetan infrastructure has been improved considerably. The PLA can now launch an assault very quickly, without any warning, the officer said.

The military believes that China would have swamped Tibet with sweeping demographic changes in the medium term. For the purposes of Divine Matrix, China would call Dalai Lama for rapprochement and neutralise him. The top brass also brainstormed over Indias options in case Pakistan joined the war to. Another apprehension was that Myanmar and Bangladesh would align with China in the future geostrategic environment.

Story Page


----------



## saiko

Hi, we're the Indian army and we need more money so we'll play up the threat of "misadventure" by China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ANDUBYLL

MOD EDIT....Finding humour in infantile posts is a good way to get banned.


----------



## Gabbar

*New IAF airfield to be reopened in east Ladakh*

NEW DELHI: After successfully reopening Daulat Beg Oldi and Fuk Che airfields in Ladakh last year, India is now working aggressively to 
operationalise the Neoma Advanced Landing Ground (ALG) this year for the Indian Air Force (IAF), close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China. 

Though these airfields are being revived to support troop movement in times of need, India would prefer these to be ready for future tourism requirements. 

In due course, the airfield at Neoma will also be converted into a full fledged runway to cater to future tourist inflow. 

"This new ALG is coming up at Neoma in east Ladakh, which will, in all probability, be converted into a full fledged runway, like any other runway to cater for the future tourism requirements also in the region," IAF's Western Air Command Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief Air Marshal P K Barbora told reporters here on Monday. 

Neoma is not as close to the LAC as Daulat Beg Oldi or Fuk Che are, but it will be close enough to support military operations too. The airfields were operated by the Indian armed forces during the 1962 Sino-Indian war, but closed a few years later. 

"Not as close (to China) as DBO, Chushul or Fuk Che. But it is in a pretty comfortable place," Barbora said. 

Work on Neoma airfield has already started and the IAF is preparing the ALG to operate fixed-wing aircraft. 

Regarding the IAF's original plans to reopen the Chushul airfield in the Ladakh region, Barbora said the idea has been shelved for the moment, but it could be revived as and when the government wanted the ALG operationalised. 

Giving reasons for the government decision, the Air Marshal said the IAF felt it was not required now because of the road connectivity that has come up there, and because of the amount of money and work that would go into preparing the airfield for operation. 

"Whenever there is a requirement, we can and will prepare the Chushul airfield. Also, the amount of work that has to be fitted in to get it ready is not worth it. We already have done landing and take off at Daulat Beg Oldi and Fuk Che," he added. 

When Neoma gets ready, it would be IAF's third ALG in Ladakh to be reopened nearer to the Chinese and Pakistani borders in the last one year in Jammu and Kashmir, with Daulat Beg Oldi and Fuk Che becoming operational in May and November respectively. 

The IAF has been reopening airfields to strengthen its air maintenance operations and promotion of tourism in the region, which is the gateway to the highest battlefield, Siachen Glacier.


----------



## Sargodhian_Eagle

Max The Boss said:


> China and India mainly focusing on their
> Economic Development & Energy Security.
> So China and India can corporate with each
> Other on the issue peacefully.
> 
> For example  *China and India can sign a
> Navel Corporation Agreement.*China can share South China Sea
> With India.
> *India can share Indian Ocean
> With China.*
> If China and India ready to corporate
> With each other peacefully then both
> Countries benefit.



If india had to do so then why China invested 198 million $ in Gawader Sea Port at Pakistan?
India is trying to fly like a viewer who comes out of cinema after watching Super Man movie
India wants dominance over subcontinent specielly over china and Pak and this maidness led india to 1962 and 1965 wars


----------



## Gabbar

> India wants dominance over subcontinent specielly over china and Pak and this maidness led india to 1962 and 1965 wars



Want to elaborate more?


----------



## Sargodhian_Eagle

Its fact as u knw


----------



## Gabbar

Sargodhian_Eagle said:


> Its fact as u knw



That's it? that's best you got? Your statement doesn't hold any credibility, if that was your reason.


----------



## Fennecus

Gabbar said:


> Indian Army fears China attack by 2017
> 
> The Indian military fears a Chinese aggression in less than a decade. A secret exercise, called Divine Matrix, by the armys military operations directorate has visualised a war scenario with the nuclear-armed neighbour before 2017.
> 
> A misadventure by China is very much within the realm of possibility with Beijing trying to position itself as the only power in the region. There will be no nuclear warfare but a short, swift war that could have menacing consequences for India, said an army officer, who was part of the three-day war games that ended on Wednesday.
> 
> In the militarys assessment, based on a six-month study of various scenarios before the war games, China would rely on information warfare (IW) to bring India down on its knees before launching an offensive.
> 
> The war games saw generals raising concerns about the IW battalions of the Peoples Liberation Army carrying out hacker attacks for military espionage, intelligence collection, paralysing communication systems, compromising airport security, inflicting damage on the banking system and disabling power grids. We need to spend more on developing information warfare capability, he said.
> 
> The war games dispelled the notion that China would take at least one season (one year) for a substantial military build-up across Indias northeastern frontiers. The Tibetan infrastructure has been improved considerably. The PLA can now launch an assault very quickly, without any warning, the officer said.
> 
> The military believes that China would have swamped Tibet with sweeping demographic changes in the medium term. For the purposes of Divine Matrix, China would call Dalai Lama for rapprochement and neutralise him. The top brass also brainstormed over Indias options in case Pakistan joined the war to. Another apprehension was that Myanmar and Bangladesh would align with China in the future geostrategic environment.
> 
> Story Page



Completely unfounded, there are few here who desire war with India.


----------



## Nihat

Since 1970 , in every decade Indian Relations with China have only improved , long may this continue.


----------



## Sargodhian_Eagle

Gabbar said:


> That's it? that's best you got? Your statement doesn't hold any credibility, if that was your reason.



Its clear that India has craze to dominate subcontinent n wants to be a super power like russia n USA
War of 1962 was result of wrong indian policy but on the other hand china n pak had border problm but unlike india, Pak n china solved it at table not in battle field

In 1965 India attacked Pakistan with out reason but by the grace of ALLAH Almighty Pakistan defeated india
In 1987 India deployed the army to border
In 2001 India made tension without reason

Now india is trying to become a permanent member of UNO to get veto power

These examples r few there r lot of examples
Abt China-India tension, my chinese mature fellows can reply better
*LOVE PAKISTAN *
*LOVE CHINA *


----------



## Gabbar

> Its clear that India has craze to dominate subcontinent n wants to be a super power like russia n USA



*You got that right and God willing India will be a major power in the world.*

War of 1962 was result of wrong indian policy but on the other hand china n


> pak had border problm but unlike india, Pak n china solved it at table not in battle field



*Pakistan and China had border problem? Could you care to explain more about it?*



> In 1965 India attacked Pakistan with out reason but by the grace of ALLAH Almighty Pakistan defeated india



*I would state otherwise? It's can of worm that has been opend many time on this forum.*



> In 2001 India made tension without reason



*Are you n_ts? All those militents that attacked paliament was from Pakistan. Thank US that prevented another war in 2001.*



> Now india is trying to become a permanent member of UNO to get veto power



*What's wrong with that? A country with Billion people, a regional power and one of the fastest emerging economy definetly deserve to be there.*



> These examples r few there r lot of examples



*Unfortunatly your examples are hollow.*



> Abt China-India tension, my chinese mature fellows can reply better
> *LOVE PAKISTAN *
> *LOVE CHINA *



*Chinese are mature and long live Pakistan and China.*


----------



## notsuperstitious

Sargodhian_Eagle said:


> Its clear that India has craze to dominate subcontinent n wants to be a super power like russia n USA
> War of 1962 was result of wrong indian policy but on the other hand china n pak had border problm but unlike india, Pak n china solved it at table not in battle field



Pakistan gave china parts of kashmir to 'solve the problem' peacefully. we expect exactly the same settlement between india pakistan too  just kidding.

The border problems of india china are legacy problems, handed down by the british. just like the durand line. i hope they are solved soon.

in any case india china relations are mature and they are talking abt the issues.


----------



## shravan

I would say China & India can't be friends neither can afford to be enemies.
-----------
Gabbar
Pakistani won 1965 war. Don't forget 1 Pakistani equals 10 Indians.


----------



## Gabbar

shravan said:


> I would say China & India can't be friends neither can afford to be enemies.
> -----------
> Gabbar
> Pakistani won 1965 war. Don't forget 1 Pakistani equals 10 Indians.


----------



## Sargodhian_Eagle

Ok
1) Getting veto power is nt a bad thing but in India's hand its a very bad thing coz "Having a gaint power is good thing but using it like a giant is bad thing" 
2) I think u hvnt read Indian Army's EX chief Shanker Roy's statement. He said "India was fully prepared to attack Pakistan but Pakistani Atomic power was main threat which prohibted India to attack Pakistan in 2001. This statement is not so old it was given in previouse month i think

3) India will become a super power is in ur dreams. China is not only sub continent's but also world's next super power coz china has s strong economy n strong political system
Muslims r not killed in china on the base of religion like India


----------



## Gabbar

> 1) Getting veto power is nt a bad thing but in India's hand its a very bad thing coz "Having a gaint power is good thing but using it like a giant is bad thing"



*You will definetly suggest that India with veto power is bad thing because India and Pakistan are arch rivals. If shoe was in the foot, I pretty sure Indians would have same opinion.*



> 2) I think u hvnt read Indian Army's EX chief Shanker Roy's statement. He said "India was fully prepared to attack Pakistan but Pakistani Atomic power was main threat which prohibted India to attack Pakistan in 2001. This statement is not so old it was given in previouse month i think



*I am not disputing that nuclear threat didn't played role in that decision. But you said in your previous post that India provoked that situation but it was Pakistani infiltrators who crossed the border.*



> 3) India will become a super power is in ur dreams. China is not only sub continent's but also world's next super power coz china has s strong economy n strong political system Muslims r not killed in china on the base of religion like India



*India will become Major power if current economic situation countinues. When? who knows? China is next superpower, there is no question about it. Sir if you want to talk about human rights, china has ever worse record. Most of the news dont even come out. Human right apply to all humans not just muslims, nothing agains muslims. I can talk about tibets and muslims operetion in western china but that's whole different issue. If you want to talk about it, we can open a new thread.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sargodhian_Eagle

*India will become Major power if current economic situation countinues. When? who knows? China is next superpower, there is no question about it. Sir if you want to talk about human rights, china has ever worse record. Most of the news dont even come out. Human right apply to all humans not just muslims, nothing agains muslims. I can talk about tibets and muslims operetion in western china but that's whole different issue. If you want to talk about it, we can open a new thread.*[/QUOTE]

Very good
U r talking abt tibet but u hv closed ur eyes frm Kashmir. u hv forgotn Golden temple incident. u hv forgotn that muslims were killed n burned in Gujrat under Nrinder Moodi's leadership. 

2) U knw that Pakistani infiltrators cross the border but u dnt knw abt RAW camps on afghan border who r working against Pak


----------



## taiji

The current relation between India and China does no good to either India nor China. Both governments were generally doing good to stay cool, but people on both sides don't appreciate each other. IMHO, we all have fell into western media's trap. The current situation only serve the best to those who just sit aside and watch fighting. The old Divide and Conquer trick still works today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

*&#8216;A thorn in India-China relationship&#8217; *

P. S. Suryanarayana 

SINGAPORE: The continuing presence of the Dalai Lama in India &#8220;does not help&#8221; in its ties with China, according to Singapore&#8217;s elder statesman and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. In a dialogue session, under the auspices of Singapore&#8217;s Ministry of Foreign Affairs Diplomatic Academy, he said: &#8220;I do not see the Dalai Lama as a bargaining chip [for India] against China. &#8230; *As long as the Dalai Lama is there [in India], there will be this thorn in their side.* &#8230; 1959 [when he reached India] was a different year. And, in 2009, the configuration of world balances has changed. *And, it is going to change in their [Chinese] favour over the next 50 years*, provided there is no internal collapse.&#8221; 

Answering questions from S.D. Muni, Professor at the Singapore-based Institute of South Asian Studies, Mr. Lee emphasised that the status of Tibet &#8220;is off the table&#8221;. On an intervention by dialogue moderator and Singapore&#8217;s Ambassador-at-Large Tommy Koh, Mr. Lee said China believed that the Dalai Lama&#8217;s reported acceptance of the status of Tibet &#8220;is not his true position.&#8221; In fact, the Chinese &#8220;need no interlocutor&#8221; to resolve the Tibetan problem. &#8220;They need time to bring up a new generation [of Tibetans]: speaking Chinese, thinking like them and integrating &#8230; into China.&#8221; Responding to India&#8217;s High Commissioner S. Jaishankar on the issue of rebalancing the world order, Mr. Lee said: &#8220;My guess is that they [the Chinese] would like to have in the Security Council only five permanent members [as at present].&#8221;

&#169; Copyright 2000 - 2008 The Hindu

The Hindu : Front Page : &#8216;A thorn in India-China relationship&#8217;

----------

Sino-India relationship won't be fundamentally improved if 1) Dalai Lama issue, 2) territorial disputes are not resolved.


----------



## Gabbar

> U r talking abt tibet but u hv closed ur eyes frm Kashmir. u hv forgotn Golden temple incident. u hv forgotn that muslims were killed n burned in Gujrat under Nrinder Moodi's leadership.



First of dont use text language. If you are too lazy, dont type anyting.
Sick to the topic, why some guys have the habit of bringing this to every topic? There is seperate thread for Kashmir issure.



> U knw that Pakistani infiltrators cross the border but u dnt knw abt RAW camps on afghan border who r working against Pak



So what do you think that ISI is doing in India? I am pretty sure that they not here to watch cricket.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

*China suggests it blocked India's loan efforts at ADB due to border dispute*

BEIJING: The Chinese foreign ministry on Tuesday indicated it was motivated by the dispute over Arunachal Pradesh to block India's application for a 
loan from the Asian Development Bank. Part of the loan money is meant for development of Arunachal, which China is claiming as its own territory. 

Jiang Yu, spokeswoman for the Chinese foreign ministry, was asked at the ministry's regulator briefing on Tuesday to confirm reports that China had vetoed India's loan application and if this was done because the money is going to be spent in Arunachal Pradesh. 

She did not give a direct reply but gave ample indications that China was using the ADB meeting to deal with a bilateral issue between the two countries. 

Jiang said Beijing always supported ADB's efforts to play a "positive role" for the development of poor nations. She then went on to say that China was in favour of consultations for settling the border dispute with India in an amicable manner. 

It is not unusual for the foreign ministry to avoid giving direct replies to questions and coach them in a manner that gives some idea of the government's thinking. Jiang's statement is noteworthy because China did not provide any reasons for its move at the ADB meeting. 

The move will have deep ramifications over India-China border talks and might also affect the growing trend of the two countries working jointly on certain issues in international forums, sources said. It showed China is determined to push the debate on the border issue to the international arena instead of settling it solely in a bilateral fashion, sources said. 

The move also comes at a time when China is lobbying world leaders for a larger role for itself in the International Monetary Fund and other international institutions. Analysts said the incident is bound to cause alarm bells in New Delhi, which may have to consider the long term effects of growing Chinese influence over international bodies. 

The ADB was firming up its country partnership strategy for India until 2012 when Beijing came in the way. India was seeking funds for flood management, water supply and sanitation, sources said. 

This is the first time that ADB's efforts to lend money to India has been blocked. India was the largest recipient of ADB funding last year after receiving $3 billion in loans.


----------



## maverick2009

China although a great Economic Power house is stil a relatively low key in International politics.

Usa is stil the worlds only Hyper power and Policeman. 

Russia although only approx same size as India in GDP now stil has a very big voice/opinion in Global Politics. As do the Brits & French too.

China is not a AGGRESSIVE nation by nature. Rather more subtle.

China also defintitely sees India as a Major Economic & military RIVAL in next decade or so. 

China has already acknowledged India,s steady Rise as have USA & Europe.

FOR PAKISTAN this seems a little bitter to admit or Acknowledge JUST YET. 

Coming back to Indo China Relations i expect them to mirror China Japan relations in other words diplomatic but Wary of each other.

I don,t see the SORT OF TENSION exist between india china that exists between Pakistan and india. 

I see massive two way trade between the 2 fastest growing economies in the world with half the worlds poplulation as their markets. 2.5 billion people and trade worth over $100 billion by 2010.. Both countries will use each other to continue to grow their trade globally. I genuinely believe both wil put ECONOMIC growth above conflict or local border disputes.


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

psugumar said:


> This is not media propaganda ,Even I have seen news where Chinese Officials claiming Arunachal Pradesh,Sikkim as Part of China.Nobody in India/China going to threat "We are going to engage in war"  . Claiming Indian territory as part of China is called threat. Number border cease fire violation from China into India is more than that of India - Pakistan border . That why India considers China a threat.
> 
> I agree that India does not for a Invasion, You need only one reason for Invasion ,resource . We do not have much natural resource in our country except coal , Iron. But there there are other reasons for China like Tibet.



China never claims Sikkim

But Arunachal Pradesh = South Tibet


----------



## Gabbar

Sino-PakFriendship said:


> China never claims Sikkim
> 
> But Arunachal Pradesh = South Tibet



*Sikkim residents vent ire over Chinas claim to land in their state*

Gangtok, May 20 (ANI): Residents of Sikkim have reacted strongly to reports about Chinas claim to a small tract of land in northern Sikkim.
On the one hand, China is trying to tell the international community that it has stepped back from laying claims on portions of Sikkim close to its borders, on the other hand, we keep hearing about military activities on Sikkims border with China, said Ratan Gurung, a resident.
China is retracting on its commitment. Its wrong on its part to lay claim on the area, added Bhupal Basnett, another resident.
China has made fresh claims with troops making an entry into the finger area which is the northernmost tip of Sikkim. The boundary area is demarcated by mounds of stones, which China has objected to.
India though has told China it will not allow Chinese troops in the area, as it would mean a breach of treaty between the neighbours.
The row has occurred even as the two Asian giants reopened trade across the 15,000-ft Nathu La Pass, 52 km east of Sikkims capital Gangtok, as part of a broader rapprochement.
The move marked the first direct trade link between the two countries since a bitter border war in 1962.
The Sikkim boundary was demarcated and recognised by the two countries as far back as 1959.
The current claim by the Chinese is the latest among several irritants in Sino-India ties. China has continued to stake claim over large parts of Arunachal Pradesh, particularly Tawang.
Even as discussions continue over the matter, China and India have exchanged words over Arunachal. The Indian Government has on many occasions asserted and conveyed to the Chinese that Arunachal is an integral part of India. (ANI)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

Gabbar said:


> *Sikkim residents vent ire over Chinas claim to land in their state*
> 
> Gangtok, May 20 (ANI): Residents of Sikkim have reacted strongly to reports about Chinas claim to a small tract of land in northern Sikkim.
> On the one hand, China is trying to tell the international community that it has stepped back from laying claims on portions of Sikkim close to its borders, on the other hand, we keep hearing about military activities on Sikkims border with China, said Ratan Gurung, a resident.
> China is retracting on its commitment. Its wrong on its part to lay claim on the area, added Bhupal Basnett, another resident.
> China has made fresh claims with troops making an entry into the finger area which is the northernmost tip of Sikkim. The boundary area is demarcated by mounds of stones, which China has objected to.
> India though has told China it will not allow Chinese troops in the area, as it would mean a breach of treaty between the neighbours.
> The row has occurred even as the two Asian giants reopened trade across the 15,000-ft Nathu La Pass, 52 km east of Sikkims capital Gangtok, as part of a broader rapprochement.
> The move marked the first direct trade link between the two countries since a bitter border war in 1962.
> The Sikkim boundary was demarcated and recognised by the two countries as far back as 1959.
> The current claim by the Chinese is the latest among several irritants in Sino-India ties. China has continued to stake claim over large parts of Arunachal Pradesh, particularly Tawang.
> Even as discussions continue over the matter, China and India have exchanged words over Arunachal. The Indian Government has on many occasions asserted and conveyed to the Chinese that Arunachal is an integral part of India. (ANI)




South Tibet was ceded to British Raj in 1914 by Back-box operation between British Empire and Tibet local government but not authorized by Republic of China central government!


----------



## yh1

India is not visible in China's media or often heard at Chinese food table. If there's anything coming up it'd be Indian accusation or rumors on China. It doesn't matter if India treats China as a foe or an enemy. Indians now spend a lot on buying military equipment which really does not match its economic strength. The more India eyes China with hostility the less she will can possibly become a economic competitor of China. The weight of India in the world powers is approximately the weight of India in the anti-China league. As food and energy become more crucial to every economy the chance of India developing faster than China is fairly slim.

Why should we care much about a good relation with India?


----------



## Gabbar

> Indians now spend a lot on buying military equipment which really does not match its economic strength. As food and energy become more crucial to every economy the chance of India developing faster than China is fairly slim.



*How did you came to this conclution? Care to elaborate more?*


----------



## Gabbar

> Why should we care much about a good relation with India?



Because it is good for both nations if they both can solve thier problems peacfully. Heck, it would be better for entire region. The resources that are being spent counter each other, they can be spend some where else.


----------



## yh1

Gabbar said:


> *How did you came to this conclution? Care to elaborate more?*



Chinese are busy with our own development and have our foes under our telescope. India is neither our enemy nor competitor or friend. Chinese don't have time to care about relation with India because it's not important to us.

It's India that is making China a threat or foe or competitor. So I see the relation is up to Indians to give a say.


----------



## Gabbar

*Sir, I asked you about the this part of your statement!!!*
*Your above statement had nothing to do with my question.*



> Indians now spend a lot on buying military equipment which really does not match its economic strength. As food and energy become more crucial to every economy the chance of India developing faster than China is fairly slim.


----------



## yh1

Gabbar said:


> Because it is good for both nations if they both can solve thier problems peacfully. Heck, it would be better for entire region. The resources that are being spent counter each other, they can be spend some where else.



I think China is trying to solve own problems and we are doing quite well. Chinese resources are being spent to counter US aggression, not India. It's not that I try to be friendly with India. Chinese don't consider India an important player nor worthy of our counting. We might be ignorant but that's the reality. It's only you Indians who are making all the noises about the relation or problems between the two countries.


----------



## Gabbar

yh1 said:


> I think China is trying to solve own problems and we are doing quite well. Chinese resources are being spent to counter US aggression, not India. It's not that I try to be friendly with India. Chinese don't consider India an important player nor worthy of our counting. We might be ignorant but that's the reality. It's only you Indians who are making all the noises about the relation or problems between the two countries.



Yea, you are right, you are may be ignorent.


----------



## yh1

Gabbar said:


> *Sir, I asked you about the this part of your statement!!!*
> *Your above statement had nothing to do with my question.*



OK. When China was at the initial phase of economic reform our military budget was very small. India economy is at what China was in 1990s when our military budget was hardly $10b (India $30b this year). I think India has better places to use this money, especially at this moment.


----------



## Gabbar

yh1 said:


> OK. When China was at the initial phase of economic reform our military budget was very small. India economy is at what China was in 1990s when our military budget was hardly $10b (India $30b this year). I think India has better places to use this money, especially at this moment.



Are you serious? This is how you comparing military spending? 
A better way to look at it is % GDP spednding on military. India's is at about 2.3% of GDP, should be at least 3%.


----------



## indiatech

Young people think old people are fools but Old people knows that young ones are the fools. If you see the older generations , Indian and Chinese are both wise. There spoke only of good things, knowledge and cultural exchanges. All we are left now are materialistic people with hunger for every inch of land that even isn't cultivable or mountains as high that we cant even climb. Still we fight and blame each other. For what ? Don't we have enough place to live, or enough to eat ?


----------



## indiatech

China to approach Infosys, TCS

GURGAON: China would approach Indian software majors such as Infosys and HCL to set up units in IT and BPO parks, which will come up in Jiaxing ci 
ty, a Chinese official said today. 

Jiaxing city plans to set up three to five IT/BPO parks and is now in the process of contacting big IT companies from India like Infosys, HCL and TCS, Jiaxing Municipal Bureau of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation Vice-Director Shen Wenping said at a CII meet here. 

India is the 15th largest exports destination and 29th largest exporter to Jiaxing. 

Wenping further said the trade between India and China is likely to touch $60 billion in 2009, up from $51.7 billion last year. 

A delegation from China is on a visit to India to promote Jiaxing as an attractive investment destination for Indian enterprises and to foster bilateral ties. 


China to approach Infosys, TCS- Software & Services-News-Indiatimes - Infotech


----------



## Squallmao

Gabbar said:


> Are you serious? This is how you comparing military spending?
> A better way to look at it is % GDP spednding on military. India's is at about 2.3% of GDP, should be at least 3%.



Who sets the standard at 3%? or is there a standard?

None of China, UK, France, Germany, Japan spend 3% of the their GDP. Only a few countries such as US and Russia spend more than 3%(both under 4%, I think)

China's 2008 GDP: 4.3 trillion
China's 2009 military budget: 70 billion

works out to be: 1.63%

Mind u when China had less than one trillion economy back in the 90s, the military budget was even less than 1%, money were invested in various infrastructure to make average people's life better and boost economy growth.

A developing country spending 3% of GDP for military sounds insane to me, especially for a country severely lacks of infrastructures(road, highway, railway, airport).


----------



## Gabbar

> Mind u when China had less than one trillion economy back in the 90s, the military budget was even less than 1&#37;, money were invested in various infrastructure to make average people's life better and boost economy growth.A developing country spending 3% of GDP for military sounds insane to me, especially for a country severely lacks of infrastructures(road, highway, railway, airport).



Sir, situations is not the same that was in 90's. There more threat from terrorists and rough states. You have to protect your sea lanes even more than before. 3% of GDP spending on military is not insane, it's norm. India has lots of soviet era military infrastrucre and weapons and they needs to be upgraded. Security is everything. China is spending more than what is actually showing to world. Lots of countries are asking China to be more transparent with thier spending. You dont know the actual spending because them never made everyting public.


----------



## Screaming Skull

*India joins China&#8217;s naval parade ​*
QINGDAO: China&#8217;s People&#8217;s Liberation Army (PLA) kicked off a grand ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of its Navy on Monday off the coast of the eastern city of Qingdao.

PLA Navy Commander Admiral Wu Shengli announced the start of the four-day festivities. It would include seminars, a sampan race and a fleet parade. 

A total of 21 naval vessels from 14 countries including India and delegations from 29 countries will join the parade. The PLA Navy was founded on April 23, 1949, with nine warships and 17 boats obtained after a unit of the Kuomintang&#8217;s second coastal defence fleet defected to the PLA. 

&#8220;The Navy will move faster in researching and building new-generation weapons to boost the ability to fight in regional sea wars under the circumstance of information technology,&#8221; Navy Commander Admiral Wu Shengli told Xinhua earlier. 

In addition to ships, aircraft and torpedoes, long-range missiles with high accuracy, submarines with superb invisibility and endurance and electronic weapons and facilities were also on the Navy&#8217;s agenda. 

He said the Navy would have more equipment for offshore repair, high-seas dispatch, large-scale rescue and supply among others. 

According to Admiral Wu, the Navy will add the capacity for non-war actions to the Army&#8217;s power, especially emergency offshore search-and-rescue and anti-terrorism activities. 

Since 2003, President Hu Jintao has repeatedly inspected the Navy and made suggestions on its construction. 



*FOSTERING FRIENDSHIP: Indian Navy officers with Chinese children after missile destroyers INS Mumbaiand INS Ranveer arrived in Qingdao, Shandong Province, on Sunday.* 


Current threats to the country&#8217;s security came mostly from sea, said Mr. Hu who is also chairman of the Central Military Commission. He urged the Navy to achieve sound and fast development and enhance defensive operations with information technology. 


*Admiral Mehta&#8217;s visit* 


The officer said the celebrations would be an opportunity for foreign navies to have intensive and close observation of the PLA Navy&#8217;s facilities and personnel.

On the maiden visit of an Indian Navy chief to China, Admiral Sureesh Mehta will be attending the fleet review during his week-long tour, an official said in New Delhi.

*Seeking to engage the Chinese military on a greater level, Admiral Mehta flew to China on Saturday night and would return on April 25.*

INS Mumbai and INS Ranveer, the guided missile corvette INS Khanjar and the tanker INS Jyoti are participating in the review. Pakistani warships also are taking part. 

*&#8220;Mehta will also be visiting ships and submarines of the Chinese Navy during this trip and will be calling on Chinese Defence Minister Liang Guanglie on April 22, said an officer.*

Indian and Chinese warships have been making calls at each other&#8217;s ports as part of growing confidence building measures between the two sides. 

*The Indian Navy chief&#8217;s visit follows that of Admiral Wu&#8217;s to India last year. Indian Air Force chief, Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major, has also visited China.*

The two armies undertook their first joint exercise at Kunming in Yunnan province in December 2007 and the second at Belgaum last December. The two countries signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in May 2006 that they would hold joint military exercises. &#8212; *Xinhua, IANS*


----------



## Gabbar

*China wants to join Navy initiative on Indian Ocean, MEA says no need*

New Delhi: 


Pushing for a greater say in the Indian Ocean region, China has sounded out the Indian Navy that it wants to be inducted in some form into the 33-member Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS) initiative started by India last year. But the Ministry of External Affairs has turned down the request. 



It&#8217;s learnt that the Navy conveyed the Chinese interest to the MEA which promptly rebuffed the move, saying there was no justification to involve China in the Indian Ocean. 



Sources said Chinese Navy officials had approached their Indian counterparts to explore ways to accommodate Beijing as either an observer or associate member ahead of Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta&#8217;s ongoing week-long visit to China. 



The Navy, on its part, informed the MEA and asked it to consider the informal request. But given that China&#8217;s long-term ambition is to counter Indian influence in the Indian Ocean, the MEA said there was no strategic rationale to let China be associated with IONS as it was strictly restricted to littoral states of the Indian Ocean.
While UK is part of the initiative because its still owns Diego Garcia, the US request too is pending on technical grounds even though it has bases in the region. Admiral Mehta, who is on a visit to China until April 25, was keen that he has an answer when he is in Qingdao for the international fleet review. 

It is, however, learnt that India is keen on having a Naval attache posted in Beijing besides the Army attache.


----------



## xukxuk

hardly to say this but
guys face this the globle resouces are limited


----------



## Gabbar

*China hits out at India's decision on naval symposium*

BEIJING: India is suspicious of China&#8217;s economic growth, a new newspaper close to the Communist Party of China has said in an editorial. The paper, 
Global Times, made the comment while discussing New Delhi&#8217;s reported decision to disallow China from attending this year&#8217;s Indian Ocean Naval Symposium. 

India&#8217;s ministry of foreign affairs is simply afraid that China might "intervene" in its sphere of influence in the Indian Ocean, it said. New Delhi&#8217;s decision was also prompted by "India&#8217;s suspicion of China&#8217;s rise", it said. 

"Many people in India, the earliest industrialized country in Asia, could not accept China&#8217;s rapid rise in the past decades. Their bruised egos made them reluctant to get more intimately acquainted with China," the newspaper said. "A lack of people-to-people exchanges between China and India has also contributed to the estrangement and mutual distrust," it said. 

The paper published by the Communist Party organ, the People&#8217;s Daily, said the two countries have remained "remote neighbors" because of a border dispute and very little people to people relationship, it said. The year 2008 saw 500,000 personal trips between two nations having a total population of 2.3 billion. The number of trips is one tenth of what took place between China and South Korea, it said. 

India&#8217;s distrust of China is also related to friendly relations between China and Pakistan, but China&#8217;s friendship with Pakistan is not intended to harm India. 

"India and China are two Asian giants with increasing economic strength and regional influence. A friendly Sino-Indian relationship depends on efforts by the two countries. Sino-Indian trust demands more civil communication and business cooperation, as well as heightened efforts by government leaders," the paper said four days after it launch. 

The paper also compared Sino-South Korea trade volume of $186 billion in 2008 to show that the $50 billion trade between China and India was very small.


----------



## yh1

China could use 093s to safe guard the sea lanes for Chinese merchant ships on Indian Ocean. 095s and the carrier wud come later.


----------



## Gabbar

yh1 said:


> China could use 093s to safe guard the sea lanes for Chinese merchant ships on Indian Ocean. 095s and the carrier wud come later.



What is 093s and 095s?


----------



## yh1

They are nuclear subs.


----------



## Sambha

xukxuk said:


> hardly to say this but
> guys face this the globle resouces are limited



Yeah, that's why so many countries are trying to kick your butt out of Africa.

And hopefully from Tibet too.


----------



## yh1

Sambha said:


> Yeah, that's why so many countries are trying to kick your butt out of Africa.
> 
> And hopefully from Tibet too.



I think it's just a nasty and big mouth of an Indian.


----------



## Gabbar

yh1 said:


> They are nuclear subs.



Thanks yh1!!!


----------



## Gabbar

yh1 said:


> I think it's just a nasty and big mouth of an Indian.



Dont worry they exist in every nation, not just in India.


----------



## Gabbar

*New progress achieved in China-India trade, eonomic co-op*

In recent years, China-India relations have been developing smoothly. When Premier Wen visited India in 2005, China and India announced the establishment of strategic cooperative partnership for peace and prosperity. 
The two countries finished joint research onthe Five-year Plan of China-India Comprehensive Trade and Economic Cooperation in March 2005, and the Plan becomes a guiding document for the development of trade and economic cooperation. 

The year 2006 was a year of friendship bteween China and India, and was a year of milestone in bilateral diplomatic history. The Joint Statement released by President Hu Jintao on a visit to India served as a blueprint for cooperative development in various fields henceforth. 

Bilateral Trade Grows with Great Strength 

China-India trade has been growing so fast in recent years that trade value has kept growing rapidly. Bilateral trade increased from 2.914 billion USD in 2000 to 18.703 billion USD in 2005, with an average annual growth of 45&#37;. It reached 24.9 billion USD in 2006, meeting the target set by the leaders of the two countries in advance. According to China's statistic, India China's 10th biggest trade partner in 2006. And China became India's 2nd biggest trade partner in the 2005-2006 fiscal year in accordance with India's statistic. 

Broad Cooperation in Contractual Projects 

India has tried hard to build infrastructure in recent years. A large number of private enterprises invested heavily, planned to build a set of infrastructure like roads, bridges, railways, ports and power stations, so that a huge market of contractual projects has emerged. According to the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, India needed 380 billion USD in investment in infrastructure construction in the next 6 years. 

Chinese enterprises possessed great predominance in such fields and they made great progress in the Indian contractual projects market, especially in cash and owner financing projects, through years of exploration. 

By the end of 2006, China signed 7.012 USD economic and technological contracts in India, with a 2.108 USD turnover. In the recent 3 years, in particular, China has been in favorable development in the contractual projects market. From 2004 to 2006, Chinese enterprises signed 5.616 USD projects in India, with a 1.792 billion USD turnover, of which contractual value reached 3.298 billion USD in 2006. India now has become one of China's most important overseas contractual project markets. 

Investment Cooperation on the Upswing 

Mutual investment of the two countries has just started. By the end of 2006, approved or recorded by the Ministry of Commerce, China's investment in India amounted to 17 million USD, in such fields as the electric industry, communications and light industry. 

By the end of 2006, India's non-financial investment projects in China totaled 256, with a 548 million USD contractual values and 172 million USD in actual use. The investment fields involved metallurgy, electric appliances, pharmaceuticals, printing ink and textiles. Chinese enterprises such as Haier, TCL, Huawei and ZTE have set up manufacturing factories or researching institutes in India, and India's enterprises including Tata Consultancy Service Corporation and INFOSYS invested in China as well. 

Frequent Bilateral Business Visits 

In recent years, there have been frequent China-India bilateral trade and economic visits, so that more and more people have attended all kinds of exhibitions and expositions and the number of people who have gone on tour and business increased substantially. In 2005, people from China and India entering each other's country reached 360,000 person-times. In March 2002, China Eastern Air Company was the first to open the air route from Beijing to New Delhi via Shanghai. In addition, Air India opened an air route to Shanghai via Thailand in Nov 2003. Air China opened airline services from Beijing to New Delhi in Oct 2006 as well.


----------



## aimarraul

China-India bilateral trade in 2008 :37 B USD
China-EU&#65306;400B
China-US:333B
China-Japan:304B
China-ASEAN:231B
China-Hongkong:203B
China-south korea &#65306;180B
China-taiwan&#65306;129B
China-Australia&#65306;60B
China-Russia:56B

so this relation is irrelevant ......for now.Future China India Relations?In my opinion&#65292;it's not gonna be better than right now......


----------



## Nihat

aimarraul said:


> China-India bilateral trade in 2008 :37 B USD
> China-EU&#65306;400B
> China-US:333B
> China-Japan:304B
> China-ASEAN:231B
> China-Hongkong:203B
> China-south korea &#65306;180B
> China-taiwan&#65306;129B
> China-Australia&#65306;60B
> China-Russia:56B
> 
> so this relation is irrelevant ......for now.Future China India Relations?In my opinion&#65292;it's not gonna be better than right now......



Would it be possible for you to provide a link where you found those trade figures , especially China - Taiwan .

Not that I'm questioning your data but I've been looking out for trade valuation websites and this would be really useful.


----------



## gpit

Nihat said:


> Would it be possible for you to provide a link where you found those trade figures , especially China - Taiwan .
> 
> Not that I'm questioning your data but I've been looking out for trade valuation websites and this would be really useful.



Check this out:

Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China


----------



## A1Kaid

What I find funny is...

It is the Indians most eager to have better relations with China, but it seems the Chinese are lackadaisical about bettering relations with India. The Indians are desperate for China to be their friend, they envy the strategic Sino-Pakistan defense and Geo-strategic relationship we have.

It is always the Indians posting articles about how Indian ties with China are improving, I hardly see any Chinese guys posting articles about bettering relations with India...


So I would like to read the Chinese input on what they think about India and relations with India...


----------



## third eye

A1Kaid said:


> What I find funny is...
> 
> It is the Indians most eager to have better relations with China, but it seems the Chinese are lackadaisical about bettering relations with India. The Indians are desperate for China to be their friend, they envy the strategic Sino-Pakistan defense and Geo-strategic relationship we have.
> 
> It is always the Indians posting articles about how Indian ties with China are improving, I hardly see any Chinese guys posting articles about bettering relations with India...
> 
> 
> So I would like to read the Chinese input on what they think about India and relations with India...



Allow me to correct you,

Indians are eager to have better relations with everybody & China falls in that category. This desire for better relations is not out of appeasement or any similar motive. It is simply based on hard realities ( including those on the ground).

Having begun to see & feel the advantages of a stable economy with healthy foreign currency reserves it is felt that good relations are the correct way forward. We ( India & its neighbors) have tried every trick in the book - & outside it as well over the last 60 yrs to undo each other. Some tricks worked some didn't. What has worked across the spectrum is a healthy economy & strong fundamentals.

However, should things not work out as planned..alternatives exist.


----------



## indiatech

aimarraul said:


> China-India bilateral trade in 2008 :37 B USD
> China-EU&#65306;400B
> China-US:333B
> China-Japan:304B
> China-ASEAN:231B
> China-Hongkong:203B
> China-south korea &#65306;180B
> China-taiwan&#65306;129B
> China-Australia&#65306;60B
> China-Russia:56B
> 
> so this relation is irrelevant ......for now.*Future China India Relations?In my opinion&#65292;it's not gonna be better than right now*......



And what makes you think that ? India-China BT is 50B in 2008-2009 till now, from 37B in 2007-2008 . It is expected to reach 100B in less than 5 yrs. Your wanting or not wanting isn't going to stop the good relations both countries are going to have.

Do you know how indian companies (govt and ptivate) are welcoming chinese companies in india ? this week itself contracts worth 5 Bn in total are finalized. see an example below:

Ericsson, Huawei Share USD6bn Contract from BSNL

Alcatel, Huawei get contract from Unitech Wireless - paper | Business News | Reuters


----------



## aimarraul

indiatech said:


> And what makes you think that ? India-China BT is 50B in 2008-2009 till now, from 37B in 2007-2008 . It is expected to reach 100B in less than 5 yrs. Your wanting or not wanting isn't going to stop the good relations both countries are going to have.
> 
> Do you know how indian companies (govt and ptivate) are welcoming chinese companies in india ? this week itself contracts worth 5 Bn in total are finalized. see an example below:
> 
> Ericsson, Huawei Share USD6bn Contract from BSNL
> 
> 
> 
> Alcatel, Huawei get contract from Unitech Wireless - paper | Business News | Reuters



your date's wrong,India-China BT droped more than 30&#37; in the first season
and your government blocked a lot of chinese products this year.Rumor has it that it's the consequences of the close friendship between China and Pakistan,funny &#65292; not big deal, but as member of WTO,you should know the basic rule "what goes around,comes around"........


----------



## indiatech

aimarraul said:


> your date's wrong,India-China BT droped more than 30&#37; in the first season
> and your government blocked a lot of chinese products this year.Rumor has it that it's the consequences of the close friendship between China and Pakistan,funny &#65292; not big deal, but as member of WTO,you should know the basic rule "what goes around,comes around"........



no date is wrong. Wait for 2009-2010 consolidated figures next year. 
ur claims are baseless and unreasonable and untrue.Lot of chinese products are blocked by 100 of countries. You know the reason why some products needs to be blocked at some point of time. 
But u must also know that china is always on the higher side of exports to india then imports.

your relating india china trade somehow with pakistan china relations doesnt change anything. 

China India trade will grow and will cross new milestones in future.Just keep watching.


----------



## aimarraul

indiatech said:


> no date is wrong. Wait for 2009-2010 consolidated figures next year.
> ur claims are baseless and unreasonable and untrue.Lot of chinese products are blocked by 100 of countries. You know the reason why some products needs to be blocked at some point of time.
> But u must also know that china is always on the higher side of exports to india then imports.
> 
> your relating india china trade somehow with pakistan china relations doesnt change anything.
> 
> China India trade will grow and will cross new milestones in future.Just keep watching.



as the country over 1B people,neither china nor india will become the import country .wake up ,idiot.we are talking about hundreds of millions of city jobs for the people living in the countryside , it's only way to improve their living standard to a high level,or we can just ignore them,of course,it's another option


----------



## aimarraul

indiatech said:


> no date is wrong. Wait for 2009-2010 consolidated figures next year.
> ur claims are baseless and unreasonable and untrue.Lot of chinese products are blocked by 100 of countries. You know the reason why some products needs to be blocked at some point of time.
> But u must also know that china is always on the higher side of exports to india then imports.
> 
> your relating india china trade somehow with pakistan china relations doesnt change anything.
> 
> China India trade will grow and will cross new milestones in future.Just keep watching.


----------



## atp

indiatech said:


> The future is not India *OR* China,
> 
> it is India *AND* China.



I think so but now the Relations is Complex 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
i am a "freshman" now


----------



## indiatech

atp said:


> I think so but now the Relations is Complex
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> i am a "freshman" now



Thanks for being an optimist. No worries mate, it will be best in future.

We all support good relations between China-india. Complex indeed but not impossible. We are working on it.


----------



## indiatech

aimarraul said:


> as the country over 1B people,neither china nor india will become the import country .wake up ,idiot.we are talking about hundreds of millions of city jobs for the people living in the countryside , it's only way to improve their living standard to a high level,or we can just ignore them,of course,it's another option



you have no idea what u r talking abt. Do you? Or is it just that you like to kick some indian a** ? Whatever u r.

The comment to the heading of the thread is: yes, relations will be better and we want them to be better. We would not like to brood over the past coz one thing we are left is future. We can always make it better and we have the will.


----------



## aimarraul

indiatech said:


> you have no idea what u r talking abt. Do you? Or is it just that you like to kick some indian a** ? Whatever u r.
> 
> The comment to the heading of the thread is: yes, relations will be better and we want them to be better. We would not like to brood over the past coz one thing we are left is future. We can always make it better and we have the will.



sorry, did i accidentally break your tender heart again?maybe our government have the will to export more products to india,we don't have the problem helping more people out of countryside and giving them a better job in city,but most people in china really know nothing about india except your gov keep supporting some old **** and trying to divide china,so we really don't have the "will "to make our relationship better, i can insure you that


----------



## PeacefulIndian

aimarraul said:


> sorry, did i accidentally break your tender heart again?maybe our government have the will to export more products to india,we don't have the problem helping more people out of countryside and giving them a better job in city,but most people in china really know nothing about india except your gov keep supporting some old **** and trying to divide china,so we really don't have the "will "to make our relationship better, i can insure you that



You are right that your govt does not have any will to better the relationship. But you missed the geopolitical reasons. I see you are referring to Tibet conflict, which IMO, is a dead horse right now as far as Indo-Chinese relations are concerned.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Aeneas said:


> sometimes,I really doubt if the democratic system is the right tool to deal with this issue.60 years had past.it seemed India keep using a small knife named "democratic system" cut a huge tree named "caste system" for 60 years,and merely cut off a small part of the tree.



Dear Sir,

You are quite right to say that it is a very small knife to cut such a big tree. It is in fact a foolish way. 

As a young student, I read a story recommended by the Great Helmsman, called the Foolish Old Man and the Mountain.

You may like to take a look at that story once again.

Sincere regards,

'Joe S.'


----------



## Joe Shearer

jetLi said:


> India's democracy is that they have caste system: devide people into different class
> by their name and career. such as Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaishya,S&#363;dra
> They can't marry each other in different caste.
> I think it is just like in the slave system era.
> 
> Does it mean democracy ?



Dear Sir,

I have read again and again that Indians do not know enough about China, the Chinese and China's governing methods to be able to comment without making fools of themselves.

This is probably quite accurate.

I am an Indian Hindu married outside my caste; my wife is of a different, higher caste. My daughter is seeing a young Indian citizen of Chinese origin.

Sometimes I wonder how come there are no fools in China at all. You are to be congratulated; you have really organised yourselves very well.

Sincerely,

'Joe S.'


----------



## Joe Shearer

jetLi said:


> Government don't put any restriction on our mind, you must be get too many wrong
> information and calumniation from the western media. in china you can talk any
> thing( except against nation and CPC).
> 
> We admit these 30 years we just focus on development economic and ignore molding our core values. But i think that if citizen break away from the shadle of poority, they will began to pay attention on this.
> 
> in fact, recently lots of elits of china have appeal for it, and we believe that we will become better and better



Dear Sir,

Your post above and the one before this one.

I respectfully disagree. 

It is important to build values side by side with prosperity. It will be difficult to explain to a rich man without values why values are needed, because without values, he will say that he is rich, so he needs nothing else, not values, not civic consciousness, not anything else. If on the other hand a man with values becomes rich, he is able to understand that money is not everything. 

'It is glorious to be rich', but it is not glorious to be a rich enemy of the nation.

What you have suggested about a country needing education and a certain social and lifestyle improvement before bringing in democracy is a disastrous error. Democracy is not for the poor unemployed, the farmer, the worker, the middle class or the rich. It is for all. In theory, you may think that it will not work. In practice, it does, very powerfully. Since India has tried it, please come and see for yourself. It is not efficient, it is not quick, it is not always clean. But it builds great self-confidence and self-reliance in people. There is no iron rice-bowl.

Regards,

'Joe S.'


----------



## Marc

SoulOnIce said:


> There goes the neighborhood
> 
> but it will make war in the region much less likely
> 
> Also if Chinese and Indian IT companies do launch joint ventures, mergers, subsidiaries or even FDI's that could actually change the global source of IT. It would be hard to compete, the product would be so inexpensive compared to its western rivals.
> 
> Pakistan in the meantime goes nowhere, doesn't it feel as if Pakistan's leaders have no game plan? No real feasible strategy? Pakistan effectively is more of an oligarchy than a democracy. Things need to change over here, we need a maverick leader to wake up the masses.
> 
> But if India is taking advantage of economic opportunities right across the border and thus are strengthened in that regard, should Pakistan look towards Iran?




Absolutely, If the relationship between India and China goes well, for example, they solve the Tibet issue, no matter which side compromises. There is going to be a cooler time for Pakistan and China relation. Pakistan then will suffer


----------



## aimarraul

Marc said:


> Absolutely, If the relationship between India and China goes well, for example, they solve the Tibet issue, no matter which side compromises. There is going to be a cooler time for Pakistan and China relation. Pakistan then will suffer



obviously&#65292;you don't know chinese that well as you thought,we will try to friendly to everycountry,and that's what we did over the last 60 years,but when it comes to real friend or ally,we know which one can be trust

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

Hotline likely between Beijing and New Delhi​

​
NEW DELHI: Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh claimed on Tuesday that his country enjoyed excellent relations with all the members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) but Chinese reports suggested that Beijing had backed a *hotline between the prime ministers of the two countries, possibly to avert dangerous miscommunications between the nuclear-armed neighbours.*
Attending the SCO summit in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg, in which India has an observer status, Dr Singh said the eight-year-old organisation represented a vast land mass rich in cultural diversity, creativity and resources. India has the privilege of having excellent bilateral relations with each of the members of the organisation, he added.

Our relations with them go back in time. They rest on solid civilisational, cultural and economic linkages that have flourished over centuries.

Chinese reports, however, indicated that the Indian prime ministers meeting with President Hu Jintao on Monday night took into account the potential harm that could come from domestic rhetoric, like recent views expressed publicly by the Indian Air Force chief and a former army chief, in which they targeted Beijing as Indias main threat, and called for urgent military mobilisations.

According to the China Daily, President Hu assured Dr Singh that China had always striven, steadfastly and from a strategic and long-term perspective, to promote good neighbourliness and friendly cooperation with India, an important neighbour of China and also a fast-growing emerging power.

Indian accounts of the important meeting were not available.

Chinese reports quoted Mr Hu as saying that Beijing was ready to work with India to maintain the sound momentum for development of the bilateral strategic and cooperative partnership.

He was also for making greater efforts to implement the 10 strategies reached between the leaders of the two countries.

The reports spoke of the need to enhance mutual political trust and reciprocal cooperation in various fields, take into consideration each others concerns and core interests, and strengthen coordination and cooperation on major international and regional issues.

The China Daily said Mr Hu noted that the two sides should focus on the following key areas in efforts to promote bilateral ties.

The first was to strengthen high-level contacts. Accordingly, China welcomed the planned visit by Indian President Pratibha Patil to Beijing later this year. Chinese leaders are considering visiting India at a time convenient to both sides.

As part of the effort to boost high level contacts, the Chinese side agreed in principle to establish a hot line between the Chinese premier and the Indian prime minister, the China Daily said.

Additionally, China wants to deepen bilateral economic and trade cooperation for mutual benefit. The two sides should continue to tap potentials, encourage two-way investments, expand cooperation in contracted projects, and strive to realise the target of US$60 billion in bilateral trade in the year 2010.

And finally, the two countries should work together to respond to the impact of the international financial crisis. The Chinese side will strengthen communication and coordination with the Indian side, maintain close cooperation within the frameworks of BRIC, the five developing nations and the Group of 20, safeguard the common interests of the developing countries, and strive to contribute to economic recovery and development of Asia and the world at large.

Prime Minister Singh referred to the need for economic cooperation in his comments to the SCO summit. The economic gains that we have made in the past are today threatened by the global financial and economic crisis. We should convert this crisis into an opportunity for much greater economic cooperation between the Members of the SCO and India, he said.

Dr Singh also spoke of the need to stabilise Afghanistan. The issue of stability in Afghanistan is one that is engaging all of us keenly.

I wish to congratulate the Russian Presidency of the SCO for organising a successful conference on Afghanistan in March this year.

India is committed to contributing to international efforts for the economic reconstruction of Afghanistan, and promoting stability in that country, he told the SCO meeting.


----------



## Peace_maker

I wish we three (IND_PAK_CHINA) can solve our border disputes early and start living peacefully.we should learn from west.If we three are together we will rise like anything.No one will be able to compete with us.
People from west will come to work in our countries.we will feed them.We will give aids to western countries.


----------



## shravan

Peace_maker said:


> I wish we three (IND_PAK_CHINA) can solve our border disputes early and start living peacefully.we should learn from west.If we three are together we will rise like anything.No one will be able to compete with us.
> People from west will come to work in our countries.we will feed them.We will give aids to western countries.



India - China is it really about Borders ? I never knew that.


----------



## Peace_maker

shravan said:


> India - China is it really about Borders ? I never knew that.



Mostly it is related borders only as far as I know.


----------



## yh1

Peace_maker said:


> Mostly it is related borders only as far as I know.



It might be true only for the Chinese side.


----------



## vandemataram

yh1 said:


> Chinese are busy with our own development and have our foes under our telescope. India is neither our enemy nor competitor or friend. Chinese don't have time to care about relation with India because it's not important to us.
> 
> It's India that is making China a threat or foe or competitor. So I see the relation is up to Indians to give a say.



It is as naive as stupidity....geo-political and strategic issues will keep China from ignoring India...Of course India is China's fiercest competitors with its own subtle way ..there is no real need to spew venom and spit fire like a dragon.

The statement "Indian Ocean is not India's Ocean" coming out from your country is proof enough that your Govt knows where things stand...

It is just for nothing that Hambantota and Gwadar and Sittwe are coming up....

You know what ...Oil and Gas are your strateic assets not only for your growth and development but also to maintain lead over other countries during war time..the single most important resource needed to oil the war machinery ....

You are the amongst greatest consumer and importers of Crude oil and that is something your Govt knows more than their worth....

In the wake of this safeguarding the sea lanes of communications become paramount....and you know what the Straits of Malacca...that is critical soft underbelly ....very very soft and you do not have control on that .....it will take a days effort for the Indian Navy and the AF to cut those lines and then that will be enough to put pressure on you Hans.....thanks a lot


----------



## Gabbar

Mighty dragon in the sea​
Sixty years ago, on April 23, defections from Chiang Kai-sheks navy gave the Peoples Republic of China its first naval vessels. This event was commemorated in April this year at Qingdao in an impressive display showcasing the expanding naval prowess of a nation predicted to be the largest economy in the world by about the middle of the 21st century. 

Speaking on the occasion, the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, assured a world wary of his nations growing military power that the Chinese Navys objective is to safeguard world peace. The carefully chosen theme of the celebrations, harmonious ocean, provided the right setting. The Presidents words that Chinas armed forces will never be a threat to other nations were carefully calibrated to convey the message that none has to fear from the peaceful rise of China.

Not many were convinced though. As the US report on the Military Power of the Peoples Republic of China, 2009 states: Much uncertainty surrounds Chinas future course, particularly regarding how its expanding military power would be used.

Riding high on defence budgets that have seen double-digit growth in the last two decades, the Chinese Navy has swelled to 860 vessels. Its defence budget has become the second largest after the US. With such increasing outlays that are estimated to be two to three times the official figures, the US intelligence agencies have forecasted that the Chinese Navy could grow to be the largest within a decade.

Every nation has the right to acquire weapons and platforms to protect its legitimate security interests. But there is a lack of nexus between Chinas declared peaceful intentions and its deeds. The Chinese Navy lends credence to this fear by its aggressive manoeuvres at sea. In March 2009, Chinese ships and aircraft harassed the US surveillance ship Impeccable near the Hainan Island  the home of Chinas new underground facilities with caves to hide submarines from prying satellites. The US had to dispatch a destroyer to escort the harassed ship. Its embassy in Beijing lodged a protest with the Chinese government. But in May, another US ship  Victorious  was harassed in the Yellow Sea by Chinese vessels.

While China may have an ostensible reason to oppose the US for supporting Taiwan, what can the growing Chinese Navy portend for India? Despite declarations of friendly ties between the two nations, there is a hidden distrust for each other. India and China have land disputes and Beijing is unrelenting in its claim of Arunachal Pradesh. The latest blocking of the Asian Development Banks assistance to India is yet another reminder that China would loath to miss an opportunity to oppose India. 

China would not evidently countenance a competitor in India. New Delhi would, therefore, have to guard against the dragon in the water. India is critically dependent on the Sea Lines of Communication for economic growth and energy needs. India would also have to build a stronger navy to prepare for the impending competition for natural resources. Unfortunately, it may already be getting too late for India. 

First, China has quietly obtained a string of naval facilities around India, called the string of pearls. These could enable the Chinese Navy to project power further away from its shores. Second, the pace at with China is augmenting its naval power doesnt augur well for India. For instance, the phenomenal growth in submarines is worrisome. While the Chinese have commissioned more than three submarines, on an average, every year since 1995, Indias submarine level has decreased since 1999. All its submarines are old and, as the Comptroller and Auditor General of Indias report 2008 has pointed out, more than 50 per cent of them have completed 75 per cent of their operational life. Some have already outlived theirs. 

Third, when China acquires multiple carriers, a plan it is pursuing diligently, it could signal a quantum jump in its capability to project power. In contrast, Indias lone aircraft carrier  INS Viraat  is on perpetual life extensions and requires upgrades to keep her afloat. Indias indigenous carrier, being built at the Cochin Shipyard, may not be available to the Navy before 2015 and the carrier, Admiral Gorshkov, from Russia, is embroiled in a price war. India needs multiple carriers. The navy should establish a dedicated yard at Cochin, the only facility in India capable of building large ships and which is ideally located, opposite to the naval base in Cochin. 

The Chinese threat is for real, as Admiral Arun Prakash, former Chief of the Indian Navy said, The Chinese Defence Minister, Liang Guanglie, has announced that a class of 4-6 Chinese aircraft carriers is on the way...It is time for India to shed her blinkers and prepare to counter PLA Navys impending power-play in the Indian Ocean.

Therefore, India has to allocate more for defence, particularly for the navy, and put in place an acquisition organisation to give the armed forces the teeth they require. India cannot drift into a slumber on remixes of Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai. Having learnt a bitter lesson in 1962, it bears repeating that it would be unwise to be militarily unprepared when it comes to China.

Thomas Mathew is Deputy Director-General, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), New Delhi.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

aimarraul said:


> obviously&#65292;you don't know chinese that well as you thought,we will try to friendly to every country,and that's what we did over the last 60 years,but when it comes to real friend or ally,we know which one can be trust



It is wrong to think that if China and India form a closer relationship, Sino-Pak relation will suffer. That is wrong! Instead Sino-Pak relationship will evolve to focus more of development & cultural exchanges (i.e. less on defence), and that can only be a good thing. China will continue to support Pakistan with dealing with India so those two can settle their land disputes. When all three (or four if you include Bangladesh) cooperate then we will truly witness Asia's ascension!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peace_maker

yh1 said:


> It might be true only for the Chinese side.



Friend,
Its true from our side as well.I don't see any other problem in our relation except some border issues.
Hope it should be mended earlier by China and India.

Thanks
Jai hind!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

vandemataram said:


> It is as naive as stupidity....geo-political and strategic issues will keep China from ignoring India...Of course India is China's fiercest competitors with its own subtle way ..there is no real need to spew venom and spit fire like a dragon.
> 
> The statement "Indian Ocean is not India's Ocean" coming out from your country is proof enough that your Govt knows where things stand...
> 
> It is just for nothing that Hambantota and Gwadar and Sittwe are coming up....
> 
> You know what ...Oil and Gas are your strateic assets not only for your growth and development but also to maintain lead over other countries during war time..the single most important resource needed to oil the war machinery ....
> 
> You are the amongst greatest consumer and importers of Crude oil and that is something your Govt knows more than their worth....
> 
> In the wake of this safeguarding the sea lanes of communications become paramount....and you know what the Straits of Malacca...that is critical soft underbelly ....very very soft and you do not have control on that .....it will take a days effort for the Indian Navy and the AF to cut those lines and then that will be enough to put pressure on you Hans.....thanks a lot



 Ha ha ha. 

No China and Chinese people all over the globe do NOT see India has a major future competitor, not even a minor competitor. Get this through your thick skull: It's a one-sided obsessive fascination you guys have. Case in point, ROK as only a population of 42 million yet their economy is WAY BIGGER than yours! The day you surpass your former White Masters then we can discuss this matter at the adult table. Until then....

Also, if you somehow manage to cut the supply line Japan and Korea will also be affected. Now do you really what to piss so many people off???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## inayatali

Peacefull environment is liked by every religion even Hindus love to live peacefully so China which always peace lover country must enhance peacefull reletions with India!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vandemataram

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Ha ha ha.
> 
> No China and Chinese people all over the globe do NOT see India has a major future competitor, not even a minor competitor. Get this through your thick skull: It's a one-sided obsessive fascination you guys have. Case in point, ROK as only a population of 42 million yet their economy is WAY BIGGER than yours! The day you surpass your former White Masters then we can discuss this matter at the adult table. Until then....
> 
> Also, if you somehow manage to cut the supply line Japan and Korea will also be affected. Now do you really what to piss so many people off???



No problems....you can discuss endlessly about N Korea and your own...

Who the **** does care what Chinese people think? The Global citizens say so ..India is China;s competitor..you dont like it ..but that does nt do it away ...

And anyways...your soft underbelly of the Malacca Straits is also something you need to take care of...


----------



## vandemataram

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Ha ha ha.
> 
> No China and Chinese people all over the globe do NOT see India has a major future competitor, not even a minor competitor. Get this through your thick skull: It's a one-sided obsessive fascination you guys have. Case in point, ROK as only a population of 42 million yet their economy is WAY BIGGER than yours! The day you surpass your former White Masters then we can discuss this matter at the adult table. Until then....
> 
> Also, if you somehow manage to cut the supply line Japan and Korea will also be affected. Now do you really what to piss so many people off???



China and Chinese....who the **** are they? You and your Han brethren get this deep into your head....India and India alone is China's competitor though less than half of what China;s size is...

Yes we shall surpass them int he future but that does not mean that you are America's or EU's equal or even gettng there...

Get up from your wet dreams and clean your pants...


----------



## Peace_maker

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Ha ha ha.
> 
> No China and Chinese people all over the globe do NOT see India has a major future competitor, not even a minor competitor. Get this through your thick skull: It's a one-sided obsessive fascination you guys have. Case in point, ROK as only a population of 42 million yet their economy is WAY BIGGER than yours! *The day you surpass your former White Masters then we can discuss this matter at the adult table. Until then....*
> 
> Also, if you somehow manage to cut the supply line Japan and Korea will also be affected. Now do you really what to piss so many people off???



Dude globally now ppl talks about China-India not India-Pak. I know CHina is way ahead then us but still we are 2 no while talking about developing coutries.We are doing everything at our own not going to anyone else for Aid.

Mods racist comments are present in above mentioned reply.Please take a not..


----------



## Patriot

You block Malaca Straits and USN will intervene.You Indians really make others laugh.Yeah the Chinese Navy will be sitting in China while you are blocking it's lines.Damn Even USN is scared of IN.


----------



## sidharth

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Ha ha ha.
> 
> No China and Chinese people all over the globe do NOT see India has a major future competitor, not even a minor competitor. Get this through your thick skull: It's a one-sided obsessive fascination you guys have. Case in point, ROK as only a population of 42 million yet their economy is WAY BIGGER than yours! The day you surpass your former White Masters then we can discuss this matter at the adult table. Until then....
> 
> Also, if you somehow manage to cut the supply line Japan and Korea will also be affected. Now do you really what to piss so many people off???




this guy is crazy!
we agree that china is ahead of us bt we are also catching up!
n mind if u tok abt economy!
look at your economy today!
can it in any means be compared to ours!
forget about china!

I think india-china relationship in the coming future will improve as none of the two countries would want to end this trading!

India enjoys a positive balance of trade with China.In 2004, India's total trade to China crossed US $13.6 billion, with Indian exports to China touching $ 7677.43 million and imports from china at US $ 5926.67


----------



## vandemataram

Patriot said:


> You block Malaca Straits and USN will intervene.You Indians really make others laugh.Yeah the Chinese Navy will be sitting in China while you are blocking it's lines.Damn Even USN is scared of IN.



u r right...but the USN needs a reason to block India's efforts...

of course to think that the Chinese navy shall come deep in to the straits and wage a war and gain superiority is a pathetic notion..


----------



## Gabbar

Eye on China, is India adding muscle on East?​
NEW DELHI: India may publicly be very cautious about not ruffling China's prickly feathers but is slowly taking some steps to counter the stark 
military asymmetry with its much larger neighbour. In the latest such move, the Army now wants a dedicated artillery division for the eastern front. 

After getting the Cabinet Committee on Security's approval to raise two new infantry mountain divisions (with around 15,000 combat soldiers each) and an artillery brigade last year, the Army is now pushing the case for the new artillery division, say defence ministry sources. 

The proposed artillery division, under the Kolkata-based Eastern Army Command, will have three brigades -- two of 155mm howitzers and one of the Russian `Smerch' and indigenous `Pinaka' multiple-launch rocket systems. 

As earlier reported by TOI, IAF has already begun to base its most potent Sukhoi-30MKI fighter jets at Tezpur, with other airbases in the northeast like Chabua next on the roadmap, apart from building new helipads in Arunachal Pradesh. 

Even as the Navy tries to counter China's strategic moves in the Indian Ocean Region, India is progressively reactivating old ALGs (advanced landing grounds) like Daulat Beg Oldi, Fukche, Chushul and Nyama in Ladakh after decades of them lying largely unused. 

Then, of course, India is also set to conduct another test of the 3,500-km range Agni-III ballistic missile this month, even as work is in progress for the maiden test of the 5,000-km Agni-V missile by mid-2010. 

"Though China is way ahead in military capabilities, all we want is a credible active deterrence posture against it. But again, the progress of our various measures to counter Chinese moves, like the huge build-up of military infrastructure in Tibet and south China, remains quite sluggish," said a top official. 

Only 10 of the 73 roads earmarked for construction along the Sino-Indian border, for instance, have been built till now. This when the 2.5-million People's Liberation Army can move two divisions to the border within a month. 

The importance of the proposed artillery division can be gauged from the fact that India has only two such formations till now. Both are primarily tasked for the western front with Pakistan, one under the Chandimandir-based Western Command and the other under Pune-based Southern Command. 

All Army divisions and corps, including those in the eastern sector, have their own integral artillery brigades. But a dedicated artillery division will give the Eastern Army commander a `potent' force with long-range, high-volume firepower, having as it will guns and rocket systems, missiles and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles). 

The Army's Rs 15,000 crore artillery modernisation programme continues to be hampered by a series of kickback scandals. The project to procure 140 ultra-light howitzers for Rs 2,900 crore, for instance, needs to get going since it will ensure artillery can be deployed in forward, inaccessible areas at short notice with the help of helicopters.


----------



## Joshi

Sino-PakFriendship said:


> If USA, India and Turkey want our Xinjiang and Tibet to be the next Kosovo!
> 
> 
> Please let Washington, New Delhi and Ankara enjoy our Nuclear bombs!
> 
> We have Nothing but Nuclear bombs!



Actually to remind you, India and US also has N-bombs.

Apart from that we also have sensibility of not throwing up this type of over-confident BS.


----------



## Jako

Joshi,no use debating with the naive troll,ignore him.....


----------



## Gabbar

*GET BACK TO TOPIC, STOP DEGRADING THIS THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Gabbar

*Intel centres to keep tabs on China's missiles, navy *

NEW DELHI: Stung by China's aggressive posturing, including its deployment of missiles in Delingha near Tibet, and other increasingly hostile activities in India's neighbourhood, the Cabinet Committee on Security is considering a proposal to set up separate centres for nuclear or missile intelligence and maritime security. In fact, with strong backing by National Security Advisor M K Narayanan, the CCS, which is still smarting under the Chinese `aggression', is all set to give the go-ahead to the proposal. 

The inability of central intelligence agencies like RAW, DIA and IB in keeping a tab on recent deployment of intermediate range missiles like DF-4 and reports that Beijing might station ICBMs in the Delingha region seem to have alarmed authorities into action. The medium-range ballistic missiles which are already deployed in Delingha can hit targets that are almost 3,000 kilometres away. China has also built several launch pads for nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles in the same region. 
"The entire northern India and parts of central India can be hit from there. The way these missiles have been deployed, they can only hit four countries -- Nepal, Pakistan, Myanmar and India. And because the other three countries are not potential adversaries of China, there is obviously deep concern here about China's intentions and you can say that this is one way of addressing this concern,'' said a source, adding that the separate centres for missile and maritime intelligence will initially comprise officers from central intelligence agencies. Till now, the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) has worked as the nodal agency responsible for the functioning of all internal and external intelligence agencies. 
A security official admitted that the need for separate missile intelligence centres was primarily because of China's expanding missile development programme. The new agency will not just gather information but also analyse information available with central agencies like DIA, RAW, IB and NTRO and recommend action to counter any adverse development. 

"This agency, once it comes into being, will deal exclusively with nuclear and missile intelligence. The agencies carrying out this work now function under the JIC but the committee is not exclusively for missile and nuclear intelligence,'' he added. The new agency will function directly under the National Security Council and will be accountable for all inputs from the neighbouring region on developments related to missile and nuclear technology. 

This proposal was first mooted by a joint task force on intelligence headed by former JIC chief S D Pradhan. Two other members of the task force are former IB director P C Haldar and scientist Roddam Narasimha. The task force was constituted at the behest of Narayanan himself and it has submitted its report to the government. 

Similarly, a separate centre for maritime intelligence is also likely to be cleared by CCS. This centre will work as pivot around which all intelligence agencies involved in maritime security will function.


----------



## sensenreason

China is far ahead of India in all areas and will remain far ahead for atleast a decade or so.Its important to note that while India has on paper a strong defence forces but is surely less efficient than the Chinese.

In war many things matter such as strategy, deception, execution, weaponry and psy-ops...In recent years, India has made some progress in developing a strategic framework. However, we are still pretty much archaic,theoritical and ineffecient in many of the above areas...which means the 1:2 advantage in numbers that the Chinese enjoy becomes a 1:5 (xx:yy....) superiority in a real situation; IN's and IA's superior planes and warships notwithstanding...The above is theoretical comparison ie the ratio's are arbitrary....

Its important to realise, China is competing with the US and not India.
Right now, India is a also ran story....In Geo-strategic scenario, there is no draws; only winners and losers at any point of time.India doesnt hold any major cards...economic, military, intel...etc

Given the above, economic recession and therefore the emerging new duopoly of US:China.India needs to make a strategic choice between three options:

1. Try and compete with the Chinese and the west (US) on its own terms and be ready to be attacked, isolated, sanctioned and stand on its own feet...

2. Align totally with US.
3. Aligh totally with China.

Right now, India wants #1, actually practices psuedo #2 and considers #3 as a totally unthinkable option....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## oct605032048

No offense but the 4th largest Economy is still no more than one third of the second largest economy. And the friendship across the Karakoram Range is not funny under the threaten of a south asia giant.


----------



## moha199

Mr.F said:


> LOL
> 
> You pakistanis are very humorous people, spreading laughter all around.
> 
> The way you Pakis lick Chinki *** is something to be proud of, no wonder the world thinks of you people as the most good-for-nothing bunch of idiots on the face of the planet.
> 
> Who's obsessed with whom? The way I see it, you lots have been obsessed with the big, bad Hindu India for the last 62 years. Your leaders said they would eat grass but would match India bullet for bullet, well that certainly has'nt happened but you all are still eating grass nonetheless.
> 
> Look at your country, or should I call it a 'shithole' since that would go better with the state your land of pure is currently in. What do you think you are? Who do you think you are? What's your standing in the world? Everybody thinks of you as terrorists, as bloody chutiyas of the world. You're a liability to the rest of the world.
> 
> You talk of 'white masters'. LMAO. The same Britishers ruled your ***** too, in case you forgot, your Pakistan was carved out of British India. If anything, you're the ones who still bow down & the lick the ***** of your white masters (in addition to licking Chinki *****, which is your favourite national pastime), you are the ones who go begging to 'Friends of Pakistan' forum & beg for money..Baksheesh dedo !! Baksheesh dedo!!  Every single day, US keeps bombing your own people in your own territory. We have surpassed our 'white masters', but you're busy shining their shoes & licking their gaand.
> 
> Talking about China, it's funny how you Pakistanis jump up to defend your 'tallel than mountains, deepel than osheans' fraaaand.  The whole world talks about India AND China, and that's what pisses the Chinkis off. Ofcourse, they are ahead of us, but for how long? Unlike you Pakistanis, we don't hide between some other country's success & lick their ***** in order to get some baksheesh. We are the 4th largest Economy in PPP terms, we are the 7th most industrialized nation, 4th largest military power in the world.
> 
> Porkistanis, WHO THE **** ARE YOU?!


What a scum bag you are. All i see is your trash mouth.

---------- Post added at 05:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:40 AM ----------




glomex said:


> A well written response...though you could have done well without those profanities.....
> 
> i wonder why Pakistanis ...with all due respect to their nationality...spend hell lot of time boasting about a Chineese relationship where Pakisan contributes next to nothing.... Reminds me of 1971 when america was a blood friend.....but they refused wepons to pakistan during war....may be Pakistan should learn from that and create a stable economy based on lesser foregin support......


Your support for his reply was a shame if you know what iam talking about. You will be reported well!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Mr.F said:


> LOL
> 
> You pakistanis are very humorous people, spreading laughter all around.
> 
> <I have snipped away most of the quote, as leaving it in place defeats the purpose of the moderators deleting the original>



Why have you joined this forum? Have you no concern for civil behaviour, for any kind of norm governing the language that you use? Is anything and everything permitted? Is it that your logic and your rationality is insufficient and you need to use some additives? I am deeply put off by this vile language and the worse attitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## moha199

sensenreason said:


> China is far ahead of India in all areas and will remain far ahead for atleast a decade or so.Its important to note that while India has on paper a strong defence forces but is surely less efficient than the Chinese.
> 
> In war many things matter such as strategy, deception, execution, weaponry and psy-ops...In recent years, India has made some progress in developing a strategic framework. However, we are still pretty much archaic,theoritical and ineffecient in many of the above areas...which means the 1:2 advantage in numbers that the Chinese enjoy becomes a 1:5 (xx:yy....) superiority in a real situation; IN's and IA's superior planes and warships notwithstanding...The above is theoretical comparison ie the ratio's are arbitrary....
> 
> Its important to realise, China is competing with the US and not India.
> Right now, India is a also ran story....In Geo-strategic scenario, there is no draws; only winners and losers at any point of time.India doesnt hold any major cards...economic, military, intel...etc
> 
> Given the above, economic recession and therefore the emerging new duopoly of US:China.India needs to make a strategic choice between three options:
> 
> 1. Try and compete with the Chinese and the west (US) on its own terms and be ready to be attacked, isolated, sanctioned and stand on its own feet...
> 
> 2. Align totally with US.
> 3. Aligh totally with China.
> 
> Right now, India wants #1, actually practices psuedo #2 and considers #3 as a totally unthinkable option....


I admire your gutts for speaking the truth, this world is crazy man and these two poor nations P and I has been used simaltaniously.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

sensenreason said:


> China is far ahead of India in all areas and will remain far ahead for atleast a decade or so.Its important to note that while India has on paper a strong defence forces but is surely less efficient than the Chinese.
> 
> In war many things matter such as strategy, deception, execution, weaponry and psy-ops...In recent years, India has made some progress in developing a strategic framework. However, we are still pretty much archaic,theoritical and ineffecient in many of the above areas...which means the 1:2 advantage in numbers that the Chinese enjoy becomes a 1:5 (xx:yy....) superiority in a real situation; IN's and IA's superior planes and warships notwithstanding...The above is theoretical comparison ie the ratio's are arbitrary....
> 
> Its important to realise, China is competing with the US and not India.
> Right now, India is a also ran story....In Geo-strategic scenario, there is no draws; only winners and losers at any point of time.India doesnt hold any major cards...economic, military, intel...etc
> 
> Given the above, economic recession and therefore the emerging new duopoly of US:China.India needs to make a strategic choice between three options:
> 
> 1. Try and compete with the Chinese and the west (US) on its own terms and be ready to be attacked, isolated, sanctioned and stand on its own feet...
> 
> 2. Align totally with US.
> 3. Aligh totally with China.
> 
> Right now, India wants #1, actually practices psuedo #2 and considers #3 as a totally unthinkable option....



There is a 4th option. Why always think in such confrontational tones?

4. Focus on internal poverty reduction while developing external friendly cooperation with all nations.

It is not a zero-sum game. Let's ASSUME it is a zero-sum game, in which conflict will only REDUCE the size of the pie ---> making it a NEGATIVE-SUM game! Contemplate on that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gpit

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> There is a 4th option. Why always think in such confrontational tones?
> 
> 4. Focus on internal poverty reduction while developing external friendly cooperation with all nations.
> 
> It is not a zero-sum game. Let's ASSUME it is a zero-sum game, in which conflict will only REDUCE the size of the pie ---> making it a NEGATIVE-SUM game! Contemplate on that.



Well said. And well understood by all sane people

But the problem is that that means the majority of Indian politicians will get unemployed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aimarraul

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> There is a 4th option. Why always think in such confrontational tones?
> 
> 4. Focus on internal poverty reduction while developing external friendly cooperation with all nations.
> 
> It is not a zero-sum game. Let's ASSUME it is a zero-sum game, in which conflict will only REDUCE the size of the pie ---> making it a NEGATIVE-SUM game! Contemplate on that.



the reality will easily crash your personal dream,the unilateral friendliness from china will only put us in a very dangerous position as long as the country like US or india propagate the "china threat" everyday,most indian was being educated under a "swear black is white" system when it comes to china,they consider china as &#8220;invader" for india's forward policy,they claimed there are over 1m PLA near the border in order to increase 60000 troops to protect a illegal McMahon line named by UK,they propagated a tibet separatist as a spiritual leader,anything different comes out when china is still friendly with them&#65311;they only consider you as"soft dragon" ,then keep doing the same thing &#65292;that's the absurd theory westerners got after summing up their brutal history&#65292;it's sad to see 5000years old india really buy that .

It is not a zero-sum game,but china will become zero if we ignore those propaganda,they are already planning something since the first day "china threat" was brought up

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

aimarraul said:


> the reality will easily crash your personal dream,the unilateral friendliness from china will only put us in a very dangerous position as long as the country like US or india propagate the "china threat" everyday,most indian was being educated under a "swear black is white" system when it comes to china,they consider china as invader" for india's forward policy,they claimed there are over 1m PLA near the border in order to increase 60000 troops to protect a illegal McMahon line named by UK,they propagated a tibet separatist as a spiritual leader,anything different comes out when china is still friendly with them&#65311;they only consider you as"soft dragon" ,then keep doing the same thing &#65292;that's the absurd theory westerners got after summing up their brutal history&#65292;it's sad to see 5000years old india really buy that .
> 
> It is not a zero-sum game,but china will become zero if we ignore those propaganda,they are already planning something since the first day "china threat" was brought up



You are correct, "unilateral friendliness" is not sufficient -- there must be BILATERAL RESPECT. In all honesty, you are most correct - everything you said is true. However, strategically we must understand the White Supremacists/Zionists implemented the "China Treat" propaganda. Whites despise the Hindus so much more than they fear us - and they do fear Chinese, but they also respect Chinese people.

Truth is China 'discovered' Europe way before Europe ever set foot outside of its tiny continent! 

Chinese were among the first when Europeans were settling the new continent, we built railroads that permitted them to conquer the Natives. They see us a (1) smart, (2) extremely hard-working, (3) honest, and our women as (4) desirable. In fact there is so much intermarriage that any prospects of attacking China is an attack on their own spouse & children.

So here's where India comes in. I am very knowledgeable about Bharat's daily barrage of propaganda - even so, I don't see Indians or Hindus as our enemies. They are people too. Most of them suffer incredibly. 

An Asian Century benefits everyone. Please understand the message I'm trying to convey.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sensenreason

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> There is a 4th option. Why always think in such confrontational tones?
> 
> 4. Focus on internal poverty reduction while developing external friendly cooperation with all nations.
> 
> It is not a zero-sum game. Let's ASSUME it is a zero-sum game, in which conflict will only REDUCE the size of the pie ---> making it a NEGATIVE-SUM game! Contemplate on that.



I wish for a equally prosperous, peaceful and happy world with all people's living together happily. However, forget between countries it doesnt happen even within one's own families...

So while the 4th exists and is a utopia.I dont see it as a realistic option. For instance, Mughal & India of the 18th century was not a existential threat to the west but East India Company still imposed its will on us through deception and military superiority.

So maybe, peace lies in becoming strong (in all ways)...

Its a long response to a short comment...Im no war monger..just realistic that while we can shut our eyesand imagine an idealistic world but war is thrust on people's that do not make right strategic choices or become weak....and....poverty eradication can co-exist geo-strategic choices..infact might even be a basic necessity for it.


----------



## RPK

Beijing does a U-turn, praises India-China bond - China - World - NEWS - The Times of India

BEIJING: China on Wednesday signaled its desire to adopt a friendlier diplomatic approach towards India as compared to its somewhat aggressive 
stance in the past weeks. Zhang Yan, the Chinese ambassador in New Delhi, has lent his name to a highly favorable editorial published by People&#8217;s Daily on Wednesday. 

The Internet edition of the paper, which is the official organ of the Communist Party of China, said that Sino-Indian relations have advanced in an all-round way and with a fast pace in recent years. The tone and content of the article is almost the opposite of what was said in another piece two months back. 

The paper and its sister publication, Global Times, published a aggressive article last June reprimanding India for "unwise military moves" of marshalling forces along the Arunchal Pradesh border. The article said India&#8217;s moves are "dangerous if it is based on a false anticipation that China will cave in". 

It is not clear what prompted the editorial apart from the fact that the "greatest neighbors" are due to celebrate six decades of friendship next year. It talked about how India and China are jointly influencing global affairs by taking similar approach on issues concerning environmental protection, climate change, food and energy security and at the Doha round of trade talks. 

Contrast these views with those expressed by the paper last June when it said: 

"India has long held contradictory views on China. Another big Asian country, India is frustrated that China's rise has captured much of the world's attention. Proud of its "advanced political system," India feels superior to China. However, it faces a disappointing domestic situation which is unstable compared with China's". 

The June article also said that "India likes to brag about its sustainable development, but worries that it is being left behind by China. China is seen in India as both a potential threat and a competitor to surpass." 

The new article does an about turn saying: "China has become one of India's largest trade partners, and India is now one of the most vital investment and overseas project contracting markets for China". The article also talks about the 35 per cent year on year growth in bilateral trade between the two countries. 

The People&#8217;s Daily said that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh&#8217;s successful, three-day visit to China in January last year has resulted in the signing of an agreement named "A Shared Vision for the 21st Century of China and India" in order to press ahead with the construction of a harmonious world for common prosperity. 

Subsequent visits to China by Indian leaders Sonia Gandhi and Pranab Mukherjee and the India trip by Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi last year has resulted in a "sound momentum of sustained, smooth and steady growth has been shown in the relations between the two Asian neighbors". 

"Looking ahead, people are confident that China and India, both nations with great ancient civilizations, which had contributed greatly to the world civilization and development, are sure to make new, fresh contributions to peace in Asia and the world at large while attaining their own development", it said.


----------



## Gabbar

*&#8220;China will be one of our primary challenges&#8221; *

NEW DELHI: The Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, on Monday underscored the primacy of challenges posed by China as India draw its national security plans to keep pace with its rise to global prominence.

&#8220;It is quite evident that coping with China will certainly be one of our primary challenges in the years ahead. China is in the process of &#8216;consolidating&#8217; its comprehensive national power and creating formidable military capabilities. Once that is done, China is likely to be more assertive on its claims, especially in its immediate neighbourhood,&#8221; Admiral Mehta said in his lecture &#8220;India&#8217;s national security challenges &#8211; an armed forces overview&#8221; organised by the National Maritime Foundation.

_Admiral Mehta acknowledged that India&#8217;s trust-deficit with China could never be removed completely till the boundary issues are settled _and flagged that Beijing&#8217;s propensity for intervention in space and cyber-warfare would also be major planning considerations in New Delhi&#8217;s strategic and operational thinking.

He said cooperation rather than competition or conflict with China was preferable since it would be &#8220;foolhardy&#8221; to compare India and China as equals in terms of economy, infrastructure and military spending. 

*&#8216;India not on par with China&#8217; *


The Navy Chief said both in convention and non-conventional terms military terms, *India neither does have the capability nor the intention to match China force for force. *

According to some American studies, China spends anywhere between $ 70 billion to $ 200 billion even though the official figure by Beijing is under $ 40 billion, he said.

A military conflict, he said, would have grave consequences on the economic front for both nations and therefore it would be in the interest of both the countries to cooperate with each other in mutually beneficial endeavours and ensure that the potential for conflict is minimised.


----------



## Hunter911

Max The Boss said:


> Future China India Relations
> 
> Geographical overview -
> China and India are separated by the formidable geographical obstacles of the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayan mountain chain, with Tibet serving as a buffer region between the two. China and India today share a border along the Himalayas and Nepal and Bhutan, two states lying along the Himalaya range, and acting as buffer states. In addition, Indian Kashmir province borders both the India and China.
> 
> Two territories are currently disputed between the China and India: Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. Arunachal Pradesh is located near the far east of India, while Aksai Chin is located near the northwest corner of India. However, all sides in the dispute have agreed to respect the Line of Actual Control and this border dispute is not widely seen as a major flashpoint.
> 
> From 2000 &#8211;
> 
> With Indian President K. R. Narayanan's visit to China, 2000 marked a gradual re-engagement of Indian and Chinese diplomacy.
> In 2002, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji reciprocated by visiting India, with a focus on economic issues.
> In 2003 ushered in a marked improvement in Sino-Indian relations following Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's landmark June 2003 visit to China. China officially recognized Indian sovereignty over Sikkim as the two nations moved toward resolving their border disputes.
> In 2004 also witnessed a gradual improvement in the international area when the two countries proposed opening up the Nathula and Jelepla Passes in Sikkim which would be mutually beneficial to both countries. 2004 was a milestone in China-India bilateral trade, surpassing the $10 billion mark for the first time.
> In April 2005, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited Bangalore to push for increased China-India cooperation in high-tech industries. In a speech, Wen stated "Cooperation is just like two pagodas (temples), one hardware and one software. Combined, we can take the leadership position in the world." Wen stated that the twenty-first century will be "the Asian century of the IT industry." The high-level visit was also expected to produce several agreements to deepen political, cultural and economic ties between the two nations. Regarding the issue of India gaining a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, on his visit, Wen Jiabao initially seemed to support the idea, but had returned to a neutral position on the subject by the time he returned to China.
> In 2005 the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit China was granted an observer status. While other countries in the region are ready to consider China for permanent membership in the SAARC, India seems reluctant.
> A very important dimension of the evolving China-India relationship is based on the energy requirements of their industrial expansion and their readiness to proactively secure them by investing in the oilfields abroad - in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. On the one hand, these ventures entail competition (which has been evident in oil biddings for various international projects recently). But on the other hand, a degree of cooperation too is visible, as they are increasingly confronting bigger players in the global oil market. This cooperation was sealed in Beijing on January 12, 2006 during the visit of Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, who signed an agreement which envisages ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) and the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) placing joint bids for promising projects elsewhere. This may have important consequences for their international relations.
> On July 6, 2006, China and India re-opened Nathula, an ancient trade route which was part of the Silk Road. Nathula is a pass through the Himalayas.
> Officials of both countries say that the re-opening of border trade will help ease the economic isolation of the region.
> In May 2007, China denied the application for visa from an Indian Administrative Service officer in Arunachal Pradesh.
> In December 2007, China appeared to have reversed its policy by granting a visa to Marpe Sora, an Arunachal born professor in computer science.
> In January 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited China and met with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao and had bilateral discussions related to trade, commerce, defense, military, and various other issues.
> In July 2008, at the 34th G8 summit in Japan, Hu Jintao and Manmohan Singh had a friendly meeting.
> In the wake of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, India offered aid to help the earthquake victims.
> In 2008 was a milestone in China India bilateral trade, surpassing the $37 billion.
> China India bilateral trade expected to reach $60 billion in 2010.
> In 2009 China Navy and India Navy joined in an Anti piracy navel mission in off Somalia waters.



Indians used to listen to all viewpoints. They May not concern the facts before the movement of Internet users in China, and now some of them visit all kinds of comments they feel a little bit surprised, and an Internet article alerted the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India, for which the content of the article was so memorable .

Indians in its domestic and overseas, they excluded the Chinese people is an indisputable fact, which shows that their narrow-minded.
They refused to China's Huawei telecommunications network provider ect., and their training in a well-known software development companies in China, lived a life as the emperor. Our local government also introduced a variety of favorable conditions to support them. I don't know why .


----------



## Hunter911

Max The Boss said:


> Future China India Relations
> 
> Geographical overview -
> China and India are separated by the formidable geographical obstacles of the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayan mountain chain, with Tibet serving as a buffer region between the two. China and India today share a border along the Himalayas and Nepal and Bhutan, two states lying along the Himalaya range, and acting as buffer states. In addition, Indian Kashmir province borders both the India and China.
> 
> Two territories are currently disputed between the China and India: Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. Arunachal Pradesh is located near the far east of India, while Aksai Chin is located near the northwest corner of India. However, all sides in the dispute have agreed to respect the Line of Actual Control and this border dispute is not widely seen as a major flashpoint.
> 
> From 2000 
> 
> With Indian President K. R. Narayanan's visit to China, 2000 marked a gradual re-engagement of Indian and Chinese diplomacy.
> In 2002, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji reciprocated by visiting India, with a focus on economic issues.
> In 2003 ushered in a marked improvement in Sino-Indian relations following Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's landmark June 2003 visit to China. China officially recognized Indian sovereignty over Sikkim as the two nations moved toward resolving their border disputes.
> In 2004 also witnessed a gradual improvement in the international area when the two countries proposed opening up the Nathula and Jelepla Passes in Sikkim which would be mutually beneficial to both countries. 2004 was a milestone in China-India bilateral trade, surpassing the $10 billion mark for the first time.
> In April 2005, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited Bangalore to push for increased China-India cooperation in high-tech industries. In a speech, Wen stated "Cooperation is just like two pagodas (temples), one hardware and one software. Combined, we can take the leadership position in the world." Wen stated that the twenty-first century will be "the Asian century of the IT industry." The high-level visit was also expected to produce several agreements to deepen political, cultural and economic ties between the two nations. Regarding the issue of India gaining a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, on his visit, Wen Jiabao initially seemed to support the idea, but had returned to a neutral position on the subject by the time he returned to China.
> In 2005 the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit China was granted an observer status. While other countries in the region are ready to consider China for permanent membership in the SAARC, India seems reluctant.
> A very important dimension of the evolving China-India relationship is based on the energy requirements of their industrial expansion and their readiness to proactively secure them by investing in the oilfields abroad - in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. On the one hand, these ventures entail competition (which has been evident in oil biddings for various international projects recently). But on the other hand, a degree of cooperation too is visible, as they are increasingly confronting bigger players in the global oil market. This cooperation was sealed in Beijing on January 12, 2006 during the visit of Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, who signed an agreement which envisages ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) and the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) placing joint bids for promising projects elsewhere. This may have important consequences for their international relations.
> On July 6, 2006, China and India re-opened Nathula, an ancient trade route which was part of the Silk Road. Nathula is a pass through the Himalayas.
> Officials of both countries say that the re-opening of border trade will help ease the economic isolation of the region.
> In May 2007, China denied the application for visa from an Indian Administrative Service officer in Arunachal Pradesh.
> In December 2007, China appeared to have reversed its policy by granting a visa to Marpe Sora, an Arunachal born professor in computer science.
> In January 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited China and met with President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao and had bilateral discussions related to trade, commerce, defense, military, and various other issues.
> In July 2008, at the 34th G8 summit in Japan, Hu Jintao and Manmohan Singh had a friendly meeting.
> In the wake of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, India offered aid to help the earthquake victims.
> In 2008 was a milestone in China India bilateral trade, surpassing the $37 billion.
> China India bilateral trade expected to reach $60 billion in 2010.
> In 2009 China Navy and India Navy joined in an Anti piracy navel mission in off Somalia waters.



China should completely control the Siliguri corridor, and then think of ways to split India. The third time in India - Pakistan war, India has given Pakistan such a vicious means.


----------



## Hunter911

It's heard that the Indians are descendants of Aryans? Why do Indians look down on the yellow race? Is the Aryan legends are aliens and Indians are their descendants?


----------



## Hunter911

sensenreason said:


> I wish for a equally prosperous, peaceful and happy world with all people's living together happily. However, forget between countries it doesnt happen even within one's own families...
> 
> So while the 4th exists and is a utopia.I dont see it as a realistic option. For instance, Mughal & India of the 18th century was not a existential threat to the west but East India Company still imposed its will on us through deception and military superiority.
> 
> So maybe, peace lies in becoming strong (in all ways)...
> 
> Its a long response to a short comment...Im no war monger..just realistic that while we can shut our eyesand imagine an idealistic world but war is thrust on people's that do not make right strategic choices or become weak....and....poverty eradication can co-exist geo-strategic choices..infact might even be a basic necessity for it.



OH,man.Your idea is that India and China continues to fight? Until you support Dalai to split the entire Tibet ?If you are able to defeat Chinese GUNG FU , just come again and maybe we can talk about your "expands policy. "


----------



## arihant

Hunter911 said:


> China should completely control the Siliguri corridor, and then think of ways to split India. The third time in India - Pakistan war, India has given Pakistan such a vicious means.



Ya, I was not sure that China has produce people like you. You will split and people of India and world will remain silent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarProfessor

The future relations? one word: difficult.

Everybody knows what's going on, it just has to be played out all by itself in nature.

A. China population is pretty much apathetic to all things Indian. However, there is the border issue doesn't seem to be able to go anywhere.
B. Chinese business wants Indian market. Indians are suspicious of Chinese and resist everything.
C. Chinese needs more secure access to ME and Africa to advance its economic interest, and Islamabad has been a staunch supporter of everything Beijing, Unfortunately, India is just out there by geography. Indians become more suspicious. However, I do believe Beijing overlooked Indians strategic security needs on this issue. However, India failed to acknowledge that there will never be strategic security for India against Beijing because China has Tibet, Chinese missiles and planes can always reach anywhere easily within northern India. If Indians never trust us, no matter what Indians do, what Chinese say, Indians can never feel secure, and this is a sad reality. We are willing to help, but we can't. Geography is geography.
D. By establishing trade route through Pakistan, Chinese hope it can also benefit Pakistan financially, and help to develop Pakistan faster. Pakistan trusts us, they never had a problem of China getting better, they know it's good for Pakistan as well when we get better. That's one of the reason for Gwadar port. However, everybody reads this as a military maneuver. It has certain military values, but I believe its more for financial gains for China, and also it would help Pakistan.
E. China is not happy that Pakistan feels in a constant threat from Indian military invasion. When Pakistan suffers, some how Chinese can feel the pain, its not politics or based on interests. That's why Pakistani leaders say our two countries relationship is unique. If Chinese foreign interest is hurt, usually we are pretty mad. If Islamabad is hurt, we can feel the pain. This is indeed a very special relationship.
F. Two many things are mis-read by both sides. The two people can't trust each other, and that's the root of all the `issues'. This fact is not going to change, as people on two sides can't mutate that fast and hope for a miracle. ;-) Chinese is simply doing stuff that is commensurate with its economic progress. And its activities inevitably have stoked pressure on the Sino-Indian relationship.
G. I didn't expect India's response is this tense, we started out naturally with Pakistan with no intention to hurt India, we believe we are doing something good for Pakistan, and also very good for China. Because of grandeur international politics involved in here, I personally feel Pakistan is sand-witched in between, sadly. This makes things more complex since last thing we want to do is to push our agenda and make Pakistan feel pressured. I don't know what's next.

To solve all this mess, India's attitude is the key. India can do a lot more to make the three countries peaceful and develop themselves, and benefit their people respectively. But for India to do anything, it is almost asking our friends in new Delhi to make a leap in faith, and I know it's not fair.

Difficult.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gabbar

India eyes Chinas climate technology​
Last week, an official Chinese think-tank surprised the world by estimating that with the right low-carbon technology China could control its carbon emissions to peak at 2030 and fall to 2005 levels or lower by 2050. 

Now India wants to know how, and will nudge China for details. On Monday, a team led by Indian Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh will huddle in a three-hour meeting in Beijing to discuss climate change.

India and China are at the centre of global negotiations to finalise a successor to the Kyoto Protocol and get nations to agree to limit heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. 
*The West is trying to play India and China against each other and trying to isolate India and China, Ramesh told HT in Beijing ahead of the talks.* China is trying to collaborate with the US and so are we. The engagement is bilateral but negotiations are multilateral.

India will ask for details on Chinas recent deal with the US for joint research on clean energy. The emission gap between India and China is very large, he said. Even so, our positions have converged. This meeting is the PMs way of signalling that were in the same boat.

India aims to study how China is increasing its forest cover by over five times the annual rate in India. The two nations will sign a collaboration to exchange data and field visits on the shrinking Himalayan glaciers. Getting Chinese field data and access for glacier studies has been strategically difficult. The minister called it a big breakthrough.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gogbot

Gabbar said:


> India eyes Chinas climate technology​
> Last week, an official Chinese think-tank surprised the world by estimating that with the right low-carbon technology China could control its carbon emissions to peak at 2030 and fall to 2005 levels or lower by 2050.
> 
> Now India wants to know how, and will nudge China for details. On Monday, a team led by Indian Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh will huddle in a three-hour meeting in Beijing to discuss climate change.
> 
> India and China are at the centre of global negotiations to finalise a successor to the Kyoto Protocol and get nations to agree to limit heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.
> *The West is trying to play India and China against each other and trying to isolate India and China, Ramesh told HT in Beijing ahead of the talks.* China is trying to collaborate with the US and so are we. The engagement is bilateral but negotiations are multilateral.
> 
> India will ask for details on Chinas recent deal with the US for joint research on clean energy. The emission gap between India and China is very large, he said. Even so, our positions have converged. This meeting is the PMs way of signalling that were in the same boat.
> 
> India aims to study how China is increasing its forest cover by over five times the annual rate in India. The two nations will sign a collaboration to exchange data and field visits on the shrinking Himalayan glaciers. Getting Chinese field data and access for glacier studies has been strategically difficult. The minister called it a big breakthrough.



Low carbon emission and carbon capture technology has been available since the late 80's. It's only the cost's involved and lack of government initiative in the area that's prevented wide spread use of this technology. The carbon economy is kicking of as people see the effects of climate change, And they are also realizing that this means a better atom economy in many industrial reactions.

Regardless of all this India does not need to eye anything, What ever technology is developed with regards to lowering carbon emissions, will no doubt be made readily available to the whole world.

And besides climate change is one thing where international collaboration is always on the rise


----------



## gogbot

WarProfessor said:


> The future relations? one word: difficult.
> 
> Everybody knows what's going on, it just has to be played out all by itself in nature.
> 
> A. China population is pretty much apathetic to all things Indian. However, there is the border issue doesn't seem to be able to go anywhere.
> B. Chinese business wants Indian market. Indians are suspicious of Chinese and resist everything.
> C. Chinese needs more secure access to ME and Africa to advance its economic interest, and Islamabad has been a staunch supporter of everything Beijing, Unfortunately, India is just out there by geography. Indians become more suspicious. However, I do believe Beijing overlooked Indians strategic security needs on this issue. However, India failed to acknowledge that there will never be strategic security for India against Beijing because China has Tibet, Chinese missiles and planes can always reach anywhere easily within northern India. If Indians never trust us, no matter what Indians do, what Chinese say, Indians can never feel secure, and this is a sad reality. We are willing to help, but we can't. Geography is geography.
> D. By establishing trade route through Pakistan, Chinese hope it can also benefit Pakistan financially, and help to develop Pakistan faster. Pakistan trusts us, they never had a problem of China getting better, they know it's good for Pakistan as well when we get better. That's one of the reason for Gwadar port. However, everybody reads this as a military maneuver. It has certain military values, but I believe its more for financial gains for China, and also it would help Pakistan.
> E. China is not happy that Pakistan feels in a constant threat from Indian military invasion. When Pakistan suffers, some how Chinese can feel the pain, its not politics or based on interests. That's why Pakistani leaders say our two countries relationship is unique. If Chinese foreign interest is hurt, usually we are pretty mad. If Islamabad is hurt, we can feel the pain. This is indeed a very special relationship.
> F. Two many things are mis-read by both sides. The two people can't trust each other, and that's the root of all the `issues'. This fact is not going to change, as people on two sides can't mutate that fast and hope for a miracle. ;-) Chinese is simply doing stuff that is commensurate with its economic progress. And its activities inevitably have stoked pressure on the Sino-Indian relationship.
> G. I didn't expect India's response is this tense, we started out naturally with Pakistan with no intention to hurt India, we believe we are doing something good for Pakistan, and also very good for China. Because of grandeur international politics involved in here, I personally feel Pakistan is sand-witched in between, sadly. This makes things more complex since last thing we want to do is to push our agenda and make Pakistan feel pressured. I don't know what's next.
> 
> To solve all this mess, India's attitude is the key. India can do a lot more to make the three countries peaceful and develop themselves, and benefit their people respectively. But for India to do anything, it is almost asking our friends in new Delhi to make a leap in faith, and I know it's not fair.
> 
> Difficult.



WarProfessor your speculative theory on India, China relations raises some very valid points

But i am afraid your view on the whole situation is very 1 dimensional.

You have not only limited your speculations to relations between only India, Pakistan and China. but also only to the south Asian theater. Thus making all your points inadequate to explain the true complexity of problems and challenges faced by our Aspiring nations.

The Pakistan issue with India is in all rights not an issue that should be China's problem, however Pakistan seems to think that China will fight its battles for it, this is not the case however. China will show its solidarity to its troubled ally with diplomatic or economic support but that's all, it will not be solving Pakistan's problems.To China's credit it has stayed out of the Kashmir affair, perhaps a sign that it still hopes that India and China can one day cooperate more readily than today.

To Pakistan, China's success are not necessarily yours. A +1 to China does not mean a +1 to Pakistan, and that's is something that most Pakistani's don't seem to want to believe. You should aspire more to develop your own nation and not stare at awe in the shadow of another.

The real problems between China And India is obviously the border issue. Both countries are to blame for this India in the 60's and China now in the present. Oblivious claiming India should have accepted Chairman Mao's concessions back in the 60's as a gesture of friendship. But in our arrogance, we let let pride cloud our judgments , and we all now how history was written.Mistakes were made , Yes But that was then what about now?

China has made the claim that the entire state of Archangel Pradesh
which is home to millions of Indian citizens that have lived there for generations. Now China is the one with the forward policy making demands that cant possibly be met or agreed to. India is willing to concede its claim in Aksai chin but china wants Arunachal PRadesh.

This is the Flash point to the hostility between both nations. But what is the fuel, well simply Its India's rapid growth that seems to possible mirror that of China's. Which unfortunately means That due to India and China's lack of cooperation in the present , both nations are most likely to be in direct competition with each other on the global stage in the near future over meeting energy need's, natural resources , and diplomatic influence. 
If we can build a foundation of cooperation now then the future can be far more beneficial to both countries.

But you may ask why is China adopting this policy of not conceding its claim of Archanchel Pradesh. Simply its due to Geo-political. China has far more power and diplomatic influence now then India , and it wants to take advantage of it to widen the gap between India and China as much as possible, China's growth will need to bottom out as with any other economic cycle. and coincidentally this bottoming out is set to occur when India's growth will be reaching full speed, India has the potential to catch up to China at this time.

But why would China be concerned about this simply put the first century of the new millennium has a name it the "China century", And India has no place in it as a global power. China has been driven by one goal to be no 1, to revive the Middle Kingdom to all its glory, a noble task. that is being shouldered by the Chinese people. Things always don't go as planned India's rise was not expected by anyone not even the Indian's expected the progress we have made in the last 20 years. The sooner China can learn to share this century with little brother India. and change the "china century" to the "China-India century", The more positive the future China India relations will be.

P.S
I know some of my statements can also be considered 1 dimensional i don't have time to go into full detail , so any query u make on what i said, i am willing to clarify in more detail.
so plz don't flame about my comments before u give me a chance to clarify any discrepancies


----------



## Halaku Khan

Not a bad summary - but it leaves out the most important point as far as India is concerned. 

Chinese supply of nuclear weapons and missile technology to Pakistan has enabled Pakistan to sustain a war of terrorism against India. Whenever innocent people are killed in India in terrorist attacks, Indians see the hand of China which enables Pakistan.

You can imagine what would be the situation if somebody supplied nuclear weapons to Uighurs, Taiwanese etc.

First step for China is to honestly acknowledge this negative conduct on its part and discuss constructively what can be done to remove weapons of mass destruction from states like Pakistan that are using them to sustain terrorism.



WarProfessor said:


> The future relations? one word: difficult.
> 
> Everybody knows what's going on, it just has to be played out all by itself in nature.
> 
> A. China population is pretty much apathetic to all things Indian. However, there is the border issue doesn't seem to be able to go anywhere.
> B. Chinese business wants Indian market. Indians are suspicious of Chinese and resist everything.
> C. Chinese needs more secure access to ME and Africa to advance its economic interest, and Islamabad has been a staunch supporter of everything Beijing, Unfortunately, India is just out there by geography. Indians become more suspicious. However, I do believe Beijing overlooked Indians strategic security needs on this issue. However, India failed to acknowledge that there will never be strategic security for India against Beijing because China has Tibet, Chinese missiles and planes can always reach anywhere easily within northern India. If Indians never trust us, no matter what Indians do, what Chinese say, Indians can never feel secure, and this is a sad reality. We are willing to help, but we can't. Geography is geography.
> D. By establishing trade route through Pakistan, Chinese hope it can also benefit Pakistan financially, and help to develop Pakistan faster. Pakistan trusts us, they never had a problem of China getting better, they know it's good for Pakistan as well when we get better. That's one of the reason for Gwadar port. However, everybody reads this as a military maneuver. It has certain military values, but I believe its more for financial gains for China, and also it would help Pakistan.
> E. China is not happy that Pakistan feels in a constant threat from Indian military invasion. When Pakistan suffers, some how Chinese can feel the pain, its not politics or based on interests. That's why Pakistani leaders say our two countries relationship is unique. If Chinese foreign interest is hurt, usually we are pretty mad. If Islamabad is hurt, we can feel the pain. This is indeed a very special relationship.
> F. Two many things are mis-read by both sides. The two people can't trust each other, and that's the root of all the `issues'. This fact is not going to change, as people on two sides can't mutate that fast and hope for a miracle. ;-) Chinese is simply doing stuff that is commensurate with its economic progress. And its activities inevitably have stoked pressure on the Sino-Indian relationship.
> G. I didn't expect India's response is this tense, we started out naturally with Pakistan with no intention to hurt India, we believe we are doing something good for Pakistan, and also very good for China. Because of grandeur international politics involved in here, I personally feel Pakistan is sand-witched in between, sadly. This makes things more complex since last thing we want to do is to push our agenda and make Pakistan feel pressured. I don't know what's next.
> 
> To solve all this mess, India's attitude is the key. India can do a lot more to make the three countries peaceful and develop themselves, and benefit their people respectively. But for India to do anything, it is almost asking our friends in new Delhi to make a leap in faith, and I know it's not fair.
> 
> Difficult.


----------



## gogbot

Halaku Khan said:


> Not a bad summary - but it leaves out the most important point as far as India is concerned.
> 
> Chinese supply of nuclear weapons and missile technology to Pakistan has enabled Pakistan to sustain a war of terrorism against India. Whenever innocent people are killed in India in terrorist attacks, Indians see the hand of China which enables Pakistan.
> 
> You can imagine what would be the situation if somebody supplied nuclear weapons to Uighurs, Taiwanese etc.
> 
> First step for China is to honestly acknowledge this negative conduct on its part and discuss constructively what can be done to remove weapons of mass destruction from states like Pakistan that are using them to sustain terrorism.



If any positive relations can be established we need to stop the blame game. what happened happened and could not have happened any other way. we need to stop holding our very short 60 years of hostility over our heads, so that we may move forward. This goes for all sides, your commitment to peaceful cooperation is only as good as your ability to forgive and forget.

If the nations of Europe after a 1000 years of bloody conflict including the World-wars on their soil. Can come together to form the EU.Why cant Mighty China, The Great India and Defiant Pakistan come together putting behind them only 60 years of hostility.

Maybe its because ii am fatigued or maybe its because i just watched Star trek the undiscovered country.

But the future is the undiscovered country. And change causes fear but India and world need to stop being afraid of china and the change its rise implies, china also needs to make the leap of faith to trust others it has to accept the change its own rise means for it, and not take that out on other nations. , just as India needs to make the leap of faith and trust India.

Only then can we venture together to find the many undiscovered countries that are yet to come.


----------



## Hunter911

In fact, most Indians like bragging.


If India and China were in fighting, the Indians would always call to inform the U.S. President Obama in order to seek the american's fire supports.
With regard to India and China border talks, the two sides will require concessions before we can have a breakthrough. 
India is now clamoring for all day that they can defeat China in three days. whether India has such a guts or not?


----------



## gogbot

Hunter911 said:


> In fact, most Indians like bragging.
> 
> 
> If India and China were in fighting, the Indians would always call to inform the U.S. President Obama in order to seek the american's fire supports.
> With regard to India and China border talks, the two sides will require concessions before we can have a breakthrough.
> India is now clamoring for all day that they can defeat China in three days. whether India has such a guts or not?



Come on hunter, You cant talk of peace when you have no respect for India, statements such as these set the president that this is what the chines mind set is like.

and in fact most people like to brag, and those who don't brag substitute it with a healthy dose of rubbing people's mistakes in their faces

and on the border talks, i don't see china making any concessions, simply because Its not in China's best intrests right now, China is stronger that India in every way.china will only make a concession as gesture of good will.

And as your's and many other statements show there is little good will between both sides. But i doubt you even care.


----------



## Hunter911

gogbot said:


> Come on hunter, You cant talk of peace when you have no respect for India, statements such as these set the president that this is what the chines mind set is like.
> 
> and in fact most people like to brag, and those who don't brag substitute it with a healthy dose of rubbing people's mistakes in their faces
> 
> and on the border talks, i don't see china making any concessions, simply because Its not in China's best intrests right now, China is stronger that India in every way.china will only make a concession as gesture of good will.
> 
> And as your's and many other statements show there is little good will between both sides. But i doubt you even care.



You are keen on China's respect for Indians, respect for the Indian government, but why ? as we know,india's high school the third-year political science textbooks, "Political Theory and Practice," it was still fooling your younger youths. the ideas is that: " The Chinese people are still smoke opium "
India's high school textbooks, most of the contents is to describe India and China since 1950, disputes and conflicts, especially in the border war in 1962. However, India and China's history textbooks, records are completely different. In addition, India is very concerned about the relationship between China and Pakistan, especially in reference to India and Pakistan in 1971 war, China resolutely supports Pakistan. 
the fact is that behind of Indians about China is quite complex and delicate feelings, and they do not entirely to China as rivals or enemies, but can not open up their hearts to regard China as a friend, this point has been reflected in indian's political textbook.


----------



## Hunter911

In China, I met some Indians, there are students&#12289;hotels security guards etc., They have never been bullied by any chinese,we treat them equally.
.You can come to Tianjin to make a survey!


----------



## gogbot

Hunter911 said:


> You are keen on China's respect for Indians, respect for the Indian government, but why ? as we know,india's high school the third-year political science textbooks, "Political Theory and Practice," it was still fooling your younger youths. the ideas is that: " The Chinese people are still smoke opium "
> India's high school textbooks, most of the contents is to describe India and China since 1950, disputes and conflicts, especially in the border war in 1962. However, India and China's history textbooks, records are completely different. In addition, India is very concerned about the relationship between China and Pakistan, especially in reference to India and Pakistan in 1971 war, China resolutely supports Pakistan.
> the fact is that behind of Indians about China is quite complex and delicate feelings, and they do not entirely to China as rivals or enemies, but can not open up their hearts to regard China as a friend, this point has been reflected in indian's political textbook.



Yes of course i am keen on China's respect for India , Why ? because trust can only be built on the basis of mutual respect. and trust is what is necessary to take the India China relations in a positive direction. if there is no respect on what basis can trust be built be built upon. 
This lack of respect will soon manifest itself as it already has, in China's actions towards India. This will cause great concern regarding china to India, And this concern will cause fear.
And as a wise old green master once said.
Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate and hate will lead to the dark side or in this case war.
These words hold true meaning. You have to agree to that at least.

And while i was going to school in India they never thought me a dam thing about China, other that the fact that china has a great wall.
this was back in the 90's. For most of my life i was led to believe that china is the same as India , in that it is also a developing country.
and other than the fact that we had a small war with china , we had generally friendly relations. the news or media back at the time, reported china in the odd news report about how they did this or that in their country how it made things better.

*India's high school textbooks, most of the contents is to describe India and China since 1950, disputes and conflicts, especially in the border war in 1962. However, India and China's history textbooks, records are completely different.*

this may be true but in my life i have not come across anything like what u mention. so you be the judge of that.

*India is very concerned about the relationship between China and Pakistan, especially in reference to India and Pakistan in 1971 war, China resolutely supports Pakistan. *

of course we are concerned, just as China would be about a Jap-IN alliance or A US-IN alliance. But there is no need to make mountain over mole hills. We are currently not fighting Pakistan, they may be unfriendly relations, at this moment they are not hostiles. 

We have to get this Idea out of our heads that the primary purpose for India and Pakistan is to fight each other. On they we may be actual allies.



Hunter911 said:


> the fact is that behind of Indians about China is quite complex and delicate feelings, and they do not entirely to China as rivals or enemies, but can not open up their hearts to regard China as a friend, this point has been reflected in indian's political textbook.



hmm Indian politics can always change, hopefully for the better.
Just this year, the re-elected government(a re-election has not happened in 2 decades) has decided to take china's approach and put Economic progress above all else, this is a fundamental change in India's politics the dividends of which the entire world will see in the coming years. 
It will be more about China's stance towards India that will determine the the future of India-China relations, this is because the same people running china today will also be running China in the future.Which is not necessarily the same case In India

It is how they are able to accept the change and its consequences as i hive detailed in my previous posts specifically



gogbot said:


> The Pakistan issue with India is in all rights not an issue that should be China's problem, however Pakistan seems to think that China will fight its battles for it, this is not the case however. China will show its solidarity to its troubled ally with diplomatic or economic support but that's all, it will not be solving Pakistan's problems.To China's credit it has stayed out of the Kashmir affair, perhaps a sign that it still hopes that India and China can one day cooperate more readily than today.
> 
> To Pakistan, China's success are not necessarily yours. A +1 to China does not mean a +1 to Pakistan, and that's is something that most Pakistani's don't seem to want to believe. You should aspire more to develop your own nation and not stare at awe in the shadow of another.
> 
> The real problems between China And India is obviously the border issue. Both countries are to blame for this India in the 60's and China now in the present. Oblivious claiming India should have accepted Chairman Mao's concessions back in the 60's as a gesture of friendship. But in our arrogance, we let let pride cloud our judgments , and we all now how history was written.Mistakes were made , Yes But that was then what about now?
> 
> China has made the claim that the entire state of Archangel Pradesh
> which is home to millions of Indian citizens that have lived there for generations. Now China is the one with the forward policy making demands that cant possibly be met or agreed to. India is willing to concede its claim in Aksai chin but china wants Arunachal PRadesh.
> 
> This is the Flash point to the hostility between both nations. But what is the fuel, well simply Its India's rapid growth that seems to possible mirror that of China's. Which unfortunately means That due to India and China's lack of cooperation in the present , both nations are most likely to be in direct competition with each other on the global stage in the near future over meeting energy need's, natural resources , and diplomatic influence.
> If we can build a foundation of cooperation now then the future can be far more beneficial to both countries.
> 
> But you may ask why is China adopting this policy of not conceding its claim of Archanchel Pradesh. Simply its due to Geo-political. China has far more power and diplomatic influence now then India , and it wants to take advantage of it to widen the gap between India and China as much as possible, China's growth will need to bottom out as with any other economic cycle. and coincidentally this bottoming out is set to occur when India's growth will be reaching full speed, India has the potential to catch up to China at this time.
> 
> But why would China be concerned about this simply put the first century of the new millennium has a name it the "China century", And India has no place in it as a global power. China has been driven by one goal to be no 1, to revive the Middle Kingdom to all its glory, a noble task. that is being shouldered by the Chinese people. Things always don't go as planned India's rise was not expected by anyone not even the Indian's expected the progress we have made in the last 20 years. The sooner China can learn to share this century with little brother India. and change the "china century" to the "China-India century", The more positive the future China India relations will be.



the way they react to the changes , and their decision on whether to use an iron fist or velvet glove in their dealings will, be the guiding factor for future relations. We need to focus on trying to influence that decision not on what happened back in the 50's or 60's. it is nearly 50 years ago from this date, I think that's enough time to both forgive and forget don't you?



Hunter911 said:


> In China, I met some Indians, there are students&#12289;hotels security guards etc., They have never been bullied by any chinese,we treat them equally.
> .You can come to Tianjin to make a survey!



That's good to hear, only if our governments can also interact in a similar fashion. It would be better for all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheWarriorIndian

Hunter911 said:


> In China, I met some Indians, there are students&#12289;hotels security guards etc., They have never been bullied by any chinese,we treat them equally.
> .You can come to Tianjin to make a survey!



You are very correct, I have been to shangai ... I was a bit tensed , Might be because It was my first time I was away from my country, some insecurity feeling haunted me... But Believe me, The people in china well cultured .... They made me feel at home.. They are very friendly... We must respect them for sure..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hunter911

TheWarriorIndian said:


> You are very correct, I have been to shangai ... I was a bit tensed , Might be because It was my first time I was away from my country, some insecurity feeling haunted me... But Believe me, The people in china well cultured .... They made me feel at home.. They are very friendly... We must respect them for sure..



Thank you ,sir. 
I appreciate your frankness! As you know,recently many Indians and Chinese have been worried about the border negotiations between India and China . 

We know that in this warm atmosphere, it's very difficult to suppress their emotions. I believe that many young and promising young people are reluctant involve in the war for the selfish politicians. Sometimes, it is helpless.


----------



## luoshan

*The China-India Rivalry: Watching the Border*
By ISHAAN THAROOR Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2009



> It's a sign of how delicate feelings are between Asia's two rising powers that an obscure blog post can cause an international incident. Just recently, Indian newspapers circulated the incendiary comments of an essay published on a nationalist Chinese website. The essay &#8212; authored under the pen name Zhanlue, or "strategy" in Mandarin &#8212; suggested that it was in Beijing's interest to support insurgencies on India's borderlands that could eventually dismember the diverse Indian federal state. The uproar in India over this provocation forced officials in New Delhi to respond, saying that "the article in question ... does not accord with the official state position of China on India-China relations." That bland assertion, though, does little to stanch a lingering anxiety, particularly in India, that tensions between the two giants will inexorably come to a tipping point. "There cannot be two suns in the sky," warns Zhanlue's post.
> 
> 
> The hubbub over the essay came at a moment when Indian and Chinese officials were engaged in a round of largely futile talks over long-standing disputes along their mountainous 1,060-mile (1,700 km) border. A war fought between the two countries in 1962 was brief, but its legacy remains rancorous, with both New Delhi and Beijing claiming chunks of land now patrolled by the other's troops. Though sparsely populated, the contested territories, from a sliver of Kashmir to the entirety of Arunachal Pradesh, a northeastern state in India that China imagines is part of Tibet, are heavily militarized.
> 
> While both nations are engaged in a budding geopolitical chess match across Asia&#8212;building naval bases abroad and enhancing ties with smaller regional powers&#8212;the rugged Himalayan frontier remains the chief fault line for potential hostilities. Zhanlue's post recommended helping militants across the border in Assam realize their separatist ambitions in the near future&#8212;a proposal that feeds into the convictions of Indian hawks like retired army officer Bharat Verma, who warned in the Indian Defence Review in July that China would attempt, covertly or otherwise, to attack India by 2012.
> 
> Many China watchers have dismissed the essay as a product of China's frenetic and often hyper-nationalist community of Netizen bloggers. The Danwei blog, a respected China commentator, says that elements of Zhanlue's essay have appeared on Chinese websites since 2005. The essay's premise &#8212;that India can be easily dissolved into its composite, regional parts&#8212;displays a naivete few actual policy experts would be capable of. Nonetheless, some Indian analysts see Zhanlue's ambition as part of an internal, chest-thumping dialogue within China that the rulers in Beijing don't wish to discourage.
> 
> Despite India and China's ever expanding trade ties and the occasional cuddly platitudes uttered by their leaders, the intractable border dispute is a fundamental impasse in their relations. China has negotiated boundary settlements with virtually all of its other neighbors&#8212;even with Japan, an old and bitter foe&#8212;but refuses to drop its Indian claims. In India, growing awareness of the gulf between the two countries, from China's colossal foreign-exchange reserves to its ballooning military spending, has also heightened concern within certain policy circles.
> There's also a disconnect between how the public in both countries perceive each other. Indian wariness rubs up against what is, at best, Chinese indifference&#8212;at worst, contempt. Ask most Chinese, and they will tell you India is a backward, chaotic place, bereft of decent infrastructure and burdened by hideous poverty. It has no part in the vision projected by Beijing of the 21st century as a Chinese one, a sense of grand historic purpose accepted by the bulk of China's population. The confident certainty behind Zhanlue's spurious post that China could break India with minimal fuss into 20 or 30 pieces is, if nothing else, an expression of a larger disdain.
> 
> But the underlying irony is that China, not India, remains the nation more threatened by the specter of ethnic separatism. The Uighurs of Xinjiang and the Tibetans to their south number fewer than, say, Kashmiris and Assamese in India, yet their aspirations for nationhood garner much greater global sympathy. This is chiefly the fault of Beijing, whose uncompromising, authoritarian rule has pushed certain minorities to the brink and transformed dissident leaders in exile into enduring spiritual anchors for their people.
> 
> Indeed, China could do worse than to look at India, a country that has managed to live with its proverbial million mutinies by safeguarding regional languages and cultures and, most importantly, letting the poor and marginalized throw out their local rulers every election cycle. Perhaps a time may come, then, when rather than spying weaknesses in India's multi-ethnic landscape, strategists in Beijing may draw inspiration from their neighbor's pluralism. In an era of great-power gamesmanship, that may be wishful thinking. But it surely is a better path than the one walked by the warmongers and doomsayers on both sides.


----------



## favabeans

Hunter911 said:


> In fact, most Indians like bragging.
> 
> 
> If India and China were in fighting, the Indians would always call to inform the U.S. President Obama in order to seek the american's fire supports.
> With regard to India and China border talks, the two sides will require concessions before we can have a breakthrough.
> India is now clamoring for all day that they can defeat China in three days. whether India has such a guts or not?



Nah, India will not seek US approval. US is not on India's side. The State Dept. is full of people who dislike the Indians, since India and the Soviet Union were de facto allies during the Cold War. Besides, US-China relations are too important to risk over India, which remains a bit player. 

I do agree with you that Indians like to brag. However, I think many in India genuinely believe that they are a superpower, or at least will be by 2020. Pipe dreams, I know. Indians just don't know better, but we do, and India's boastfulness is a great source of comedic relief


----------



## machs

China Vs India

Dear Guys ,
China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .


----------



## machs

Hunter911 said:


> Thank you ,sir.
> I appreciate your frankness! As you know,recently many Indians and Chinese have been worried about the border negotiations between India and China .
> 
> We know that in this warm atmosphere, it's very difficult to suppress their emotions. I believe that many young and promising young people are reluctant involve in the war for the selfish politicians. Sometimes, it is helpless.



China Vs India

Dear Guys ,
I have been to China i.e bejing and shanghai quiet few times . They are outstanding . China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .


----------



## machs

Hunter911 said:


> In China, I met some Indians, there are students&#12289;hotels security guards etc., They have never been bullied by any chinese,we treat them equally.
> .You can come to Tianjin to make a survey!



Agreed . China treats guest very well . No doubt in that .
China Vs India
 I have been to China i.e bejing and shanghai quiet few times . They are outstanding . China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .


----------



## machs

ever4244 said:


> We tried to contain india in the sub-continent just as US tried to contain us in aisa. No more, No less.
> 
> The game of geo-politics have always been like this and will always be
> 
> Nothing personal````````````and hope that we could play it politely and fair.



China Vs India

 I have been to China i.e bejing and shanghai quiet few times . They are outstanding . China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .


----------



## machs

Fennecus said:


> Completely unfounded, there are few here who desire war with India.



China Vs India

Dear Guys ,
I have been to China i.e bejing and shanghai quiet few times . They are outstanding . China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .


----------



## aimarraul

machs said:


> China Vs India
> 
> Dear Guys ,
> I have been to China i.e bejing and shanghai quiet few times . They are outstanding . China has done a great job in competeing with West . West wants India and China to fight . India is progressing very fast . They are II nd to china in Steel , Cement , Pharma , Iron Ore , etc . India is goint to spend 400 Billion $ on Infrastructure in this plan . China has a huge oppurtunity as many engineering firms would be engaged and Chinese Engineering firms should bid and get a minimum of 50-60% Business. China 's has overtaken Amresica s India's largest trading partner . Do worry about Pakistan ... Its a gone case . Chinese are very good business men and they will dump Pakistan when it comes to their own country's Intrest . Come on China ... there is an oppurtunity of 400 Billion $ . China is building Power Plants in SagarDighe in India , BALCO -- Alumnium Plants in Madhya Pradesh . China should forge strong ties with India . India too benefits as we get to use best Engineering at lower cost .



400$B,wow,sounds inviting,Mr.Brown


----------



## fhassan

madmax said:


> what kind of support you are taking about. You only sold us low grade weapons which was in your interest. Moreover you did not help us militarily and the result is Bangladesh. If you had helped at that time, there would be no India.



Ignore this Indian pretending to be a Pakistani:



Bezerk said:


> Hello MadMax,
> read this information about your IP address.
> 
> *IP address: 210.212.53.161 Copy
> IP country code: IN
> IP address country: ip address flag India
> IP address state: Delhi
> IP address city: New Delhi
> IP address latitude: 28.6000
> IP address longitude: 77.2000
> ISP of this IP [?]: National Internet Backbone
> Organization: National Internet Backbone
> Local time in India: 2009-10-01 01:15*
> 
> I remember this username from your previous ID. The least you could've done was to come back with a different screen name. Do us a favour and don't come back again, please.
> 
> Everyone, say goodbye to the troll.


----------



## rajeev

Hunter911 said:


> You are keen on China's respect for Indians, respect for the Indian government, but why ? as we know,india's high school the third-year political science textbooks, "Political Theory and Practice," it was still fooling your younger youths. the ideas is that: " The Chinese people are still smoke opium "
> India's high school textbooks, most of the contents is to describe India and China since 1950, disputes and conflicts, especially in the border war in 1962. However, India and China's history textbooks, records are completely different. In addition, India is very concerned about the relationship between China and Pakistan, especially in reference to India and Pakistan in 1971 war, China resolutely supports Pakistan.
> the fact is that behind of Indians about China is quite complex and delicate feelings, and they do not entirely to China as rivals or enemies, but can not open up their hearts to regard China as a friend, this point has been reflected in indian's political textbook.



Thanks Hunter for letting us know that China smoked opium. Atleast it was not in the books I studied. Probably, we dont have a book written by government for the government and also a media written by government for the government. Perhaps, it is a difficult to understand.

You are speaking of China as something out of the world. China is a poor country with per capita GDP of $3300 albeit way ahead of India.
You have to wake up to the fact that is truth. Just because media is banned from filming poor neighborhoods doesn't mean that they don't exist. 

Sorry to burst your bubble!


----------



## shchinese

rajeev said:


> Thanks Hunter for letting us know that China smoked opium. Atleast it was not in the books I studied. Probably, we dont have a book written by government for the government and also a media written by government for the government. Perhaps, it is a difficult to understand.
> 
> You are speaking of China as something out of the world. China is a poor country with per capita GDP of $3300 albeit way ahead of India.
> You have to wake up to the fact that is truth. Just because media is banned from filming poor neighborhoods doesn't mean that they don't exist.
> 
> Sorry to burst your bubble!



 next time when you are in Chinese cities such as Shanghai/Beijing/Shenzhen/Nanjing/Hnagzhou/etc. please just ask yourself whether it is a city with your mentioned GDP.


----------



## rajeev

shchinese said:


> next time when you are in Chinese cities such as Shanghai/Beijing/Shenzhen/Nanjing/Hnagzhou/etc. please just ask yourself whether it is a city with your mentioned GDP.



That is what I am telling you is to unsubscribe your government media and stop being zombies. 

Internet is a fascinating thing where information is available for free. Understanding and learning more about your own country will help you know things better.

I dont know whether Wiki is banned in China, but if you can access it here is the link:
List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Iggy

*


Hunter911 said:



You are keen on China's respect for Indians, respect for the Indian government, but why ? as we know,india's high school the third-year political science textbooks, "Political Theory and Practice," it was still fooling your younger youths. the ideas is that: " The Chinese people are still smoke opium "

Click to expand...

*


Hunter911 said:


> I think i didn't went to school when my teacher taught that..  come on guys we didn't learned about this things at school.well we learned about opium war..but i am still confused about why that war is all about


----------



## footmarks

Hi everyone. I am new here. Greetings to all of you.


----------



## skylance

yohoexpo said:


> The future of the world belongs to CHIDIA.



future of china would be more glorious if we successfully hit down india and tear it into pieces..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MZUBAIR

India will only survive, if and only if India make strong and trustable relations with China and Pakistan.


----------



## mltr

MZUBAIR said:


> India will only survive, if and only if India make strong and trustable relations with China and Pakistan.



You country is already in trouble....and you are talking about survival of india... just wait two to three years....India will definitely defend its territory in more than one front....Our PM and DRDO scientist are not fool....they know wht India required and they are doing its all matter of time


----------



## Materialistic

> You country is already in trouble....and you are talking about survival of india... just wait two to three years....India will definitely defend its territory in more than one front....Our PM and DRDO scientist are not fool....they know wht India required and they are doing its all matter of time



Dude, dunn worry about us look at ur back in ur own country you might need some help to take back ur 20 states out of 29 which are under ur very own Moaist rebbels, we on the otherhand are teaching a good lesson to talibans.

Which DRDO are you talking about who are trying to make ur LCA from last 2 centuries !!! or Indian technologies like failed cruise missile, and i heard something about Indian nukes as it was claimed in 1999 that they were not up to the par and to confess that it took a decade, a total of 10 longs years to Indian government in 2009, what about the test failed brahmos, and another missile of yours which fell 200 kms off the target and now please dunn ask me what I m talking about, members of this forum i expect them to know about atleast military capabilities of their own countries.

And two more things the lost space rocket of India and yeah, the drone which just crashed this week and to mention that some of these projects or missions were launched such as the space rocket program after purchase of technology so excuse of saying that atleast we tried for the space, which on the other hand is the only thing that Pakistan has not done so far from the above mentioned stuff, is also gone.


----------



## Iggy

Materialistic said:


> Dude, dunn worry about us look at ur back in ur own country you might need some help to take back ur 20 states out of 29 which are under ur very own Moaist rebbels, we on the otherhand are teaching a good lesson to talibans.
> 
> Which DRDO are you talking about who are trying to make ur LCA from last 2 centuries !!! or Indian technologies like failed cruise missile, and i heard something about Indian nukes as it was claimed in 1999 that they were not up to the par and to confess that it took a decade, a total of 10 longs years to Indian government in 2009, what about the test failed brahmos, and another missile of yours which fell 200 kms off the target and now please dunn ask me what I m talking about, members of this forum i expect them to know about atleast military capabilities of their own countries.
> 
> And two more things the lost space rocket of India and yeah, the drone which just crashed this week and to mention that some of these projects or missions were launched such as the space rocket program after purchase of technology so excuse of saying that atleast we tried for the space, which on the other hand is the only thing that Pakistan has not done so far from the above mentioned stuff, is also gone.



Dude we didn't even deploy out troops there against fighting our own Maoists..Our police and CRPF are doing the job..If these things are serious as you sound don't you think the government will deploy our military there?

About DRDO you people only heard about the failures of DRDO ..There are some success made by DRDO in defense sector and its widely used in Indian military..Google it and you will find it..


Failed cruise missile?? A single failure when trying a new software and you call it a complete failure??Dude only your country has no failures in testing new missile and we both know why that is ..I dont want to start a flame war so i am not saying anything about it..and I would really love to see a credible link about our missile which fell 200 kms off the target...


About the nuclear test only the Hydrogen bomb tested was claimed to not up to the par and all those sound making was to test more nuclear bombs..

Lost space rocket of India???lolz man you made me laugh there..are you serious??ISRO is the Pride of India yes some initial failures occurred but look at it now sending rockets to moon also and now planning about sending manned missions..Purchase of technology huh?any more imagination you have feel free to tell us ok..


And also i am sure that you didn't hear about the Agreement between NASA and ISRO that allows NASA to use datas of India's own OCEANSAT

---------- Post added at 06:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:34 AM ----------




skylance said:


> future of china would be more glorious if we successfully hit down india and tear it into pieces..



Another wet dream by another Chinese


----------



## razgriz19

jetLi said:


> Military competition will lead India to go bankrupt.
> This is Both China and Parkistan willing to see.
> You India should deal with the gap between the rich and the poor,
> improve the industry system and develop your hign-tech.
> You say us China just copy other country's high-tech Weapon, but
> you even can't copy others.
> Closely Ally
> otherwise,South Korea and Japan highly depend China, especially in economic
> They could't be the ally like Parkistan and China, Burma and China, Nepal and China, Sri Lanka and China.
> India
> 
> By the way, the only field you can exceed China in 21century maybe in Population, coz your population control is too bad.



china has already invest billions of $ in gwadar port, and this port is really important for pakistan and for china as well. About 60% of China's energy supplies come from the Middle East, and China has been anxious that the US, which has a very high presence in the region, could create barriers, and so this port can help china alot and pak too.
long live china-pak friendship!


----------



## razgriz19

gogbot said:


> If any positive relations can be established we need to stop the blame game. what happened happened and could not have happened any other way. we need to stop holding our very short 60 years of hostility over our heads, so that we may move forward. This goes for all sides, your commitment to peaceful cooperation is only as good as your ability to forgive and forget.
> 
> If the nations of Europe after a 1000 years of bloody conflict including the World-wars on their soil. Can come together to form the EU.Why cant Mighty China, The Great India and Defiant Pakistan come together putting behind them only 60 years of hostility.
> 
> Maybe its because ii am fatigued or maybe its because i just watched Star trek the undiscovered country.
> 
> But the future is the undiscovered country. And change causes fear but India and world need to stop being afraid of china and the change its rise implies, china also needs to make the leap of faith to trust others it has to accept the change its own rise means for it, and not take that out on other nations. , just as India needs to make the leap of faith and trust India.
> 
> Only then can we venture together to find the many undiscovered countries that are yet to come.



i totally agree! please dont get offended But if u wanna stop the "blame game" then u need to ristrict ur media for blaming pak for everything.....i mean rite after mumbai attaks ur media started to blame Pakistan....i agree that the terrorists could be from pak, but pak itself(government) was not involve in that!
but ur media started to blame pak without any evidence....
and they say that isi and army give training to those militants...
take a look at this vid and u will kno that they have access to evrything...


----------



## amarnath

razgriz19 said:


> i totally agree! please dont get offended But if u wanna stop the "blame game" then u need to ristrict ur media for blaming pak for everything.....i mean rite after mumbai attaks ur media started to blame Pakistan....i agree that the terrorists could be from pak, but pak itself(government) was not involve in that!
> but ur media started to blame pak without any evidence....
> and they say that isi and army give training to those militants...
> take a look at this vid and u will kno that they have access to evrything...



PLEASE dont get offended, but FBI and NIA both have found Pakistan army's hand In 26/11...

26/11 probe: US may ask for Pak major's extradition - India - The Times of India

Pak army officers likely involved in 26/11, FBI tells India : Sheela News

Ex-army officer accused in terror plot - World - MiamiHerald.com

IS THIS ENOUGH?

And your army is fighting terrorists not in your interest but pressure from the west, and Why not, its you who created taliban....


----------



## razgriz19

amarnath said:


> PLEASE dont get offended, but FBI and NIA both have found Pakistan army's hand In 26/11...
> 
> 26/11 probe: US may ask for Pak major's extradition - India - The Times of India
> 
> Pak army officers likely involved in 26/11, FBI tells India : Sheela News
> 
> Ex-army officer accused in terror plot - World - MiamiHerald.com
> 
> IS THIS ENOUGH?
> 
> And your army is fighting terrorists not in your interest but pressure from the west, and Why not, its you who created taliban....



we...huh?
CIA created taliban, though with the help of isi...


----------



## grey boy 2

dillip said:


> Today the top 3 most commented articles found in People's Daily Online - Home Page is given below
> 
> #1
> China approves death sentence to
> British drug smuggler |12 comments
> #2
> Air strip for Indian Air Force in
> Nepal targets Tibet |24 comments
> #3
> Indian media harm themselves in playing
> up strife between China and India
> 
> Most of the time I have seen most commented article is India.
> So the only country which is discussed most in China is INDIA.



*Read the comments carefully, most of the posters are Indians.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gpit

dillip said:


> Today the top 3 most commented articles found in People's Daily Online - Home Page is given below
> 
> #1
> China approves death sentence to
> British drug smuggler |12 comments
> #2
> Air strip for Indian Air Force in
> Nepal targets Tibet |24 comments
> #3
> Indian media harm themselves in playing
> up strife between China and India
> 
> Most of the time I have seen most commented article is India.
> So the only country which is discussed most in China is INDIA.



LOL! Majority Chinese in China don't know/don't care to know English.



grey boy 2 said:


> *Read the comments carefully, most of the posters are Indians.*



Though these two comments quoted above are an isolated incidence, it nevertheless reflects how the two types of people are different: the Chinese want to dig into details and to figure out the reasons/causes/facts by themselves, whereas the Indians are easy to believe superficial/apparent appearance.

That is maybe why China chooses to take a bumpy but its own road, and India decided to take a seems-working Western system, which turns out to be perhaps even bumpier&#8230;

By that, can we guess a little bit of China-Inida relationship in the future?


----------



## Windjammer

Meanwhile looking back.


----------



## jimjiang12

i could not agree with more!!!


----------



## jimjiang12

China & India, two Asian giants, share much in common, a large population, willingness to develop,the poor to feed...of course we have some different opinions and even disputes. But i believe talks can solve this. As the superpower, US is willing to see China and India fighting severely with each other, badly hurt.Thus, no rising power can challenge US power. So we 
must a clear understanding about this. Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

Indian view, only Indo-US and Indo-Tibet relationships, NO Sino-Indian relationship!


----------



## navtrek

Windjammer said:


> Meanwhile looking back.
> 
> 
> RX6rulgisqw[/media] - Indian soldiers surrendered then fed by the Chinese / Sino-India War 1962



ha ha  "never forget the lessons of the past but *look forward*" any civilized army would do what the Chinese army did  and we are greatful for that 

and why this weird logic that a loss to India is a gain for Pakistan  hope all that this hatred goes down some day.


----------



## navtrek

Aeneas said:


> _Indias China War _by Neville Maxwell,plz read this book and find the truth of China-India border conflict.



Read that i know we Indians did some really big blunders  and most ppl in India still don't even know the true story.


----------



## COPE2

PeacefulIndian said:


> I am an advocate of India- China friendship. But I also feel that it is not possible in near future, unless China reviews its anti-India policy. China intends to be a regional super power by holding India down. The day Chinese politicians understand that both India & China can be superpowers, it will be a golden day.



India and China have been super powers.... for thousands of years.


----------



## stax

COPE2 said:


> India and China have been super powers.... for thousands of years.



I think China and India have been great civilian civilizations for thousands of years. But India is not a super power in the history, since it was consists of many small countries in the majority time.

India has unified yet, I believe India can be a super power in the future.


----------



## gangwar

I cant see India becoming SUPERPOWER by stamping china and vice versa....if they want to the only way is Sino-India ally.

But question is why isnt it so simple. 

Reasons:- 1) USA knows its aftermath once 1/2 of world population become one.it wont allow that to happen.

2)Pakistan has been used and thrown by USA which was its most trusted ally in 20th century, now its time for a new master. China aligning with india wud leave no way to run for pakistan. Parasites do need nourishment from others.

3)MOST IMP:- Lack of trust. Even if we trust each other how much time will this trust sustain? relationship is built over a span of time and sino-indian relations has to start flourishing now to be stronger in da future otherwise fuget USA will ever allow us to come closer.

But china has to decide fast. are they gonna sustain the same attitude or gonna convince india(which i think is tougher owing to overcautious indian foreign policy). coz india will be higly obliged to be an american ally.USA and Indian style of governments are similar, ie. democracy. hence, working together isnt much of an issue for these countries. 

American freindship if sought better way can reap fruits, eg.Germany,S.Korea and Japan after WW II.it was american economic and business support that brought FDIs in these countries and helped them get developed even faster.


----------



## Sanchez

India was never any superpower in the history! It's not going to become one by modern definition. Just looking at their shining smile on Pak Fa you know they are not going to make anything out of their own.


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

China and India has no friendship, because India trolls support Tibet independence!


----------



## foxbat

^^^
If the fates of nations were to be deicded by a couple of scores of individuals typing furiously on there laptops, world would have been a much simpler (however wierder ) place


----------



## Cityboy

Sanchez said:


> India was never any superpower in the history! It's not going to become one by modern definition. Just looking at their shining smile on Pak Fa you know they are not going to make anything out of their own.



chinese too cant make anything own... chinese r also no more than a reverse engineers of ussr/smuggled us technology..chinese brag too much as they r super powers..but cant take even a single island name taiwan ..at max just cry on arm deals..thats true P:


----------



## Abhiras

their is ideology difference between india & china


----------



## Hulk

Will be driven by economics.


----------



## gpit

Maulik said:


> chinese too cant make anything own... chinese r also no more than a reverse engineers of ussr/smuggled us technology..chinese brag too much as they r super powers..but cant take even a single island name taiwan ..at max just cry on arm deals..thats true P:



*You copy and paste British political system&#8230;and you can&#8217;t event do anything remotely to &#8220;engineer&#8221; it...*

We never saw/heard many Chinese people brag superpower. What we *always *see and hear are from Indians such as &#8220;in 5 years, world forgets Shanghai, remembers Bombay&#8230;&#8221;, &#8220;in next 30 year India will&#8230;&#8221; and all sorts of laughing stocks. More regrettably, those ravings are not from illiterate Indians... 

Please straighten your screwed brain on your churlish ranting about Taiwan. Taiwan is a par of China that both CPC on mainland and KMT on Taiwan recognize, in addition to US, India, UN&#8230;

Why doesn&#8217;t mainland take over Taiwan by force? Don&#8217;t think the Chinese behavior in a bellicose Indian way. Think in a Chinese way.

No wonder you therefore crewed up in 1962&#8230;. If you don't adjust your mentality, you'll screw up India more in the future by making China your enemy number one...


----------



## thebrownguy

self delete


----------



## gubbi

gpit said:


> *You copy and paste British political system&#8230;and you can&#8217;t event do anything remotely to &#8220;engineer&#8221; it...*


There is a difference between legitimately adopting a tried and tested political system and blindly copying, illegally, technology! You do understand the difference now do ya?



> Please straighten your screwed brain on your churlish ranting about Taiwan. Taiwan is a par of China that both CPC on mainland and KMT on Taiwan recognize, in addition to US, India, UN&#8230;


rofl. Really?


> Why doesn&#8217;t mainland take over Taiwan by force? Don&#8217;t think the Chinese behavior in a bellicose Indian way. Think in a Chinese way.


Ha. Wonderful *excuse* for one's total inability to exercise the option.


> No wonder you therefore crewed up in 1962&#8230;. If you don't adjust your mentality, you'll screw up India more in the future by making China your enemy number one...


Come again.?


----------



## thebrownguy

Sanchez said:


> India was never any superpower in the history! It's not going to become one by modern definition. Just looking at their shining smile on Pak Fa you know they are not going to make anything out of their own.



lol ..we will but it will take some time. Unfotrunately we don not have Engineers which are qualified like you guys. 
(M.Tech. Reverse Engineering)


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

gubbi said:


> There is a difference between legitimately adopting a tried and tested political system and blindly copying, illegally, technology! You do understand the difference now do ya?
> 
> 
> rofl. Really?
> 
> Ha. Wonderful *excuse* for one's total inability to exercise the option.
> 
> Come again.?



Why there are many Indian trolls and White American minions like you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Communist

*I just don't understand why the CPC is allowing indians to perform their festival in China. 

Chinese people should not allow indians to perform their bollywoody style festivals on the sacred Chinese soil... * 

*The Hindu : News / International : Krishna to launch &ldquo;Festival of India&rdquo; in China
*


> *Krishna to launch Festival of India in China*
> 
> External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will kick-off a year-long celebration of Indian culture in China during his Beijing visit next month, as the two countries mark 60 years of diplomatic ties.
> 
> During his visit in April first week, he will also hold talks with his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi.
> 
> The year-long Festival of India is being organised by the Government of India in several Chinese cities to celebrate six decades of established diplomatic relations between the two countries.


----------



## ironman

Communist said:


> *I just don't understand why the CPC is allowing indians to perform their festival in China.
> 
> Chinese people should not allow indians to perform their bollywoody style festivals on the sacred Chinese soil... *
> 
> *The Hindu : News / International : Krishna to launch &ldquo;Festival of India&rdquo; in China
> *



Please keep spare little communism mr.communist.


----------



## chinapakistan

Communist said:


> *I just don't understand why the CPC is allowing indians to perform their festival in China.
> 
> Chinese people should not allow indians to perform their bollywoody style festivals on the sacred Chinese soil... *
> 
> *The Hindu : News / International : Krishna to launch &ldquo;Festival of India&rdquo; in China
> *



We need joke, we need look something interesting to laugh. It is another way to make us relax.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Communist

chinapakistan said:


> We need joke, we need look something interesting to laugh. It is another way to make us relax.



But keep vigil, they are trouble makers, as they spread violence... also they might come to spy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thebrownguy

Communist said:


> But keep vigil, they are trouble makers, as they spread violence... also they might come to spy.



Ya, we want to spy. We want to master your "technology". Of reverse engineering!!


----------



## thebrownguy

Sino-PakFriendship said:


> Why there are many Indian trolls and White American minions like you?



Sir, are you sure you have the right flags on? You are supposed to put flags which apply for real. But its ok , if this way you are getting the joy of living your dream, then good for you!!
cheers


----------



## chinapakistan

thebrownguy said:


> Ya, we want to spy. We want to master your "technology". Of reverse engineering!!



India lack technology comparing any other country, so considering a spy is posible whatever indian in any country. But the way, reverse engineering is also very difficult and indian cant even reverse a walkman.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thebrownguy

chinapakistan said:


> India lack technology comparing any other country, so considering a spy is posible whatever indian in any country. But the way, reverse engineering is also very difficult and indian cant even reverse a walkman.




Ya , it is very difficult and we don't have engineers of qualification as 
M. Tech Reverse Engineering lol ....
We dont have institutes like CIRI (China Institue of Reverse Engineering)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## chinapakistan

thebrownguy said:


> Ya , it is very difficult and we don't have engineers of qualification as
> M. Tech Reverse Engineering lol ....
> We dont have institutes like CIRI (China Institue of Reverse Engineering)



And you cant even provide stable electrisic power, and you should thanks chinese company for you can be here post and use you cell phone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## grey boy 2

thebrownguy said:


> Ya , it is very difficult and we don't have engineers of qualification as
> M. Tech Reverse Engineering lol ....
> We dont have institutes like CIRI (China Institue of Reverse Engineering)



*Ignorant Indians, take a look of what your hard-core Indian expert

said about India reverse engineering; *

Why did India turn to foreign weapons suppliers? Fifty years ago former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, in establishing the Defense Research and Development Organization, envisioned 80 percent self-sufficiency in arms by the turn of the century. That dream never came true.

The DRDO had difficulty marrying high concepts with sound engineering. Thus many major systems on the drawing board did not become potent weapons. Although it had a staff of 30,000, 51 laboratories and a US$2.5-billion budget, the organization operated under technical and critical-component constraints for the last 50 years. It has spent more than US$50 billion and produced very little.

The army has had many problems with the INSAS rifle developed by the organization, and nobody wants the main battle tank it developed. Its many tactical missiles have never met their defined parameters, and the Kaveri engine for light combat aircraft has been under development for three decades. 

The only successes it can claim are the Prithvi, Agni and Brahmos missiles, some light combat aircraft and the multi-barrel Pinaka artillery system. However, it had to import the highly accurate Russian Smerch system to supplement the underpowered Pinaka.

*The DRDOs worst failure has been its inability to reverse engineer some of its imported weapons systems. Even Pakistan with its low technology has successfully reverse engineered military hardware. China reverse engineered the highly sophisticated Russian SU-27 fighter jet. *
Israel's military supplies to India - upiasia.com

*Please wake up from your typical "Indian Wet Dream"*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## chinapakistan

grey boy 2 said:


> The only successes it can claim are the Prithvi, Agni and Brahmos missiles, some light combat aircraft and the multi-barrel Pinaka artillery system. However, it had to import the highly accurate Russian Smerch system to supplement the underpowered Pinaka.



Hey, bro. I cant agree with you that Agni and bla bla can be claimed as a success. Those are chinese 60's tech. And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## grey boy 2

chinapakistan said:


> Hey, bro. I cant agree with you that Agni and bla bla can be claimed as a success. Those are chinese 60's tech. And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable.



Bro, don't forget the article was written by a "Hard Cord" Indian, a 

so-called "Expert", but at least he is honest about "Indians biggest 

failure"= "Fail to reverse engineer any import weapons"

*But what you expect from a country still fail to reverse engineer a 

decent "Assault Rifle" for 50 years and still counting.* HaHaHa

'Incredible India"


----------



## bomberman

chinapakistan said:


> Hey, bro. I cant agree with you that Agni and bla bla can be claimed as a success. Those are chinese 60's tech. And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable.



World was screened to watch china, because they dont want to show their failures to the world! your media is prohibited to release those tests conducted by your govt!.. if that comes out then your failure rate will be touching skies!
*Perfect screening* Go ahead china


----------



## bomberman

grey boy 2 said:


> Bro, don't forget the article was written by a "Hard Cord" Indian, a
> 
> so-called "Expert", but at least he is honest about "Indians biggest
> 
> failure"= "Fail to reverse engineer any import weapons"
> 
> *But what you expect from a country still fail to reverse engineer a
> 
> decent "Assault Rifle" for 50 years and still counting.* HaHaHa
> 
> 'Incredible India"








*Incredible chinese reverse engineering* salute to their valuable products!!


----------



## chinapakistan

bomberman said:


> World was screened to watch china, because they dont want to show their failures to the world! your media is prohibited to release those tests conducted by your govt!.. if that comes out then your failure rate will be touching skies!
> *Perfect screening* Go ahead china



Typical idian logic, like talking everything without src supporting. Could we have the src? If you cant provide src then just stop your trolling.


----------



## chinapakistan

bomberman said:


> YouTube - Chinese car crash test failure
> 
> *Incredible chinese reverse engineering* salute to their valuable products!!



*Indian Misille technology, world best.*


----------



## Lion Of Pakistan

bomberman said:


> YouTube - Chinese car crash test failure
> 
> *Incredible chinese reverse engineering* salute to their valuable products!!



SOMEHOW that proves something not.
But I must say, India has gone A LONG WAY in Engineering Trains and developing them to carry more passengers than supposed to.





That picture MAKES ME 100% SURE INDIA IS THE NEXT BIG THING...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bomberman

chinapakistan said:


> Hey, bro. I cant agree with you that Agni and bla bla can be claimed as a success. Those are chinese 60's tech.* And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable*.



*And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable
*

Can you please provide me the source for your minimum failure rate and our maximum failure rate!
Befrore you produce the src for everything what you said!
are u frnd of shchinese(troller )? did he asked you to take his designation to troll after he got banned?


----------



## chinapakistan

bomberman said:


> *And considering the failed test rate, their tech is still unstable
> *
> 
> Can you please provide me the source for your minimum failure rate and our maximum failure rate!
> Befrore you produce the src for everything what you said!
> are u frnd of shchinese(troller )? did he asked you to take his designation to troll after he got banned?



Another typical indian logic. Only what saying indian is good is true, and what saying indian is bad is fake. Sir, go back to Mars, here is earth. And about banned member, I think you should say hello to those indian who trolled to my post and banned by my report.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## chinapakistan

bomberman said:


> YouTube - A Shooking Look Inside Chinese Fur Farms
> 
> *OMG* dog and cat are killed for fur!!!



What's this??? Are you completely trolling???
I have some video here about indian eat bats, rats and even raw dead human body... Do you wanna have a look?  though it is too disscusting to post here, but if you request I would be glad to post that for you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Bomber man Thank GOD they dont marry dogs unlike india

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mjnaushad

bomberman said:


> YouTube - How they eat dogs in China


If people can eat Pigs whats so strange in Dogs. Are pigs better than dogs. 

Anyway Lets not go to youtube for mud throwing contest. You know the other party have a long list.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bomberman

chinapakistan said:


> What's this??? Are you completely trolling???
> I have some video here about indian eat bats, rats and even raw dead human body... Do you wanna have a look?  though it is too disscusting to post here, but if you request I would be glad to post that for you.



no one has started troll except you!!
every nation have their bitter experience! it wont take time for me to post all bitter things happen china..., moreover you too wont know abt those things!!
you didnt discussed one post regarding china & indian relation in future!
think what you doind before!


----------



## grey boy 2

chinapakistan said:


> What's this??? Are you completely trolling???
> I have some video here about indian eat bats, rats and even raw dead human body... Do you wanna have a look?  though it is too disscusting to post here, but if you request I would be glad to post that for you.



Bro, ingnore that stupid "Indian Troll" He was hurt from "Hard Cold 

Facts" of Indians backwardation, I already reported his post.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## chinapakistan

bomberman said:


> YouTube - How they eat dogs in China



What's wrong with you? Korea like eating dogs, you should blame them first, and japanese like eating whales... But at least we dont marry with dogs like indian and we dont eat rats and raw dead human body like indian. Comparing to indian eat raw dead human body I think eatting dogs is not a so disscussing thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mjnaushad

Cant we ignore and move on. We all have our youtube videos. Lets just forget it and move on.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## chinapakistan

grey boy 2 said:


> Bro, ingnore that stupid "Indian Troll" He was hurt from "Hard Cold
> 
> Facts" of Indians backwardation, I already reported his post.



I really cant understant "A3" logic. That guy posted some video about chinese eat dogs and say he is not trolling. Is he mad?


----------



## chinapakistan

mjnaushad said:


> Cant we ignore and move on. We all have our youtube videos. Lets just forget it and move on.



Yes, bro, We should ignore this guy and move on.


----------



## Awesome

Lion Of Pakistan said:


> SOMEHOW that proves something not.
> But I must say, India has gone A LONG WAY in Engineering Trains and developing them to carry more passengers than supposed to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That picture MAKES ME 100% SURE INDIA IS THE NEXT BIG THING...


That picture is more Pakistani than Indian

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## grey boy 2

chinapakistan said:


> I really cant understant "A3" logic. That guy posted some video about chinese eat dogs and say he is not trolling. Is he mad?



Bro, do understand "A3 logic" base on natural born inferior complex,

Feeling insecure, shameful etc. You simply can't reason with them.


----------



## Sanchez

Here is an interesting article about the Sino-India border issues:
(Í¼ÎÄ)¾ä¾ä¾¾ÐÄ£¬Ó¡¶È²»º¦ÅÂÖÐ¹úÔÚ²ØÄÏ¾üÊÂÌ¯ÅÆµÄÁù´óÔ­Òò£¡ - ÊÀ½çÂÛÌ³Íø

Non-Chinese reading members may go for the Goole translations:
Google Översätt


----------



## thebrownguy

chinapakistan said:


> Yes, bro, We should ignore this guy and move on.



ok .. fine .. if you think indians resorted to trolling, it was only in response to the chinese trolls. Well i apologise on behalf of alll of us,maybe if we did not respond the insanity levels would have been far less. Happy? You win brother. Now please lets promise that we should not let this hell break out on other threads. Athread aboutmaoists in India got derailed the same way.While commenting please don't be to attacking, it leads to flame wars. If you have a problem with posts, please critisize with polite words and logical points. Critisizing does not mean attacking.


----------



## skyisthelimit

i will place my cents on india china friendship....they have a lot to gain from it....today itself we have such good trade relations, this is surely goin to improve in the coming years...

ofcourse no two types are same, same goes for India and china....both countries are smart enough to understand the importance and play a far bigger role in future towards the progress of world....

the way they have EU...........one day we will have something equivalent of india, pakistan and china...

regards;


----------



## Abhiras

Sanchez said:


> Here is an interesting article about the Sino-India border issues:
> (Í¼ÎÄ)¾ä¾ä¾¾ÐÄ£¬Ó¡¶È²»º¦ÅÂÖÐ¹úÔÚ²ØÄÏ¾üÊÂÌ¯ÅÆµÄÁù´óÔ*Òò£¡ - ÊÀ½çÂÛÌ³Íø
> 
> Non-Chinese reading members may go for the Goole translations:
> Google Översätt



typical brainwasher from the communist counrty ...
& indian army is not known as "People's Liberation Army "

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

skyisthelimit said:


> i will place my cents on india china friendship....they have a lot to gain from it....today itself we have such good trade relations, this is surely goin to improve in the coming years...
> 
> ofcourse no two types are same, same goes for India and china....both countries are smart enough to understand the importance and play a far bigger role in future towards the progress of world....
> 
> the way they have EU...........one day we will have something equivalent of india, pakistan and china...
> 
> regards;



Agree with you.

The problem is it is so often from Indian side that people/media claim China is India number 1 enemy/potential enemy.

I never heard much from Chinese side of the similar, except one seemingly appeared to counter excessive Indian belligerent and aggressive verbiage...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## deep_s1987

About India considering, "China as potential threat" just because of historical events, and their current position. If together they workout, I am sure, they will move more quickly in the route of progress. But if it goes other way, like a war kind of think, I am sure, US will surely retain the title of the strongest country in the world. And, also, all the good work done in progressing over couple of decades will go in drain.


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

Abhiras said:


> typical brainwasher from the communist counrty ...
> & indian army is not known as "People's Liberation Army "



1. China is NOT real communist counrty.

2. Not all Chinese are brainwashed. USA and Western Whites' media also brainwashes their citizen!


----------



## BJlaowai

*Krishna to launch Festival of India in China*



> External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will kick-off a year-long celebration of Indian culture in China during his Beijing visit next month, as the two countries mark 60 years of diplomatic ties.
> 
> During his visit in April first week, he will also hold talks with his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi.
> 
> The year-long Festival of India is being organised by the Government of India in several Chinese cities to celebrate six decades of established diplomatic relations between the two countries.
> 
> India and China established diplomatic ties on April 1, 1950 and India was the first non-Socialist country to establish relations with the People's Republic of China  a fact often forgotten in the aftermath of the 1962 war, which left a legacy of lingering tensions and a long-running border dispute.
> 
> The border issue  over which talks have made little progress  will no doubt feature in Mr. Krishna's discussions with Chinese officials. But Indian officials hope the year-long festivities in both countries  China will also be hosting a festival in India  will help the two countries turn the corner after a year of renewed strains in relations.
> 
> The festival will be launched here by Mr. Krishna on April 7, with the staging of a Ratan Thiyam play in Beijing's prestigious Forbidden City Concert Hall.
> 
> The play is based on the life of Emperor Ashoka and his conversion to Buddhism  one of the two Bs that, for most Chinese, almost entirely defines Indian culture. The other, Bollywood, will also be featured prominently in the festivities, officials said.


----------



## BJlaowai

Indian Community in Beijing is Holding a Indian Bazaar in Beijing on 21st March. There will be lots of cultural events, games and mouth watering south-asian food. There will be lots of great prizes to be won too.
All Chinese and south-asian friends in Beijing are cordially invited.
See you people in British School of Beijing on 21st March.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

There will be no "future" for Sino-Indian relations UNTIL INDIANS OWN UP TO THEIR RACIST GENOCIDE OF CHINESE PEOPLE IN NE, AND CALCUTTA.

350,000 Chinese people in Calcutta do not simply just "disappear".

After the nazi-hindus were defeated in 1962, we treated Indian people living in HK with dignity, while they MASSACRED TENS OF THOUSANDS in India EACH YEAR.


----------



## aimarraul

where is the future? i can only see the so-call "future" in pakistan forum in few indian's mouth , it's filled with hypocritical and cunning,these few guy can even stab china next day in the same forum,you can only see pure hating if you visit any indian forum,and the funny part is india is the side grasping our territory and support the separatists against us&#12290;it's ridiculous to hate china based on their media's faking news and propaganda&#65292;and it's freaking ridiculous to hate china because they lost a "forward policy" war to us


----------



## Join

I do not see any future relations with fellows who can back stab us any time.... We do not need a relation of that kind...


----------



## Communist

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> There will be no "future" for Sino-Indian relations UNTIL INDIANS OWN UP TO THEIR RACIST GENOCIDE OF CHINESE PEOPLE IN NE, AND CALCUTTA.
> 
> 350,000 Chinese people in Calcutta do not simply just "disappear".
> 
> After the nazi-hindus were defeated in 1962, we treated Indian people living in HK with dignity, while they MASSACRED TENS OF THOUSANDS in India EACH YEAR.



*Please visit this thread:*


*http://www.defence.pk/forums/member...00-ethnic-chinese-residents-2.html#post731125*


----------



## Mallu

Lion Of Pakistan said:


> SOMEHOW that proves something not.
> But I must say, India has gone A LONG WAY in Engineering Trains and developing them to carry more passengers than supposed to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That picture MAKES ME 100% SURE INDIA IS THE NEXT BIG THING...



are you sure this picture is from India


----------



## ssheppard

Lion Of Pakistan said:


> SOMEHOW that proves something not.
> But I must say, India has gone A LONG WAY in Engineering Trains and developing them to carry more passengers than supposed to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That picture MAKES ME 100% SURE INDIA IS THE NEXT BIG THING...



Its a Picture from Pakistan: The train is green in color...Indian trains are a combination of Light blue and Dark blue...and the men hanging all over it are wearing Salwar Kameez....more used in Pakistan than India India.


----------



## Mallu

thebrownguy said:


> ok .. fine .. if you think indians resorted to trolling, it was only in response to the chinese trolls. Well i apologise on behalf of alll of us,maybe if we did not respond the insanity levels would have been far less. Happy? You win brother. Now please lets promise that we should not let this hell break out on other threads. Athread aboutmaoists in India got derailed the same way.While commenting please don't be to attacking, it leads to flame wars. If you have a problem with posts, please critisize with polite words and logical points. Critisizing does not mean attacking.



Brother i doubt whether they are Chinese.
I am a member of Chinese forums too
I never found people bashing Indians.
wolf in Sheep skin


----------



## aimarraul

Mallu said:


> Brother i doubt whether they are Chinese.
> I am a member of Chinese forums too
> I never found people bashing Indians.
> wolf in Sheep skin



we give a nickname to indian

and we bash with commend words

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sensenreason

As I commented elsewhere...after years of blogging reading geopolicitcs Ive new found respect for India and Indians..(Im one too)..

It rankles the Americans like Obama that eventually we truly BELIEVE we will be the SOLE supowrpower of the world. Come what may and it will happen in the next 50 years....all in the India middle upwards ie 250 MM people believe that...and surely it rankes Obama and it rankles the Pakistanis and to some extent the Chinese as they have COMPROMISED more of theie freedoms to BUY peace from US....

Think this through...this is my conclusion after lot of thought...Consider the fact that India hasnt opened up India's economy to the US like the Chinese have and neither are we dependent on US for security like Europe or Japan...etc etc..I can go on.


----------



## A.R.

Mallu said:


> Brother i doubt whether they are Chinese.
> I am a member of Chinese forums too
> I never found people bashing Indians.
> wolf in Sheep skin



yes true and agreed I have also been to a Chinese forum... They do not consider Indians as there enemy but to americans


----------



## chinapakistan

A.R. said:


> yes true and agreed I have also been to a Chinese forum... They do not consider Indians as there enemy but to americans



Yes, that was before. But recent decades, BS from your govt and your media everyday made chinese have to consider that india is an enemy to us.


----------



## below_freezing

sensenreason said:


> As I commented elsewhere...after years of blogging reading geopolicitcs Ive new found respect for India and Indians..(Im one too)..
> 
> It rankles the Americans like Obama that eventually we truly BELIEVE we will be the SOLE supowrpower of the world. Come what may and it will happen in the next 50 years....all in the India middle upwards ie 250 MM people believe that...and surely it rankes Obama and it rankles the Pakistanis and to some extent the Chinese as they have COMPROMISED more of theie freedoms to BUY peace from US....
> 
> Think this through...this is my conclusion after lot of thought...Consider the fact that India hasnt opened up India's economy to the US like the Chinese have and neither are we dependent on US for security like Europe or Japan...etc etc..I can go on.



lol we are BUYING peace from the americans? 

strategic industries like telecom, defense and finance are completely government controlled over here.

more than i can say for india where HUAWEI has to install your GSM systems, there are more foreign banks than private OR public banks in india, and defense... we all know about india's defense "industry".


----------



## BJlaowai

*P-o-Kconstruction work, stapled visa to figure during Krishna's China visit*



> A host of issues, including China's involvement in construction projects in Pak Occupied Kashmir (***), stapled visas for Kashmiris and the imbalance in trade with China are likely to be raised during External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna's China visit starting from Monday.
> 
> Krishn's four-day official visit coincides with the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between India and China.
> 
> Briefing media on the visit, the External Affairs Ministry spokesman Vishnu Prakash said a whole gamut of bilateral, regional and international issues will be reviewed during Krishna's talks in Beijing with Chinese leadership.
> 
> This is the first high level bilateral visit since the UPA Government began its second innings and the first by S. M. Krishna since he took over the External Affairs Ministry.
> 
> Joint Secretary (East Asia), Gautam Bambawale said India is of the view that a uniform practice should be followed with regard to issuing of visa regardless of ethnicity and domicile of Indian nationals.
> 
> He said the issue involves national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
> 
> "India has already taken up the issue of Chinese construction in P-o-K at several levels, " said Prakash.
> 
> The ministry reiterated that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and any construction there by a foreign body is illegal.
> 
> Prakash said China has made it clear that the Kashmir issue should be resolved bilaterally by India and Pakistan.
> 
> On the imbalance in trade, New Delhi will seek greater access of Indian goods to Chinese markets, with the trade deficit touching 15.8 billion dollars last year.
> 
> The volume of two-way trade has increased phenomenally from 1.8 billion dollars in 2000 to 43 billion dollars last year, despite the global meltdown.
> 
> There was an increase of trade in the first two months of this year by 50 per cent as compared to the corresponding period last year.
> 
> "India is keen to build on positives to fulfill the development aspirations of the two countries," Prakash said.
> 
> The two sides should narrow down the divergences and should be sensitive to each other's concerns," he added.
> 
> During his stay in China, Krishna will also inaugurate Festival of India and attend a function to mark 60 years of diplomatic relations between the two Asian giants.
> 
> The official said India will also participate in a big way in Shanghai World Expo in May. (ANI)


----------



## BJlaowai

*Krishna's China visit to boost Sino-India ties*



> By Matthias Williams
> 
> NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna travels to China next week to consolidate ties, recently improved by a trade boom and cooperation over climate change that shifted the focus away from a border dispute.
> 
> The world's two most populous nations are putting the global financial crisis behind them more quickly than developed countries and want to build on a decade of commercial growth that has pushed China to the top of India's list of trade partners.
> 
> While Beijing is deep into a spat with the United States over the strength of the yuan currency and Google's battle with Chinese censors, Indian analysts say India and China have much to gain from keeping each other onside.
> 
> A turning point seems to have been last December's climate conference in Copenhagen, where India and China helped patch together a deal while facing accusations that they were obstructing a more ambitious agreement.
> 
> "The climate did change in Copenhagen. There is a new warmth in China's tone towards India," Sanjaya Baru, former media adviser to India's prime minister, wrote in the Business Standard.
> 
> The largest and fourth-largest emitters, China and India want rich nations to take the lead to slow global warming, and will not let their own climate commitments stifle economic growth.
> 
> Krishna starts his four-day visit on Monday -- scant months after tempers flared over reports of border incursions and a row over the Dalai Lama's visit to the disputed frontier state of Arunachal Pradesh
> 
> MISTRUST OVER BORDER
> 
> Nearly half a century after war broke out between them, mistrust persists, especially over the 90,000 sq km (35,000 sq. miles) of land in Arunachal Pradesh state claimed by Beijing.
> 
> China was incensed when the Dalai Lama visited the state last year and saw it as proof of the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader's separatist machinations.
> 
> "After the brinkmanship of 2009, on Arunachal Pradesh and Dalai Lama, both sides seem to want to return to a more normal template of pragmatic engagement," Baru wrote.
> 
> Ahead of his trip, Krishna said only that India had "some concerns" about its border.
> 
> "There's a sense I get, of both sides trying not to escalate the war of words," said Siddharth Varadarajan, strategic affairs editor of The Hindu newspaper.
> 
> Trade Minister Anand Sharma has called the Chinese currency a concern for Indian industry. But unlike Washington, New Delhi has refrained from putting pressure on China, the world's fastest growing economy, to let the yuan strengthen.
> 
> The bilateral trade boom has been a mixed blessing for India, now grappling with a deficit in China's favour which ballooned from $1 billion in 2001-2 to $16 billion in 2007-8, according to Indian central bank data.
> 
> They can still cross swords over tariffs and perceived protectionist barriers, with India of late initiating more anti-dumping investigations against China than any other country.
> 
> But both sides say bilateral trade and investment lag far behind their potential and have agreed to even out trade flows.
> 
> The two countries are expected to lead a 9.5 percent expansion in global trade volumes projected by the World Trade Organisation in 2010.
> 
> Lurking in the background will be Indian suspicions over China's growing military clout. Underscoring Indian jitters, the outgoing National Security Adviser earlier this year said his computers had likely been targeted by Chinese hackers.
> 
> Also on the list of talking points could be Afghanistan, where India worries it might be losing a struggle for strategic influence with nuclear-armed rival Pakistan.
> 
> (Editing by Alistair Scrutton and Ron Popeski)



*Krishna&#8217;s China visit to ease problem issues*



> Beijing, April 4: The external affairs minister, Mr S.M. Krishna will arrive here on Monday for &#8220;comprehensive&#8221; talks with the top Chinese leadership covering issues like issuance of stapled visas by Beijing and &#8220;illegal&#8221; construction in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.
> 
> Billed as a visit aimed at consolidating the much improved Sino-Indian ties after last year&#8217;s spat on Arunachal Pradesh, Mr Krishna will have a hectic schedule for the next two days, which include talks with his Chinese counterpart, Mr Yang Jiechi followed by the Prime Minister Mr Wen Jiabao.
> 
> Besides attending a civic reception, he would formally kick off six-month-long celebrations to mark the 60th year of establishment of diplomatic ties between the two countries.
> 
> While the two sides attach a great deal of importance on the substantive issues that would come for discussion, officials of both sides said the tone and tenor of the dialogue would be based on common perception.
> 
> The general feeling in both the countries is that the tensions arising out of Chinese statements over Arunachal Pradesh, subsequent visit of Dalai Lama there, the adverse reports in the media in both the countries have not benefitted either of the countries, Indian officials here said.
> 
> The entire gamut of bilateral issues will be taken up, including the boundary issue, &#8220;illegal&#8221; construction by Chinese companies in P-o-K and China issuing stapled visas to those hailing from Jammu and Kashmir, a ministry of external affairs spokesman said in New Delhi on Saturday.
> 
> India has been maintaining that any construction in P-o-K by China was &#8220;illegal&#8221;. This has been conveyed to China at every level as it was a matter of &#8220;core concern&#8221; to the country, another Indian official said. China regards Mr Krishna&#8217;s patient approach during last year&#8217;s spat provided a &#8220;calming influence&#8221; on the bilateral ties during the 2009, Indian diplomats said here.
> 
> He is also expected to take up the arrest of 21 diamond dealers from Gujarat, who were held few months ago in Shenzhen city on charges of smuggling.


----------



## letsbefriends

below_freezing said:


> lol we are BUYING peace from the americans?
> 
> strategic industries like telecom, defense and finance are completely government controlled over here.
> 
> more than i can say for india where HUAWEI has to install your GSM systems, there are more foreign banks than private OR public banks in india, and defense... we all know about india's defense "industry".



so what if we have more foreign banks in india???it maintains a healthy competition for the business and people get a good eal,he was sayig dat we r not dependant on US as much as china is for our imports or exports.periodn yeah we all knw abt chinese defence industry


----------



## COPE2

indians, pakistanis, and chinese need to stop fighting with each other. if we do that, the only people who will win are the european, and american.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## below_freezing

letsbefriends said:


> so what if we have more foreign banks in india???it maintains a healthy competition for the business and people get a good eal,he was sayig dat we r not dependant on US as much as china is for our imports or exports.periodn yeah we all knw abt chinese defence industry



lol how do we depend on the americans for import or export, our largest export market is the EU and our largest import is from japan, followed by south korea.


----------



## Martian2

sensenreason said:


> As I commented elsewhere...after years of blogging reading geopolicitcs Ive new found respect for India and Indians..(Im one too)..
> 
> It rankles the Americans like Obama that eventually we truly BELIEVE we will be the SOLE supowrpower of the world. Come what may and it will happen in the next 50 years....all in the India middle upwards ie 250 MM people believe that...and surely it rankes Obama and it rankles the Pakistanis and to some extent the Chinese as they have COMPROMISED more of theie freedoms to BUY peace from US....
> 
> Think this through...this is my conclusion after lot of thought...Consider the *fact that India hasnt opened up India's economy to the US like the Chinese* have and neither are we dependent on US for security like Europe or Japan...etc etc..I can go on.



I must disagree. As you say, China is a very open economy with large imports and exports of goods. In comparison, India's economy is far more closed with much lower imports and exports.

Let's compare the results of the two different economic paths. According to the IMF, China's economy (e.g. $4.9 trillion dollars) is four times larger than India's economy (e.g. $1.2 trillion dollars). Also, China's foreign exchange reserves (e.g. $2.45 trillion dollars) are nine times larger than India's forex reserves (e.g. 0.28 trillion dollars).

Similarly, there is a significant discrepancy in industrial power and technology between the two countries. See http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/54821-chinas-top-ten-videos.html

India is moving away from the old policy that you advocate of "import substitution" and toward China's policy of "free trade."

Commanding Heights : India Trade Policy | on PBS
"*India's import controls and tariff policy stimulate the production of import-substitution goods by local manufacturers.* ... it holds preliminary trade talks with the regional organization ASEAN, and *free trade deals are in the works* ..."

"1985-1989: The *beginnings of trade liberalization* are visible. The government reduces import duties and widens investment opportunities for the private sector. The reduction in tax rates and import deficits is financed through commercial borrowing. Liberalization of imports extends to capital and intermediate goods.

1990-1994: The *1991 economic reform package further liberalizes trade*. The government reduces tariffs and trade barriers, eliminates licenses for most industries, and slashes subsidies for domestic products and exports. Many powerful vested interests oppose liberalization, however, and trade remains somewhat regulated. The government bans, for example, the import of many consumer goods.

1995-2001: *To meet WTO commitments, India agrees to eliminate quantitative restrictions on many consumer and agricultural product imports*, while retaining export subsidies and incentives. Growth of Bangalore's high-tech industry leads to the export of software and supercomputers."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DesiGuy

COPE2 said:


> indians, pakistanis, and chinese need to stop fighting with each other. if we do that, the only people who will win are the european, and american.






They will never stop fighting. So Just be friend with USA and don't blame USA when any war takes place between any of these countries.


----------



## BJlaowai

NDTV 24x7: Little India in Beijing. 
Watch the documentary on the NDTV website.

link: Little India in Beijing

One of the participants, is a very close friend of mine


----------



## samaste.march

Basis of relationships is established by the two states bilaterally with other states were also founded in that historical context. Chin had won its freedom through an armed struggle of epic proportions, Its military was unlike any in history in its struggle against overwhelming odds, And military of China was unlike any in history in its struggle against overwhelming odds and its commitment to an ideology. I thing China is adding a healthy dose of Idealist balance to its policies and India on the other hand is introducing an element of Realist pragmatism to its policies.


----------



## LeeRain

You are speaking of China as something out of the world. China is a poor country with per capita GDP of $3300 albeit way ahead of India.
You have to wake up to the fact that is truth. Just because media is banned from filming poor neighborhoods doesn't mean that they don't exist.
______________
orlando real estate
solar installations san joaquin county

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CardSharp

Hi, new member and sorry for the non-sequitur but I wanted to share an article. It details an under-exposed diminsion to Indians attitude towards China and that is betrayal. Indians are taught that China betrayed India early in the relationship and it is still a common theme in Indian journalism today. From the Indian site rediff. *Nehrus legacy India the Lamb state*



> India is the only known country in modern history to have repeatedly cried betrayal, not by friends but by adversaries in whom it had reposed trust (ie China)
> Reflecting Indias decline in its own eyes, however, while one betrayal in 1962 hastened the death of Jawaharlal Nehru (ie the 1962 sino-indian war)


When I did some more digging I came across this excellent article that seem to explain why they felt stabbed in the back. 

*Laying the ghost of the India-China war
By Sultan Shahin 
*_http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DK01Df04.html
_

In this article Sultan Shahin lays out what he called the Nehruvian betrayal felt by Indians toward china. He describes how Nehru famously created the slogan Hindi-Chini bhai bhai [Indians and Chinese are brothers] then outline how this friendship was perceived to have been broken by a ungracious and perfidious China, who started an aggressive war in 1962 (the Sino-Indian war). It is well worth a read and I am hoping for input from both sides to perhaps work out some of these grievances through discourse.


----------



## Guynextdoor

aimarraul said:


> where is the future? i can only see the so-call "future" in pakistan forum in few indian's mouth , it's filled with hypocritical and cunning,these few guy can even stab china next day in the same forum,you can only see pure hating if you visit any indian forum,and the funny part is india is the side grasping our territory and support the separatists against us&#12290;it's ridiculous to hate china based on their media's faking news and propaganda&#65292;and it's freaking ridiculous to hate china because they lost a "forward policy" war to us


You've got a big mouth


----------



## Guynextdoor

CardSharp said:


> Hi, new member and sorry for the non-sequitur but I wanted to share an article. It details an under-exposed diminsion to Indians attitude towards China and that is betrayal. Indians are taught that China betrayed India early in the relationship and it is still a common theme in Indian journalism today. From the Indian site rediff. *Nehrus legacy India the Lamb state*
> 
> 
> When I did some more digging I came across this excellent article that seem to explain why they felt stabbed in the back.
> 
> *Laying the ghost of the India-China war
> By Sultan Shahin
> *_http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DK01Df04.html
> _
> 
> In this article Sultan Shahin lays out what he called the Nehruvian betrayal felt by Indians toward china. He describes how Nehru famously created the slogan Hindi-Chini bhai bhai [Indians and Chinese are brothers] then outline how this friendship was perceived to have been broken by a ungracious and perfidious China, who started an aggressive war in 1962 (the Sino-Indian war). It is well worth a read and I am hoping for input from both sides to perhaps work out some of these grievances through discourse.


The problems between India and China are more than just some fist fight over territotory or indoctrination or perspective. It goes to the very heart of how each country views itself. 
a) CHina has always considered itself a sigle entity contuniously existing throughout the ages for thousands of years. Emipres/ Governments/ Ideologies change but the land is one, is always the same (growing & expanding) country. So areas which once paid tribute/ accepted the suzeerainty of the any chinese govt in the past is effectively chinese- no matter how distant in history that event may have been 

b) India is a product of a more recent. May have existed as a civilization but as a geographical entity we welded our country through 'acquisitions'. So giving concessions on territory just becuase a few hundred years ago they accepted your paramountcy doesn't make sense

The territories in dispute now are Populated and India will never make a compromise on populated territories.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sino-PakFriendship

One day India is still supporting Tibet independence.

One day India is full of Anti-China speech

NO good relationship between China and India


----------



## xdrive

Sino-PakFriendship said:


> One day India is still supporting Tibet independence.
> 
> One day India is full of Anti-China speech
> 
> NO good relationship between China and India



Asia Asians.


----------



## Chinaownseverything

China needs not to be afraid of India. 

India will never make the progress she needs because they are a democracy.

In India the population of entire China is crammed into a tiny area. People are literally living on top of each other and because of democracy the government can not build public transportation, universities etc.... for the people who do not want to move. India's population is going to keep growing making economic activities impossible. India is going to be the next Africa.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Chinaownseverything said:


> China needs not to be afraid of India.
> 
> India will never make the progress she needs because they are a democracy.
> 
> In India the population of entire China is crammed into a tiny area. People are literally living on top of each other and because of democracy the government can not build public transportation, universities etc.... for the people who do not want to move. India's population is going to keep growing making economic activities impossible. India is going to be the next Africa.



Everybody agrees.

Now go back and finish your homework before teacher kicks your backside.


----------



## MilesTogo

No matter how you look at it the future of India and China is tied together.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Guynextdoor said:


> The problems between India and China are more than just some fist fight over territotory or indoctrination or perspective. It goes to the very heart of how each country views itself.
> a) CHina has always considered itself a sigle entity contuniously existing throughout the ages for thousands of years. Emipres/ Governments/ Ideologies change but the land is one, is always the same (growing & expanding) country. So areas which once paid tribute/ accepted the suzeerainty of the any chinese govt in the past is effectively chinese- no matter how distant in history that event may have been
> 
> b) India is a product of a more recent. May have existed as a civilization but as a geographical entity we welded our country through 'acquisitions'. So giving concessions on territory just becuase a few hundred years ago they accepted your paramountcy doesn't make sense
> 
> The territories in dispute now are Populated and India will never make a compromise on populated territories.



Dear Friend Cardsharp,

This interesting post by 'Guynextdoor' is an appropriate point at which to address you.

There are in fact three aspects of this relationship; all need to be understood, thereafter acted upon (praxis is important) before practical results will emerge.

There is first the *emotional history*; ethnographers call this myth.

You have brilliantly (on another thread) brought out this element, as it relates to the case of China and India, into the cold light of day for examination. It was a valuable insight. This determines how we think of ourselves, and how we view others.

There is second the *actual history*; this is usually not known, and participants only refer to it in the stupidest, coarsest terms. Which is a pity. While history does not 'instruct' the human race, it does offer us a picture of the past, and of what may have happened, in the most authenticated account possible, according to strict rules of evidence, which includes stating when these rules of evidence are breached.

In the case of China and India, the recent relationship between China and India has been discussed; the earlier history of the relationship between Tibet and India, and of the relationship between China and Tibet have never been discussed.

There is finally the political and diplomatic situation on the ground. This is influenced and formed, to some extent by the first two factors. We can always identify it and consider sensible ways of proposing solutions that the establishment of each country concerned might actually adopt, if it was inclined to.

In the case of India and China, this is the simplest part of the whole puzzle, and the answers are clear and happily solvable. All that gets in the way today is largely the effect of the myth.

I should like an opportunity some day to dwell on point two purely for your intellectual satisfaction.

With warm regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Capt.Popeye

"Everybody agrees."

@Joe Shearer
Thank you sir for raising the level of discussion and debate on so many topics on this forum. 
Even in my "most deluded state", i have come away from many of them; in a singularly "better informed condition".
As for the fact that there are many buzzing insects around me; i am still willing to hazard walking into the jungles.
i hope that does not sound "too delusional". 
Thanks and Cheers!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MilesTogo

Why would China fear progress of others?



Chinaownseverything said:


> China needs not to be afraid of India.
> 
> India will never make the progress she needs because they are a democracy.
> 
> In India the population of entire China is crammed into a tiny area. People are literally living on top of each other and because of democracy the government can not build public transportation, universities etc.... for the people who do not want to move. India's population is going to keep growing making economic activities impossible. India is going to be the next Africa.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Guynextdoor said:


> The problems between India and China are more than just some fist fight over territotory or indoctrination or perspective. It goes to the very heart of how each country views itself.
> a) CHina has always considered itself a sigle entity contuniously existing throughout the ages for thousands of years. Emipres/ Governments/ Ideologies change but the land is one, is always the same (growing & expanding) country. So areas which once paid tribute/ accepted the suzeerainty of the any chinese govt in the past is effectively chinese- no matter how distant in history that event may have been
> 
> b) India is a product of a more recent. May have existed as a civilization but as a geographical entity we welded our country through 'acquisitions'. So giving concessions on territory just becuase a few hundred years ago they accepted your paramountcy doesn't make sense
> 
> The territories in dispute now are Populated and India will never make a compromise on populated territories.





Capt.Popeye said:


> "Everybody agrees."
> 
> @Joe Shearer
> Thank you sir for raising the level of discussion and debate on so many topics on this forum.
> Even in my "most deluded state", i have come away from many of them; in a singularly "better informed condition".
> As for the fact that there are many buzzing insects around me; i am still willing to hazard walking into the jungles.
> i hope that does not sound "too delusional".
> Thanks and Cheers!



Dear Sir,

I make haste to place on record my appreciation of your even-tempered and balanced posts. If any of the pejoratives used mistakenly seemed directed at you, my most humble apologies. 

This is far, very far from my intentions.

Some Pakistanis - it would be invidious to single out any, but I have to refer to sparklingway at least, although Agnostic Muslim and one or two others would hold their own in any company - some Indians, your good self prominently included, and these two gentlemen from China, Cardsharp (what a misleading nick!) and chauism, are refreshing, breaths of fresh air. 

I write for this august company and its approbation, largely. A word of praise from them is worth the time I spend.

Sincerely,


----------



## CardSharp

Joe Shearer said:


> I should like an opportunity some day to dwell on point two purely for your intellectual satisfaction.
> With warm regards,


Nothing would please me more. After all, how can I pass up a chance for discourse with someone who writes like a poet and invokes the Greek muse of history. 


Guynextdoor said:


> a) CHina has always considered itself a sigle entity contuniously existing throughout the ages for thousands of years. Emipres/ Governments/ Ideologies change but the land is one, is always the same (growing & expanding) country. So areas which once paid tribute/ accepted the suzeerainty of the any chinese govt in the past is effectively chinese- no matter how distant in history that event may have been b) India is a product of a more recent. May have existed as a civilization but as a geographical entity we welded our country through 'acquisitions'. So giving concessions on territory just becuase a few hundred years ago they accepted your paramountcy doesn't make sense


This is true to a large extent. We Chinese have our shared myths about founding kings and dynasties that linger into the boundary between pre-history and history. This identity never faded or lost its vibrancy through the years. This is more than any political machanation is what I believe to be responsible for there being a single modern Chinese state. Invaders came and went ( and there were many of them) but they all suffer the same fate, cultural assimilation and the inevitable loss of their own identity. 




Joe Shearer said:


> There is second the *actual history*; this is usually not known, and participants only refer to it in the stupidest, coarsest terms. Which is a pity. While history does not 'instruct' the human race, it does offer us a picture of the past, and of what may have happened, in the most authenticated account possible, according to strict rules of evidence, which includes stating when these rules of evidence are breached.



The key here as with all history is to never depend on one source when possible and always, always be aware when someone is lying to you. There are many many historians today but fewer and fewer of them can be called honest. But we shouldnt feel the need to lie because the truth cant hurt us.




Joe Shearer said:


> In the case of India and China, this is the simplest part of the whole puzzle, and the answers are clear and happily solvable. All that gets in the way today is largely the effect of the myth.



Myth and pride. For the myth are there to sooth our pride.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## chauism

There are something other than history I have to point out, the more issues or problems we have among ourselves in Asia with each other, the more excuses others will have to meddle in our own affairs. Why should we give them the opportunities and pleasure of doing so? Divide and conquer is not a tactics that died with British colonism. It still exists in a very different form. I think everyone should seriously think about that before taking out on its own neighbours.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Capt.Popeye

@Joe Shearer,
"I make haste to place on record my appreciation of your even-tempered and balanced posts. If any of the pejoratives used mistakenly seemed directed at you, my most humble apologies. "

Sir,
Even in any state of utmost 'intoxication, delusion or adolescence' i would find it difficult, nay impossible to take offence at your views. And i'm indeed fortunate that there are many views on this forum that are helpful to keeping myself educated (including but not limited to names you mentioned). As for the more obtuse persons, its nice to see them sometimes; only because they make me feel more intelligent and intellectual than i actually am. And once in a while i get a chance to indulge in some verbal jousting.
But over the years, i have come to understand that plain stupidity carries no particular passport, nature has distributed it evenly across the globe. But to appreciate wisdom, i need to define stupidity; hence i'm willing to countenance it (to some extent).
i believe you are going 'off-air' for while; earnestly awaiting your return.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Capt.Popeye said:


> @Joe Shearer,
> "I make haste to place on record my appreciation of your even-tempered and balanced posts. If any of the pejoratives used mistakenly seemed directed at you, my most humble apologies. "
> 
> Sir,
> Even in any state of utmost 'intoxication, delusion or adolescence' i would find it difficult, nay impossible to take offence at your views. And i'm indeed fortunate that there are many views on this forum that are helpful to keeping myself educated (including but not limited to names you mentioned). As for the more obtuse persons, its nice to see them sometimes; only because they make me feel more intelligent and intellectual than i actually am. And once in a while i get a chance to indulge in some verbal jousting.
> *But over the years, i have come to understand that plain stupidity carries no particular passport, nature has distributed it evenly across the globe. But to appreciate wisdom, i need to define stupidity; hence i'm willing to countenance it (to some extent).*
> i believe you are going 'off-air' for while; earnestly awaiting your return.



Dear Sir,

With regard to the highlighted passage, may I request you to contact our mutual acquaintance, Toxic_pus, and get from him the relevant sentence from Mr. Frank Zappa's eloquent testimony before the United States Senate? It is relevant and meaningful. This suggestion is in case you have not already read it yourself and understood the vast beauty that lies behind.

Sincerely,


----------



## lca mk2

If combination of India+China+Russia become true so they can rule the world


----------



## CardSharp

Capt.Popeye said:


> But over the years, i have come to understand that plain stupidity carries no particular passport, nature has distributed it evenly across the globe.



Words of wisdom. There is no superior race, no God chosen people. I can't say with any seriousness Chinese people are better than Indians or vice-versa. But much of the wasted energy on PDF is aimed at precisely at establishing this "mine better than yours" idiocy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Capt.Popeye

"There is no superior race, no God chosen people. I can't say with any seriousness Chinese people are better than Indians or vice-versa. But much of the wasted energy on PDF is aimed at precisely at establishing this "mine better than yours" idiocy. "

@ CardSharp
Spot on ! Having had the opportunity to work (and live) in different parts of the world, let me share one personal experience. i was part of a programme to train young Chinese professional men. i ended up learning many things from them- especially the things that they were better at. Was that "because of the fact "they were Chinese or, "in spite of the fact" that they were Chinese? Neither. They were intelligent people, well motivated and entirely focused on getting better. 
The Beginnings (and definitely not the end) of Learning.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Originally Posted by Joe Shearer View Post
"With regard to the highlighted passage, may I request you to contact our mutual acquaintance, Toxic_pus, and get from him the relevant sentence from Mr. Frank Zappa's eloquent testimony before the United States Senate? It is relevant and meaningful. This suggestion is in case you have not already read it yourself and understood the vast beauty that lies behind."

Thank you for sharing this reference. i must get get in touch with 'Toxic_pus'.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Capt.Popeye said:


> "There is no superior race, no God chosen people. I can't say with any seriousness Chinese people are better than Indians or vice-versa. But much of the wasted energy on PDF is aimed at precisely at establishing this "mine better than yours" idiocy. "
> 
> @ CardSharp
> Spot on ! Having had the opportunity to work (and live) in different parts of the world, let me share one personal experience. i was part of a programme to train young Chinese professional men. i ended up learning many things from them- especially the things that they were better at. Was that "because of the fact "they were Chinese or, "in spite of the fact" that they were Chinese? Neither. They were intelligent people, well motivated and entirely focused on getting better.
> The Beginnings (and definitely not the end) of Learning.





chauism said:


> There are something other than history I have to point out, the more issues or problems we have among ourselves in Asia with each other, the more excuses others will have to meddle in our own affairs. Why should we give them the opportunities and pleasure of doing so? Divide and conquer is not a tactics that died with British colonism. It still exists in a very different form. I think everyone should seriously think about that before taking out on its own neighbours.





CardSharp said:


> Words of wisdom. There is no superior race, no God chosen people. I can't say with any seriousness Chinese people are better than Indians or vice-versa. But much of the wasted energy on PDF is aimed at precisely at establishing this "mine better than yours" idiocy.



I sincerely hope that we can keep up this positive tempo, and discuss the question of military planning, strategy, tactics and tools and equipment in the context of a common humanity which at the end of the day needs to refrain from killing each other off.

Looking forward to joining you again two weeks later; this is my last response for the time being. The very best of times, ladies and gentlemen, and may your discussions be warm without being heated.

Sincere regards,


----------



## euvucan

I think China and India should be friends or at least not to bother the other's business as we did throughout the last 3000 years. Now both countries are to some extent hostile to each other. should it actually be the case? no, cos the hostility was created by western powers when britain deliberately created the contradiction by vesting south tibet to india, while now america is doing its best to keep the two countries hostility.

When america want to suppress china it can use india, and if one day india does not listen to america america will side to china against india, and this game continues as long as the two countries have conflicts.

when china and india are in hostility consider who benefits, is it china, india or america

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

euvucan said:


> I think China and India should be friends or at least not to bother the other's business as we did throughout the last 3000 years. Now both countries are to some extent hostile to each other. should it actually be the case? no, cos the hostility was created by western powers when britain deliberately created the contradiction by vesting south tibet to india, while now america is doing its best to keep the two countries hostility.
> 
> When america want to suppress china it can use india, and if one day india does not listen to america america will side to china against india, and this game continues as long as the two countries have conflicts.
> 
> when china and india are in hostility consider who benefits, is it china, india or america



India will side against China only when China threatens us(which i doubt a mature nation like China would do )

Our relations will improve gradually,as both nations continue to support eachother on international stage like WTO talks,Climate change convention etc.

but our border dispute will remain a blemish on our ties.which i doubt won't be solved until 2030 or may be longer.Also China's close ties with Pakistan is a concern.

So i think mostly it will be that both nations won't interfere into eachother's affairs and have good trade relations parallely. 


By the way, to


----------



## CardSharp

Bombensturm said:


> India will side against China only when China threatens us(which i doubt a mature nation like China would do )
> 
> Our relations will improve gradually,as both nations continue to support eachother on international stage like WTO talks,Climate change convention etc.
> 
> but our border dispute will remain a blemish on our ties.which i doubt won't be solved until 2030 or may be longer.Also China's close ties with Pakistan is a concern.
> 
> So i think mostly it will be that both nations won't interfere into eachother's affairs and have good trade relations parallely.
> 
> 
> By the way, to






While I wish for all the world that there can be heartfelt friendship and unity between east Asia and the subcontinent, I think it would be foolish to see things through rose coloured glass just yet. We must bring the issues that really bother us to the surface and discuss them in a spirit of earnestness so that we can actually move to be friends. 

The more we talk, the more I'm sure we will trust.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## indianpatriot

India and China can never ever be friends unless they resolve some really hardcore issues...without which their friendship will always remain symbolic and pretentious and always at the risk of breaking down....though i must say cooling down Indo-sino relations will be way easier than Indo-pak because there is no religious or cultural values involved here...and governments of both the nation are capable enough to do so!!!!!


----------



## euvucan

indianpatriot said:


> India and China can never ever be friends unless they resolve some really hardcore issues...without which their friendship will always remain symbolic and pretentious and always at the risk of breaking down....though i must say cooling down Indo-sino relations will be way easier than Indo-pak because there is no religious or cultural values involved here...and governments of both the nation are capable enough to do so!!!!!



There are lot's of pretentious friendship in the world and that's life...

I am sure if India has the economic powerhouse on par of china, and china relatively deprived, then India will surely become america's new enemy...i also doubt if india-america friendship is that solid as anglo-american friendship


----------



## amit27

China backs Pakistan I doubt India will ever be true friends with China when chinese nukes are located in tibet pointing at delhi this does not sound like a true friend to me.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

CardSharp said:


> While I wish for all the world that there can be heartfelt friendship and unity between east Asia and the subcontinent, I think it would be foolish to see things through rose coloured glass just yet. *We must bring the issues that really bother us to the surface and discuss* them in a spirit of earnestness so that we can actually move to be friends.
> 
> The more we talk, the more I'm sure we will trust.



Agree!

Like i said the border dispute is going to resolved only when our people have complete trust in our Govt decision,that i predict mostly will not happen before 2030.


----------



## indianpatriot

euvucan said:


> There are lot's of pretentious friendship in the world and that's life...
> 
> I am sure if India has the economic powerhouse on par of china, and china relatively deprived, then India will surely become america's new enemy...i also doubt if india-america friendship is that solid as anglo-american friendship



China is not an enemy of US...its what you call a strategic competitor....its a war of ideologies....Asia has produced it powerful child called china to tackle with the dominance of the west...her another child india is still in womb while the eldest one-japan has been proved insufficient!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CardSharp

indianpatriot said:


> China is not an enemy of US...its what you call a strategic competitor....its a war of ideologies....Asia has produced it powerful child called china to tackle with the dominance of the west...her another child india is still in womb while the eldest one-japan has been proved insufficient!!!



I like the analogy



Bombensturm said:


> Agree!
> 
> Like i said the border dispute is going to resolved only when our people have complete trust in our Govt decision,that i predict mostly will not happen before 2030.



I hope it won't take that long but public opinion can be hard to change. I was quite shocked to hear that India doesn't teach its own modern history in Highschool and that many Indian members here learnt about 1962 war on youtube 

Talk about a terrible source of information. It is little wonder that many Indians harbour animosity against China if they believe the youtube version of events.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Sardar Ram Singh said:


> WOW WHAT A TECHNOLOGICAL ACHIEVEMENT FOR PAKISTAN. WOW WOW WOW WOW WOW. JUST COPY AND BECOME KINGS OF TECHNOLOGY. WOW, LEARN NEW TECHNOLOGY FROM PAKISTAN NOW AND YOU CAN EVEN DO NEW THINGS IN CRICKET AND TEACH THE WHOLE WORLD ABOUT MATCH FIXING AND BY THE WAY THAT TOO WAS COPIED FROM INDIANS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA



Cant u do anything except trolling slum ...
All ur posts have been trolls and flaim baits!
I would love to feed u with a @ss kickin reply but u wont stop even after tht.
So Get a bloody life.

Also chinese dont play cricket! But the lil srisant loves to get his butt kicked!


----------



## Scud

I'm sure if China & India be allies ( or even good friend ), than many of their Friend & Foe will dislike it.

And many nation / country will happy if China & India be hate each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## kingofkings

I'm definitely lookin forward for the day when both countries trust each other and go together.

At that stage even the greatest power in the world would feel insecure.

I think this is the main reason some people always try to find or create some difference between the two.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Scud

The relationship threat not only from foreign country but from "internal" of both too. So China & India must watching their own "back".


----------



## Scud

Now China is the target.
And if China has fall, I'm sure that India will be the next target in the future.

At that time, India are alone already.


----------



## Developereo

At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.

- I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.

- Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?

- There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.

- Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.

- The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.

- Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.

So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Developereo said:


> - Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?


The immediate answer would be China of course.Considering the fact that one of high level diplomatic personnel even once said that _China is no.1 threat_.

But if seen a bit more carefully you"ll realize that China for India is more of an excuse to build up our military.That poses another question "Why India needs a powerful military when its existing/perceived threats are China and Pakistan?"
Simple answer would be the ex in 1971 we had to face an American carrier.
Also, we Indians like all crave for power.


-


> There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.



Even if someone boasts that Buddhism was India's export to China in ancient times,truth be told,there is not much of Chinese culture in India or vice -versa when compared to other Indianized countries like Laos,Cambodia,Thailand etc.


-


> The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history.


Himalayas served as a good natural geographic fence.
Also Chinese kingdoms never expanded beyond modern day Xinjiang or say into Burma to come in contact with India.
Same for the Indian Kingdoms.

There was however one clash in the 18th-19th century the Sino-Sikh War,which was a stalemate.



> The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.



The Mongol invasions into India were repelled by Delhi Sultanate ,even though Kashmir did fall into their hands

Mongol invasions of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


-


> Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.



Completely agree



> So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.


Yes! as of now we aren't valuable to them in any way.But we are considered a future potential rival.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## CardSharp

Developereo said:


> At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.
> 
> - I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.
> 
> - Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?
> 
> - There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.
> 
> - Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.
> 
> - The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.
> 
> - Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.
> 
> So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.



What is your obsession with race?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Developereo

Bombensturm said:


> we are considered a future potential *rival*.



Which brings me to the original point about diplomacy being the art of saying nice doggie until you can find a stick.



CardSharp said:


> What is your obsession with race?



It is not my obsession. I am pointing out that much of the India-China friendship talk centers around an 'Asian' partnership to counter 'Western' dominance.

It is the India-China friendship boosters who use the race card (evil white man) to support their arguments. I am pointing out that Asia doesn't have much of a history of brotherly conduct either, so the race card doesn't wash.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## maxx

Developereo said:


> - Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.


Why would better China-India relation alienate Pakistan? If that's what you mean.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

maxx said:


> Why would better China-India relation alienate Pakistan? If that's what you mean.



India and Pakistan are arch rivals (although Indians like to pretend they have moved on) and are likely to remain so (despite much shared culture) until core issues like Kashmir are resolved.


----------



## eastwatch

Proud2Indian said:


> China has military ties with Pakistan, BD, Myanmar and Nepal encircling India.



You have to understand why the countries you have mentioned distrust India and go out for Chinese assistance to build their infrastructure and military. India's foreign policy (regional) is a total failure. India is not trusted and respected by its neighbour, only because it believes in bullying.


----------



## CardSharp

Developereo said:


> Which brings me to the original point about diplomacy being the art of saying nice doggie until you can find a stick.
> 
> 
> 
> It is not my obsession. I am pointing out that much of the India-China friendship talk centers around an 'Asian' partnership to counter 'Western' dominance.
> 
> It is the India-China friendship boosters who use the race card (evil white man) to support their arguments. I am pointing out that Asia doesn't have much of a history of brotherly conduct either, so the race card doesn't wash.



The talk about solidarity against white people is irrelevant. Official diplomatics communique between China and India contain the same window dressing of ancient civilization and Asia co-prosperity but it doesn't mean for a second that any of it figures into real-politik and how relations are actually carried out. 

Race plays a role only in the forming of the 'us' and 'them' and that's not even hard and fast. They are more based on many more factor than race. There isn't going to be a race war of your imagining anytime soon.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

eastwatch said:


> You have to understand why the countries you have mentioned distrust India and go out for Chinese assistance to build their infrastructure and military. India's foreign policy (regional) is a total failure. India is not trusted and respected by its neighbour, only because it believes in bullying.



Going out for Chinese assistance is obvious as its already an established economic and global power.

However yes,India policy isn't effective in SA like wise its neighbors as South Asia is matured or developed enough as of now.


----------



## Nomenclature

Developereo said:


> At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.
> 
> - I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.
> 
> - Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?
> 
> - There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.
> 
> - Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.
> 
> - The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.
> 
> - Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.
> 
> So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.



I agree with most you've said. Geopolitics is geopolitics and it will be decided on strategic interests and strategic interests alone. 

South Korea is probably a good case for study, China and SK had a tremendous amount of grass-root level good will toward each other at the dawn of this century, and the cultural and economic ties between the two countries are far stronger than anything between China and North Korea (and probably stronger than anything China and India could ever develop). Yet much to South Koreans' charging China backed the North in the aftermath of the sinking of Choenan.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.



India,Bharat,Hindustan,what ever, was rich majority of its history bro. And the Mongols in the form of the early Mughals did take over India. But the large Mongol empire was repelled.

"According to economic historian Angus Maddison in his book The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective, India had the world's largest economy from the first to eleventh century, and in the eighteenth century, with a (32.9&#37 share of world GDP in the first century to (28.9%) in 1000 AD, and in 1700 AD with (24.4%. "



> There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.



There was through Buddhism. Many Chinese monks used to come to India to translate Sanskrit and Pali verse to Chinese.



> The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history.



It was because of the himalayas. Bharats natural borders are the Indus river, himalayas, Arakan Yoma, and the peninsula. No Indian empire passed the Himalayas.












*Mughal *


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varghese said:


> There was through Buddhism. Many Chinese monks used to come to India to translate Sanskrit and Pali verse to Chinese.



Also, Ancient Chinese literature was highly influenced by Indian culture and Buddhism in particular. The most well-known example is "Journey to the West", where Sun Wukong and a Buddhist monk travel West to India, in order to obtain sacred Buddhist scrolls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journey_to_the_west

The Japanese then took our idea of the Monkey King, and turned it into Dragon Ball. The main character even has the exact same name as Sun Wukong, &#23403;&#24735;&#31354; (the Japanese pronounce it as Son Goku).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Also, Ancient Chinese literature was highly influenced by Indian culture and Buddhism in particular. The most well-known example is "Journey to the West", where Sun Wukong and a Buddhist monk travel West to India, in order to obtain sacred Buddhist scrolls.
> 
> Journey to the West - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The Japanese then took our idea of the Monkey King, and turned it into *Dragon Ball*. The main character even has the exact same name as Sun Wukong, &#23403;&#24735;&#31354; (the Japanese pronounce it as Son Goku).



Wow, I had no Idea dragon ball was a copy of that. I loved that show!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varghese said:


> Wow, I had no Idea dragon ball was a copy of that. I loved that show!



Not the whole series, just the main character. Son Goku was based on the "Monkey King" Sun Wukong.

Son Goku - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Varghese said:


> No Indian empire passed the Himalayas.



No Indian empire passed through the Himalayas, but Indian "culture" certainly did.

In fact, most of my family is Buddhist, so there is the proof right there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

Chinese-Dragon said:


> No Indian empire passed through the Himalayas, but Indian "culture" certainly did.
> 
> In fact, most of my family is Buddhist, so there is the proof right there.



As others have pointed out, Buddhism is all but extinct within India itself. Yes, India passed Buddhism onto China and beyond, but it is not a shared culture any more.

It is like saying that the US and Iraq have a shared culture because the ancient Babylonian system of base-60 is still used by us (60 seconds, 60 minutes, 360 degrees, etc.)


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Developereo said:


> As others have pointed out, Buddhism is all but extinct within India itself. Yes, India passed Buddhism onto China and beyond, but it is not a shared culture any more.



I didn't say it was "shared culture", I just said it passed through the Himalayas.

I know that only 1% of Indians are Buddhist today, and that Buddhism survives on in East Asian nations like China/Korea/Japan.

Still, it's nice to know about the cultural exchange that occurred over the Himalayas.


----------



## StingRoy

Developereo said:


> As others have pointed out, Buddhism is all but extinct within India itself. Yes, India passed Buddhism onto China and beyond, but it is not a shared culture any more.



Buddhism is still prevalent and thriving in India... the tenets and principles of Buddhism are still attracting many Hindus to convert and follow. I have first hand experience because a couple of my cousins have converted to Buddhism and they say it gives them the inner peace that they have been looking for. There are several other examples I can give where people have converted and it is continued to be followed in India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

dezi said:


> Buddhism is still prevalent and thriving in India... the tenets and principles of Buddhism are still attracting many Hindus to convert and follow. I have first hand experience because a couple of my cousins have converted to Buddhism and they say it gives them the inner peace that they have been looking for. There are several other examples I can give where people have converted and it is continued to be followed in India.



That's interesting, is there a revival of Buddhism going on in India?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StingRoy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> That's interesting, is there a revival of Buddhism going on in India?



I can't say for the whole country... but atleast in my circle of friends and family. Last year i was in India I actually went with my cousins to one prayer hall... It was a very peaceful and calming experience. 

Few years back I had also gone to Sarnath (place where Buddha first gave his preachings) and it was bustling with people from all walks of life.... so I wouldnt agree that Buddhism is declining in India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarnath

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I didn't say it was "shared culture", I just said it passed through the Himalayas.
> 
> I know that only 1&#37; of Indians are Buddhist today, and that Buddhism survives on in East Asian nations like China/Korea/Japan.
> 
> *Still, it's nice to know about the cultural exchange that occurred over the Himalayas.*



It didn't go over. It went around. Many of the Greeks who stayed in Afghanistan area who were left over from Alexanders army. Formed Indo-Greek kingdoms. They adopted Buddhism and formed Greco-Buddhist culture. This was then passed down to the Kushans which had extensive trade with China. These central Asian Buddhist would go to China and pass Buddhism to China. So It wasn't really Indian to Chinese contact. China would later spread it to Korea and Japan.

Only famous Indian monk that I think that went to China was *Bodhidharma*.He founded Zen Buddhism there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

dezi said:


> There are several other examples I can give where people have converted and it is continued to be followed in India.



According to Wikipedia
Hindus 827,578,868 80.5&#37; 
Muslims 138,188,240 13.4% 
Christians 24,080,016 2.3% 
Sikhs 19,215,730 1.9% 
Buddhists 7,955,207 0.8% 
Jains 4,225,053 0.4% 
Bah&#225;'&#237;s 1 953 112 0.18% 
Others 4,686,588 0.32% 
Religion not stated 727,588 0.1%

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

dezi said:


> I can't say for the whole country... but atleast in my circle of friends and family. Last year i was in India I actually went with my cousins to one prayer hall... It was a very peaceful and calming experience.
> 
> Few years back I had also gone to Sarnath (place where Buddha first gave his preachings) and it was bustling with people from all walks of life.... so I wouldnt agree that Buddhism is declining in India.
> 
> Sarnath - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I would love to visit Sarnath one day. 

I would also like to visit Bodh Gaya, the place where the Buddha attained enlightenment.

Bodh Gaya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like I said, my family are mostly Buddhists so they would probably love the idea of visiting these places. I'm non-religious personally, but I would still go at least once in my life to see those places.


----------



## StingRoy

There was an article in Time Magazine a couple of years back about India's New Buddhists.

*India's New Buddhists*

Many people who are stressed in life and always running after achievements often seek solace in the principles of Buddhism.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StingRoy

Developereo said:


> According to Wikipedia
> Hindus 827,578,868 80.5%
> Muslims 138,188,240 13.4%
> Christians 24,080,016 2.3%
> Sikhs 19,215,730 1.9%
> Buddhists 7,955,207 0.8%
> Jains 4,225,053 0.4%
> Bahá'ís 1 953 112 0.18%
> Others 4,686,588 0.32%
> Religion not stated 727,588 0.1%



Yes Developereo... I agree with the stats that it is still a minority religion... I said it is picking up in some places and social circles mostly amongst the educated and urban class indians ... but it would still be a minority religion for a long long time in India if that is what you wanted to point out by the stats.

Following Buddhism does not always mean that you have to give away your birth religion. I have often see people who claim they are Hindus, but actively follow principles of Buddhism.


----------



## jayron

Chinese-Dragon said:


> That's interesting, is there a revival of Buddhism going on in India?



There are several reasons for revival of buddhism. One of it is Ambedkar The leader who wrote Indian constitution was a Buddhist and he was a Dalit(a Hindu Caste). So the Dalits like to follow him and convert to Buddhism. Apart from that, Tibetian buddhism is the majority religion in Ladakh and Sikkim.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varghese said:


> Only famous Indian monk that I think that went to China was *Bodhidharma*.He founded Zen Buddhism there.



That's really interesting. I guess I learn something new every day.


----------



## Developereo

dezi said:


> Yes Developereo... I agree with the stats that it is still a minority religion... I said it is picking up in some places and social circles mostly amongst the educated and urban class indians ... but it would still be a minority religion for a long long time in India if that is what you wanted to point out by the stats.
> 
> Following Buddhism does not always mean that you have to give away your birth religion. I have often see people who claim they are Hindus, but actively follow principles of Buddhism.



My only point was that Buddhism does not consitute a shared culture between India and China, which is where this discussion started from.
I do not want to belabor the issue, since the point is made.

On the matter of revival of Buddhism, it is actually a global phenomenon. Many people in the West who walk away from Christianity are intrigued by Buddhism and become non-practising Buddhists. Essentially they like the general message, although they do not follow the rituals, etc.


----------



## StingRoy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I would love to visit Sarnath one day.
> I would also like to visit Bodh Gaya, the place where the Buddha attained enlightenment.
> Like I said, my family are mostly Buddhists so they would probably love the idea of visiting these places. I'm non-religious personally, but I would still go at least once in my life to see those places.



You are most welcome to visit these places. I haven't been personally to Bodh Gaya, but I heard it is a nice place as well. If you do plan a visit you should also go to Dhauli in Orissa. This is the place when King Asoka fought the great Kalinga War and seeing the bloodshed converted to Buddhism and was responsible for spreading Buddhism through out India and Sri Lanka.

Dhauli Stupa






Ref: Kalinga War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 

Dhauli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

dezi said:


> You are most welcome to visit these places. I haven't been personally to Bodh Gaya, but I heard it is a nice place as well. If you do plan a visit you should also go to Dhauli in Orissa. This is the place when King Asoka fought the great Kalinga War and seeing the bloodshed converted to Buddhism and was responsible for spreading Buddhism through out India and Sri Lanka.



Thanks buddy. 

That story about the Kalinga war looks fascinating, I'll definitely check out those links you gave me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Developereo said:


> As others have pointed out, Buddhism is all but extinct within India itself. Yes, India passed Buddhism onto China and beyond, but it is not a shared culture any more.
> 
> It is like saying that the US and Iraq have a shared culture because the ancient Babylonian system of base-60 is still used by us (60 seconds, 60 minutes, 360 degrees, etc.)



This makes astonishing reading.

Do you have any further basis for this strange assertion?


----------



## Joe Shearer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> That's interesting, is there a revival of Buddhism going on in India?



In a manner of speaking, yes.

Mainstream Hinduism, under the impact of external forces, has become a harsh distortion of its original form, a Semiticised version, borrowing much from the ideology of the west.

Mainstream Islam is also an all-or-nothing option. As, for that matter, is Christianity, in some of its manifestations.

Many people have sought middle paths, which borrow the relaxed theological mindset of the original Hinduism, and the stern egalitarianism of the Muslims, and mingle them. Some took to the Khalsa path, became Sikhs, and before they were literally driven to take up the sword, they were a peaceful set of people minding their own business. After they turned to war, they went all the way, and became one more all-or-nothing religion, although one which is far more tolerant than others of its sort. 

Because Buddhism isn't associated with social divisions any longer, it has become popular, especially among the oppressed classes, who see it as a viable, very undemanding alternative to the Abrahamic faiths (at least to the two of them to which conversions are allowed). This is apart from the existing widespread profession of the religion among the hillsmen of the north and the east.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe Shearer

Varghese said:


> It didn't go over. It went around. Many of the Greeks who stayed in Afghanistan area who were left over from Alexanders army. Formed Indo-Greek kingdoms. They adopted Buddhism and formed Greco-Buddhist culture. This was then passed down to the Kushans which had extensive trade with China. These central Asian Buddhist would go to China and pass Buddhism to China. So It wasn't really Indian to Chinese contact. China would later spread it to Korea and Japan.
> 
> Only famous Indian monk that I think that went to China was *Bodhidharma*.He founded Zen Buddhism there.



Er, no, actually.

It went around and it also went over. Look up the second phase of Buddhist proselytisation in the 13th century, under Atish Dipankar and others. What you described is some elements of the first phase, in no way a full description of the first phase.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Developereo said:


> At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.



You are not being a party-pooper, merely ignorant. I say this not with rancor or to put you down, but as an assessment of fact. If you take the trouble to go through the responses to your several theses below, you will understand that my response to your post is that with sufficient information and knowledge, you might not have written that post; another of its sort, perhaps, that vents your spleen, but not that precise one.



Developereo said:


> - I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.



There is no particular necessity for fraternal feeling to be based on shared (not mutual) enmity for the white man. In fact, this is hardly possible given the widespread occurrence of bananas and coconuts.

The only reason why the white man comes in again and again is because they have been the most recent oppressors in South Asia, and the most recent but one in China. 

Finally, don't you feel silly quoting Asian disagreements as a reason for fraternal feeling not to be present, given that the example of the European Union stares you in the face? There is nothing that one Asian has done to another that has not been exceeded many times over by the Europeans in their dealings with one another. And yet France and Germany are at peace with one another, support each other in the EU, enter into complex business arrangements and build a whole generation of polyglot businessmen, from whose spoken languages, it is impossible to tell if they are French or German. Sometimes, in spite of there being many shared names, their names are the only way to tell.



Developereo said:


> - Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?



Please do a quick check of the order of battle of the Indian Army. 

23 divisions out of 33 are oriented towards Pakistan. 10 are oriented to China. China has the capability of the following:


Deploy one (mountain) brigade in 8 hours at any point of the Sino-Indian frontier;
Deploy one (mountain) division on the frontier within 24 hours (one phase of an airlift is the way it is phrased in the original, where it also states that a brigade now takes 8 hours to deploy);
The quick reaction force of 4 divisions within 4 days, to any frontier or any part of the PRC;
Up to 10 divisions within 15 days, on any frontier;
Up to 25 divisions within 30 days.

Does this tell you where the focus of the Indian Army is? Does it tell you which potential hostile power it considers more dangerous and unpredictable, above all, unpredictable? Hint: it isn't PRC.



Developereo said:


> - There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.


 
A superb argument. Worthy of your acumen and intellectual grasp of the matter.

Arguing in reverse, therefore, we can re-write sub-continental history, as there is shared culture on the sub-continent, as well as being not only on the same continent, but within the rather narrow confines of the same sub-continent.



Developereo said:


> - Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.



Tell us about it!

However, let us read on; the essential indefensibility of this position appears very clearly further on.



Developereo said:


> - The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.



The only reason that there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is because China's *trajectory of expansion *was by way of Qing Hai, Xijang and Xinjiang. If it continues, it will be through Kazakhstan and Baltistan. 

China has always sought to consolidate its northern and western boundaries; its western boundaries were forcefully defined by the Arabs first, but subsequently and without let-up, China has challenged those frontiers, fought the Turks to a standstill at a huge distance from her own power centres, and then annexed Xinjiang. There are no explicit threats to the west any more; threats to the north have disappeared, with the crumbling of the Soviets; threats to the south were put on the shelf of history many centuries ago, and threats to the east are its primary concern today.

Note that there is no desire to 'expand' to the east, as Taiwan is already considered part of China, but being ruled by an adversarial political system, still Chinese in every respect.

In contrast, India has always had a defensive and inward-looking mindset; this is staple historical analysis, and is fed with the future history scholar's baby food. In an ironically mistaken posting by one of your good friends from Bangladesh, this was described by the Brookings Institute as a policy of _*strategic restraint*_.

A brilliant phrase, an epigram which sums up the whole situation.



Developereo said:


> - Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.



Perhaps you should consider a look at the trade figures and the breakdown of those figures. It might help illuminate the matter.



Developereo said:


> So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.



No, China doesn't need India as an ally at all. China has a perfectly viable alternative; to lock herself into the same gangrened point of view as other, traditional rivals of India, in spite of the dreadful example of what results thereby. On the whole, she might prefer an alliance, or, properly speaking, friendly relations with mutual self-respect.

Why would she wantonly frighten India into building her arsenals to levels that will force the PRC to dedicate some effort to this front?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Joe Shearer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I would love to visit Sarnath one day.
> 
> I would also like to visit Bodh Gaya, the place where the Buddha attained enlightenment.
> 
> Bodh Gaya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Like I said, my family are mostly Buddhists so they would probably love the idea of visiting these places. I'm non-religious personally, but I would still go at least once in my life to see those places.



It is very easy to do so; large crowds from Asia go there, people from Thailand, Cambodia and the rest of south-east Asia, people from Mongolia, the Japanese, all are to be found there. Pick your season; before or after the rains, preferably in the 'cold' weather, when the heat will not kill you. Look up the facilities; there is accommodation at various layers of comfort and cost. Much of the infrastructure development has been done by a pious, worshipful Japan, and she has made a wonderful job of it. India owes her enormous gratitude for that.


----------



## baconlover

meh....Christianity FTW


----------



## Joe Shearer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Also, Ancient Chinese literature was highly influenced by Indian culture and Buddhism in particular. The most well-known example is "Journey to the West", where Sun Wukong and a Buddhist monk travel West to India, in order to obtain sacred Buddhist scrolls.
> 
> Journey to the West - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The Japanese then took our idea of the Monkey King, and turned it into Dragon Ball. The main character even has the exact same name as Sun Wukong, &#23403;&#24735;&#31354; (the Japanese pronounce it as Son Goku).



It might amuse you, on some future lazy Sunday afternoon, to look up the cultural antecedents of the Monkey King. 

In my personal opinion, the matter goes further even than that, into Indo-European linguistics and mythology. But I'd like you to browse through those fascinating possibilities for yourself first ;-)


----------



## Joe Shearer

dezi said:


> Yes Developereo... I agree with the stats that it is still a minority religion... I said it is picking up in some places and social circles mostly amongst the educated and urban class indians ... but it would still be a minority religion for a long long time in India if that is what you wanted to point out by the stats.
> 
> Following Buddhism does not always mean that you have to give away your birth religion. I have often see people who claim they are Hindus, but actively follow principles of Buddhism.



Indeed.

In the same line of discussion, it is worth pointing out that Buddhism swept through the sub-continent, through its different kingdoms and states, to peak in or around 100 BC to 400 AD. There were attempts at reviving Hinduism, after the priests recovered from the shock of religious, cultural and finally social and economic overthrow. However, the big reformation of Hinduism, which led to a desiccation of its formerly rich philosophical systems, down to Vedanta alone, occurred during the time of Sankaracharya (800 AD). There was a period of a further tussle for another four centuries, but Islam was a greater enemy of Buddhism than any other previous religion had been, and it proved to be its mortal enemy, eradicating it on a large scale in wide parts of the country. 

Those parts of India that survived the social, economic and cultural pressure to convert to Islam were generally regions where Buddhism was never very strong: the extreme south, for instance, although there has been an Asokan pillar found even in Madurai. These parts later led a drive towards conflating the two religions. One visible, iconic sign of this assimilating tendency is the famous ten avatars of Vishnu: the last avatar but one, the last avatar that has arrived is the Buddha himself.

Shades of the Borgs.


----------



## huzihaidao12

Joe Shearer said:


> You are not being a party-pooper, merely ignorant. I say this not with rancor or to put you down, but as an assessment of fact. If you take the trouble to go through the responses to your several theses below, you will understand that my response to your post is that with sufficient information and knowledge, you might not have written that post; another of its sort, perhaps, that vents your spleen, but not that precise one.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no particular necessity for fraternal feeling to be based on shared (not mutual) enmity for the white man. In fact, this is hardly possible given the widespread occurrence of bananas and coconuts.
> 
> The only reason why the white man comes in again and again is because they have been the most recent oppressors in South Asia, and the most recent but one in China.
> 
> Finally, don't you feel silly quoting Asian disagreements as a reason for fraternal feeling not to be present, given that the example of the European Union stares you in the face? There is nothing that one Asian has done to another that has not been exceeded many times over by the Europeans in their dealings with one another. And yet France and Germany are at peace with one another, support each other in the EU, enter into complex business arrangements and build a whole generation of polyglot businessmen, from whose spoken languages, it is impossible to tell if they are French or German. Sometimes, in spite of there being many shared names, their names are the only way to tell.
> 
> 
> 
> Please do a quick check of the order of battle of the Indian Army.
> 
> 23 divisions out of 33 are oriented towards Pakistan. 10 are oriented to China. China has the capability of the following:
> 
> 
> Deploy one (mountain) brigade in 8 hours at any point of the Sino-Indian frontier;
> Deploy one (mountain) division on the frontier within 24 hours (one phase of an airlift is the way it is phrased in the original, where it also states that a brigade now takes 8 hours to deploy);
> The quick reaction force of 4 divisions within 4 days, to any frontier or any part of the PRC;
> Up to 10 divisions within 15 days, on any frontier;
> Up to 25 divisions within 30 days.
> 
> Does this tell you where the focus of the Indian Army is? Does it tell you which potential hostile power it considers more dangerous and unpredictable, above all, unpredictable? Hint: it isn't PRC.
> 
> 
> 
> A superb argument. Worthy of your acumen and intellectual grasp of the matter.
> 
> Arguing in reverse, therefore, we can re-write sub-continental history, as there is shared culture on the sub-continent, as well as being not only on the same continent, but within the rather narrow confines of the same sub-continent.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us about it!
> 
> However, let us read on; the essential indefensibility of this position appears very clearly further on.
> 
> 
> 
> The only reason that there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is because China's *trajectory of expansion *was by way of Qing Hai, Xijang and Xinjiang. If it continues, it will be through Kazakhstan and Baltistan.
> 
> China has always sought to consolidate its northern and western boundaries; its western boundaries were forcefully defined by the Arabs first, but subsequently and without let-up, China has challenged those frontiers, fought the Turks to a standstill at a huge distance from her own power centres, and then annexed Xinjiang. There are no explicit threats to the west any more; threats to the north have disappeared, with the crumbling of the Soviets; threats to the south were put on the shelf of history many centuries ago, and threats to the east are its primary concern today.
> 
> Note that there is no desire to 'expand' to the east, as Taiwan is already considered part of China, but being ruled by an adversarial political system, still Chinese in every respect.
> 
> In contrast, India has always had a defensive and inward-looking mindset; this is staple historical analysis, and is fed with the future history scholar's baby food. In an ironically mistaken posting by one of your good friends from Bangladesh, this was described by the Brookings Institute as a policy of _*strategic restraint*_.
> 
> A brilliant phrase, an epigram which sums up the whole situation.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should consider a look at the trade figures and the breakdown of those figures. It might help illuminate the matter.
> 
> 
> 
> No, China doesn't need India as an ally at all. China has a perfectly viable alternative; to lock herself into the same gangrened point of view as other, traditional rivals of India, in spite of the dreadful example of what results thereby. On the whole, she might prefer an alliance, or, properly speaking, friendly relations with mutual self-respect.
> 
> Why would she wantonly frighten India into building her arsenals to levels that will force the PRC to dedicate some effort to this front?



I do not vote in the "Indian restraint", in fact, India has a very aggressive, you know, "south" policy is a policy of aggressive enough, even now, India does not solve the problem any one country's borders, in Nepal, Bangladesh , Sri Lanka and even Pakistan, these smaller all countries than India, India has sufficient aggressive performance, which is ambitious, India is not a "restraint", simply because there is no ability, no major show.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## huzihaidao12

If you say "strategic restraint" is also right, because there is no capacity, so a temporary restraint, in the strategy, but not peace and goodwill wishes.


----------



## Developereo

Joe Shearer said:


> This makes astonishing reading.
> 
> Do you have any further basis for this strange assertion?



Buddhism is not the basis of a shared culture between India and China. Certainly, there may be ancient historical sites of interest to Buddhists, as a sort of pilgrimage destination, but that's about it.

India has 0.8&#37; Buddhists. USA has 1.7% Buddhists.
By that logic, USA shares more 'culture' with China than India does.



Joe Shearer said:


> You are not being a party-pooper, merely ignorant. I say this not with rancor or to put you down, but as an assessment of fact. If you take the trouble to go through the responses to your several theses below, you will understand that my response to your post is that with sufficient information and knowledge, you might not have written that post; another of its sort, perhaps, that vents your spleen, but not that precise one.



Let's rock... 



Joe Shearer said:


> There is no particular necessity for fraternal feeling to be based on shared (not mutual) enmity for the white man. In fact, this is hardly possible given the widespread occurrence of bananas and coconuts.
> 
> The only reason why the white man comes in again and again is because they have been the most recent oppressors in South Asia, and the most recent but one in China.



Except that the threat of the 'evil white man' v/s the Asian brothers is the most oft-quoted reason for India-China friendship. Take away the bogey of the 'evil white man' and the whole premise falls apart.



Joe Shearer said:


> Finally, don't you feel silly quoting Asian disagreements as a reason for fraternal feeling not to be present, given that the example of the European Union stares you in the face?



Not at all.
This is precisely where the part about 'shared culture' comes in. Clearly you missed the connection between these two points, so I will explain below. Stay tuned...



Joe Shearer said:


> Does this tell you where the focus of the Indian Army is? Does it tell you which potential hostile power it considers more dangerous and unpredictable, above all, unpredictable? Hint: it isn't PRC.



The Indian military, by its own account, has more than enough resources to deal with Pakistan. Its focus now is to handle both fronts simultaneously. This is not just me talking. This is the Indian military's official position, as reported in one of the Indian chest thumping threads on this very forum.



Joe Shearer said:


> A superb argument. Worthy of your acumen and intellectual grasp of the matter.



Why, thank you. 



Joe Shearer said:


> Arguing in reverse, therefore, we can re-write sub-continental history, as there is shared culture on the sub-continent, as well as being not only on the same continent, but within the rather narrow confines of the same sub-continent.



No need to go in reverse; let's stay in forward gear.
Coming back to your comparison to the EU, yes they fought mortal battles with each other over the centuries, yet they are now joined together. The reason for that union is shared culture. All the countries in the EU share (variants of) a common religion, culture and much history.

There is no such parallel when it comes to India and China. They have almost nothing in common in terms of history, culture, religion, language... Nothing. Zilch. Nada!

Except the bogey of the 'evil white man', of course.



Joe Shearer said:


> The only reason that there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is because China's *trajectory of expansion *was by way of Qing Hai, Xijang and Xinjiang. If it continues, it will be through Kazakhstan and Baltistan.



As others have pointed out, it was mostly a geographical accident because of the Himalayas. There were some brief clashes, but neither side followed through.



Joe Shearer said:


> India has always had a defensive and inward-looking mindset



Utter nonsense. Your Akhand Bharat friends will be happy to regale you with tales of Indian conquests spanning from Burma through the Middle East. The only reason India didn't invade China was, again, because of the Himalayas.



Joe Shearer said:


> Perhaps you should consider a look at the trade figures and the breakdown of those figures. It might help illuminate the matter.



It certainly does. The bilateral trade stands at 60 billion. An insignificant pimple compared to the GDP of either country.



Joe Shearer said:


> No, China doesn't need India as an ally at all. China has a perfectly viable alternative; to lock herself into the same gangrened point of view as other, traditional rivals of India, in spite of the dreadful example of what results thereby. On the whole, she might prefer an alliance, or, properly speaking, friendly relations with mutual self-respect.



China knows exactly what game India is playing. And so does everyone else.


----------



## justanobserver

Joe Shearer said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Those parts of India that survived the social, economic and cultural pressure to convert to Islam were generally regions where Buddhism was never very strong: the extreme south, for instance, although there has been an Asokan pillar found even in Madurai. These parts later led a drive towards conflating the two religions. One visible, iconic sign of this assimilating tendency is the famous ten avatars of Vishnu: the last avatar but one, the last avatar that has arrived is the Buddha himself.
> 
> Shades of the Borgs.



I think the process of assimilation started much before the advent of Islam, many of the new ideas of Jainism and Buddhism were injected into mainstream Hinduism during Ashokan times.

In that sense Buddhism has not been wiped out, there is just too much shared culture !

Unfortunately our neighbors will view it through an Abrahamic prism and quote absolute numbers and percentages


----------



## Joe Shearer

huzihaidao12 said:


> I do not vote in the "Indian restraint", in fact, India has a very aggressive, you know, "south" policy is a policy of aggressive enough, even now, India does not solve the problem any one country's borders, in Nepal, Bangladesh , Sri Lanka and even Pakistan, these smaller all countries than India, India has sufficient aggressive performance, which is ambitious, India is not a "restraint", simply because there is no ability, no major show.



Isn't this hostile perception and simply that? There is no problem with Nepal's borders; there is no problem with Sri Lanka's borders; the problem with Bangladesh' borders amount to tiny handkerchief sized patches of land of a few acres each, which were not transferred during partition because they were owned by private owners and the transfer laws never transferred private title (as you can look up, Jinnah owned his own house in Bombay until the date he died). And the problem therefore boils down to the problems with Pakistan. 

For the rest, there are tensions with Nepalese governments from time to time, as there have been in the past during their spasms of royal misrule, but seven regiments of infantry are still largely Nepali citizens, literally millions of Nepalis earn livings within India, and the bulk of her hydel power finds outlets in India. So too with Sri Lanka; other than the issues related to the Tamil minority, there has been no specific issue between the two countries. The only one that existed was resolved by India ceding the island in question to Sri Lanka.

I am afraid India's 'aggression' is a synthetic element, of doubtful or no value.


----------



## huzihaidao12

Joe Shearer said:


> Isn't this hostile perception and simply that? There is no problem with Nepal's borders; there is no problem with Sri Lanka's borders; the problem with Bangladesh' borders amount to tiny handkerchief sized patches of land of a few acres each, which were not transferred during partition because they were owned by private owners and the transfer laws never transferred private title (as you can look up, Jinnah owned his own house in Bombay until the date he died). And the problem therefore boils down to the problems with Pakistan.
> 
> For the rest, there are tensions with Nepalese governments from time to time, as there have been in the past during their spasms of royal misrule, but seven regiments of infantry are still largely Nepali citizens, literally millions of Nepalis earn livings within India, and the bulk of her hydel power finds outlets in India. So too with Sri Lanka; other than the issues related to the Tamil minority, there has been no specific issue between the two countries. The only one that existed was resolved by India ceding the island in question to Sri Lanka.
> 
> I am afraid India's 'aggression' is a synthetic element, of doubtful or no value.


Can you provide a variety of reasons, but I just ask you one word, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and even Bhutan's people also can give the same answer? This is not a hostile, but a reason, if you, India is really sincere, please go to resolve all border issues, and then with the results, I certainly agree that India's "restraint", or I would doubt it. I always wonder, India inherited the British imperialist style, in the territorial ambition, dedication, and foreign relations. I admit this is not the conclusion, I still need to see more.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## justanobserver

> India is really sincere, please go to resolve all border issues,



What border issues are you talking about?

Do you know we have an *open border* policy with Nepal and Bhutan? Their citizens can freely move into India and get all economic privleges

Sri Lanka have resolved the maritime dispute long ago

Pakistan, of course we have major issues

China, yes we have issues

Bangladesh we have minor issues


----------



## huzihaidao12

justanobserver said:


> What border issues are you talking about?
> 
> Do you know we have an *open border* policy with Nepal and Bhutan? Their citizens can freely move into India and get all economic privleges
> 
> Sri Lanka have resolved the maritime dispute long ago
> 
> Pakistan, of course we have major issues
> 
> China, yes we have issues
> 
> Bangladesh we have minor issues



You have answered some of your questions, big or small, India is likely that the small, but other countries may think that large, it is a symbol of national policy and even spiritual.

Also, I know that Bhutan and Nepal are not satisfied with the policy of India. Not to mention a number of unfriendly neighbors.

I did not say ordinary Indians, Indians are peace and optimism. I mean the elite of India by the British marks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## huzihaidao12

Also, a few days ago, I saw some Indian members of the remarks in a discussion, I agree it was a good discussion, and even Indian opposition China to develop economic relations with South Asia countrys. what a mentality? I can understand the military relationship, which is reasonable, but what is right in India against China and any country to develop economic relations? Any country and East Asia, Southeast Asia, the development of economic relations, China will not oppose, China has no right to oppose, I really do not understand what it is a state of mind, most Indians think so?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## justanobserver

> Also, I know that Bhutan and Nepal are not satisfied with the policy of India.



Come on, you're getting this India because you're on this particular forum, please check the opinions of a Nepali (nietzche), or some Indo-Nepali members (Indian Gurkha is one of them), and see where they stand. 

True we do have problems with the Maoists taking power in Nepal, but now they're in the decline

Bhutan? Bhutan is the most friendly neighbour of India


----------



## Joe Shearer

Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> This makes astonishing reading.
> 
> Do you have any further basis for this strange assertion?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buddhism is not the basis of a shared culture between India and China. Certainly, there may be ancient historical sites of interest to Buddhists, as a sort of pilgrimage destination, but that's about it.
> 
> India has 0.8% Buddhists. USA has 1.7% Buddhists.
> By that logic, USA shares more 'culture' with China than India does.
Click to expand...


Nonsense.

Regrettably, that merely shows that your understanding of Indian culture is limited to the dictates of the two nation theory and some light reading from Wikipedia, and a complete lack of knowledge of the different waves and stages in which Buddhism was propagated and spread in the world.

The entire history of the religious development of Hinduism from 600 BC onwards was first a fierce resistance to Buddhism, leading to a fairly severe defeat in terms of the adherence of people of all walks of life, followed by a painful re-appraisal, which among other things, involved assimilating Buddhist thought and doctrine into mainstream Hinduism. I have already mentioned the Buddha as an avatar; in addition, Tantricism spanned Buddhism and Hinduism alike and its ramifications were deep and significant. The entire revised preaching of Buddhism in Tibet in the 12th and 13th centuries, the basis on which the Dalai Lama was created, and later adopted as spiritual adviser by successive Mongolian and Chinese overlords, leading to a revised preaching of Buddhism in those lands, was entirely an offshoot of Tantric Buddhism. 

You may or may not be aware of the re-conversion of Buddhists initiated by Sankaracharya; while he succeeded in converting the philosophers and key intellectuals, Buddhism was alive and well and coexistent with Hinduism, and practised sometimes in parallel by royalty and common people alike, according to Chinese accounts, well into the 13th century. The story of the destruction of Buddhism in India is another story, and you are no doubt already familiar with it.

Finally, measuring culture by percentage points of a population is strange practice.

[Omitted]



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no particular necessity for fraternal feeling to be based on shared (not mutual) enmity for the white man. In fact, this is hardly possible given the widespread occurrence of bananas and coconuts.
> 
> The only reason why the white man comes in again and again is because they have been the most recent oppressors in South Asia, and the most recent but one in China.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the threat of the 'evil white man' v/s the Asian brothers is the most oft-quoted reason for India-China friendship. Take away the bogey of the 'evil white man' and the whole premise falls apart.
Click to expand...


We have already looked at the cultural factor, so sadly misunderstood by your lack of knowledge of the religions involved, and their overlap. But there are other factors.

What about economic cooperation? 

There is an increasing amount of so-called South-South trade and commerce, and of industrial cooperation, compared to the former North-South pattern. This single factor by itself is seen as causing huge changes in world power dispositions; the power of both China and India is seen in terms of the growth of economic power, in turn driven by trade and commerce, in turn increasingly trade and commerce with other Asian, African and South American partners. 

This is a major cause for the shift in attention of each of the states concerned, those growing faster than the former leaders, and the former leaders themselves, towards the new economies, towards Asia in general.



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, don't you feel silly quoting Asian disagreements as a reason for fraternal feeling not to be present, given that the example of the European Union stares you in the face?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.
> 
> This is precisely where the part about 'shared culture' comes in. Clearly you missed the connection between these two points, so I will explain below. Stay tuned...
Click to expand...






Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does this tell you where the focus of the Indian Army is? Does it tell you which potential hostile power it considers more dangerous and unpredictable, above all, unpredictable? Hint: it isn't PRC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Indian military, by its own account, has more than enough resources to deal with Pakistan. Its focus now is to handle both fronts simultaneously. This is not just me talking. This is the Indian military's official position, as reported in one of the Indian chest thumping threads on this very forum.
Click to expand...


Again, totally mistaken.

You have seen the figures; even when the focus is on fighting a possible two front war, which is indeed current doctrine, there is a clear understanding that much less needs to be done on the frontiers with China than has been done, and will remain in place on the frontiers with Pakistan.

Second, quoting a chest-thumping thread on this very forum is not a substitute for authentic information; we are surely not to take your misgivings as representative of Pakistani opinion, because we have only to travel to PTH, for instance, to find a completely different, far more credible set of Pakistani views. 



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> A superb argument. Worthy of your acumen and intellectual grasp of the matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why, thank you.
Click to expand...


At least you did not seek to defend the indefensible. We must be thankful for small mercies.



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arguing in reverse, therefore, we can re-write sub-continental history, as there is shared culture on the sub-continent, as well as being not only on the same continent, but within the rather narrow confines of the same sub-continent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need to go in reverse; let's stay in forward gear.
Click to expand...


Why should we abandon an argument because it displays the fallacy of yours? Why should we not pin you down to the fact that *greater* cultural compatibility within the sub-continent - shared languages, shared ethnicity, shared religions, shared cultures of private life, food, clothing, the works, does not lead to greater compatibility? Far from your fallacious argument that the EU succeeded because of greater cultural compatibility within itself?

If your argument about the EU is right, then South Asia is destined to unite; not a prospect which is pleasing to Indians, considering what comes into the mix. Do please consider other, more palatable arguments. All will be pleased.

The truth is of course that along with a certain minimal cultural compatibility, as already exists in ample measure among Asian countries, there has to be a readiness to join hands. This is hugely present in Europe, and has found expression; this is nascent but growing in Asia, and has yet to find greater expression than ASEAN and SAARC; and it is unlikely to find expression in South Asia, as long as Pakistan and India exist in their present forms.



Developereo said:


> Coming back to your comparison to the EU, yes they fought mortal battles with each other over the centuries, yet they are now joined together. The reason for that union is shared culture. All the countries in the EU share (variants of) a common religion, culture and much history.
> 
> There is no such parallel when it comes to India and China. They have almost nothing in common in terms of history, culture, religion, language... Nothing. Zilch. Nada!
> 
> Except the bogey of the 'evil white man', of course.



We've just been through this. As was explained already, shared religions, shared culture and all of history shared did not lead to cultural integration in South Asia. There was far greater cohesion of these factors in South Asia than there is even today in Europe.

This is obviously not the only factor. There have to be others. We are not discussing chemicals coming into contact with each other and forming compounds; far more goes into a union.

The factors that drive a union are partly cultural and partly economic, and both factors exist in Asia in general, and between India and China in particular. While there is unlikely to be more than proper and correct relations at the outset, there is little chance that in the medium term, the relationship will not grow, with or without an effect on other relationships. You must remember that a state in dissolution is unlikely to remain a viable member of a partnership, however ardently both sides desire it. 

No doubt you will work out the implications by yourself.



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only reason that there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is because China's trajectory of expansion was by way of Qing Hai, Xijang and Xinjiang. If it continues, it will be through Kazakhstan and Baltistan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As others have pointed out, it was mostly a geographical accident because of the Himalayas. There were some brief clashes, but neither side followed through.
Click to expand...


Again, it is necessary to point out that this is a view developed in ignorance of history and historical facts.

First, India and China never faced each other across the Himalayas for nearly 1,600 years of recorded history. Thereafter, China held her suzerainty over Tibet with a light hand, and there was never any occasion for China and any Indian state to clash, until the 20th century, when the PRC took direct control of Tibet. That was the only reason why there was no conflict across the Himalayas. 

Second, it is a myth that there was no military or political activity across the Himalayas. The Tibetans had penetrated across in the West all the way upto the Hindu Shahi kingdom at one stage; directly to the south, the greater Tibetan Empire extended into Bengal and parts of the Gangetic plains. 



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> India has always had a defensive and inward-looking mindset
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Utter nonsense. Your Akhand Bharat friends will be happy to regale you with tales of Indian conquests spanning from Burma through the Middle East. The only reason India didn't invade China was, again, because of the Himalayas.
Click to expand...


You will appreciate that a reference to unnamed Akhand Bharat friends is hardly either a factual or a logical response.

As a student of history, I can assure you that I am not aware of any such conquests, other than Chola domination of parts of South East Asia. None other existed historically. 

It is pathetic to cite the hypothetical statements of hypothetical others, when you are confronted with details and dates.



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should consider a look at the trade figures and the breakdown of those figures. It might help illuminate the matter.
> 
> 
> 
> It certainly does. The bilateral trade stands at 60 billion. An insignificant pimple compared to the GDP of either country.
Click to expand...


Really? How embarrassing. We should perhaps reach for the skies in future, and try to achieve, say, the corresponding Pakistan-China trade figures.

China set to become 4th biggest trade partner of Pakistan: MOFCOM official



Developereo said:


> Joe Shearer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, China doesn't need India as an ally at all. China has a perfectly viable alternative; to lock herself into the same gangrened point of view as other, traditional rivals of India, in spite of the dreadful example of what results thereby. On the whole, she might prefer an alliance, or, properly speaking, friendly relations with mutual self-respect.
> 
> 
> 
> China knows exactly what game India is playing. And so does everyone else.
Click to expand...


What does that remark add to the discussion? Besides adding local colour and drama?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## huzihaidao12

justanobserver said:


> Come on, you're getting this India because you're on this particular forum, please check the opinions of a Nepali (nietzche), or some Indo-Nepali members (Indian Gurkha is one of them), and see where they stand.
> 
> True we do have problems with the Maoists taking power in Nepal, but now they're in the decline
> 
> Bhutan? Bhutan is the most friendly neighbour of India



Here is a difference, and in any case, I can not bring a proof, you're not enough to make me believe. We held in abeyance.


----------



## huzihaidao12

Joe Shearer, I agree with most of your view, China and India to develop a better relationship, as long as leaders smart enough.


----------



## Joe Shearer

huzihaidao12 said:


> Can you provide a variety of reasons, but I just ask you one word, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and even Bhutan's people also can give the same answer? This is not a hostile, but a reason, if you, India is really sincere, please go to resolve all border issues, and then with the results, I certainly agree that India's "restraint", or I would doubt it. I always wonder, India inherited the British imperialist style, in the territorial ambition, dedication, and foreign relations. I admit this is not the conclusion, I still need to see more.



Please provide me with some facts that I can respond to, rather than conjecture.

This is like asking an unmarried man to stop beating his wife.

You mention Sri Lankan, Nepalese and Bhutanese people giving the same answer. What answer? Where? Can you cite some instances? Suppose I were to respond saying I have personally met all the people you heard from, satisfied them, and they are now happy? Would you not find it ridiculous?

We can resolve border issues when there are border issues. With these three states, there are in fact no border issues. If you believe that there are, again, please cite facts.

Regarding territorial ambition, dedication and foreign relations, I can categorically inform you, and this is a knowledgeable and fact-based statement, it is a fact that Indian policy from 1947 onwards is confined to relations with her immediate neighbours, whereas British Indian policy was hugely different. For instance, Aden and Burma were part of the British Indian military command. Independent India has no such territorial ambitions, as the paper that we have been discussing puts forth in such authentic academic detail. If you have contrary evidence, can you please produce it?

If you have no such facts, do you not agree that it is incorrect to continue to make accusations?


----------



## cloneman

huzihaidao12 said:


> Joe Shearer, I agree with most of your view,* China and India to develop a better relationship*, as long as leaders smart enough.


Whats the better relation with India? And better relation for what?


----------



## justanobserver

> We can resolve border issues when there are border issues. *With these three states, there are in fact no border issues.* If you believe that there are, again, please cite facts.



Exactly !


----------



## Joe Shearer

huzihaidao12 said:


> Here is a difference, and in any case, I can not bring a proof, you're not enough to make me believe. We held in abeyance.



Dear Sir,

I believe that you have brought yourself into an awkward position due to accusations by two other purported Chinese posters, in another thread, of excessive friendliness being shown by you to India and to Indian posters. 

It is understandable that you should try to prove your integrity to both Chinese (even false-flag Chinese like challenger) and Pakistani readers. I applaud your loyalty. Unfortunately, it is difficult to applaud your logic or facts.

Here, it was you who initiated the charges that other neighbours were unhappy with us. Except for Pakistan and sometimes Bangladesh, nobody else has any problems that you can cite. No Indian made any statements bearing on this issue, so where is the question of proving something that never existed? Why should we do anything at all until you have something concrete to say?

Please be sure, you are welcome to make any statement that you like, and it will be acceptable, as it is a free forum, and all of us are free to make statements. However, if you wish to discuss any matter, then you have to not only make a statement but to produce evidence backing that statement, otherwise you will yourself agree that there cannot be a discussion.

On my side, you will always find facts. That is my personal assurance. However, I cannot deal with conjecture or supposition.

Regards,


----------



## huzihaidao12

cloneman said:


> Whats the better relation with India? And better relation for what?



The relationship between stability and rational.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

huzihaidao12 said:


> Joe Shearer, I agree with most of your view, China and India to develop a better relationship, as long as leaders smart enough.





That is a most gratifying remark. I agree with you in principle.

However please permit me to add a couple of words.

My basic academic discipline is history. While my current political point of view is social democracy, my history is Marxian (not Marxist, not Communist; I do not wish to bore you with the differences). For this reason, I believe that there are objective reasons for China and India to become closer to each other, beyond the *idealist*, anti-materialist scope of _leadership_, whatever that is, and beyond the *personality cult* of _leaders_.

It is with that conviction, and not from a propaganda point of view, that I view these matters. if you examine my posts, you will find that all of them are consistent in this regard, and with a secular, democratic position.


----------



## challenger

Joe Shearer said:


> Dear Sir,
> 
> I believe that you have brought yourself into an awkward position due to accusations by two other purported Chinese posters, in another thread, of excessive friendliness being shown by you to India and to Indian posters.
> 
> It is understandable that you should try to prove your integrity to both Chinese (even false-flag Chinese like challenger) and Pakistani readers. I applaud your loyalty. Unfortunately, it is difficult to applaud your logic or facts.
> 
> Here, it was you who initiated the charges that other neighbours were unhappy with us. Except for Pakistan and sometimes Bangladesh, nobody else has any problems that you can cite. No Indian made any statements bearing on this issue, so where is the question of proving something that never existed? Why should we do anything at all until you have something concrete to say?
> 
> Please be sure, you are welcome to make any statement that you like, and it will be acceptable, as it is a free forum, and all of us are free to make statements. However, if you wish to discuss any matter, then you have to not only make a statement but to produce evidence backing that statement, otherwise you will yourself agree that there cannot be a discussion.
> 
> On my side, you will always find facts. That is my personal assurance. However, I cannot deal with conjecture or supposition.
> 
> Regards,



There is a kind of psychological disorder. I think its genetic, or may be birth defection. 

Its called masochism. What happens here is that a person feels extreme pleasure (psycho-sexual type) by receiving punishment (physical and psychological). 

Those Chinese members who feel great... e x t r e m e pleasure... when indians bash them are victims of this psychological disorder. It might happen in reality that if any indian punches on his face, he considers him his friend. If the indian does not punch, the person feels unhappy and reject the indian from his friends' list. 

There are people who themselves want to be beaten by their enemies. They are masochists and to them the enemies are friends and friends are enemies. That is their dictionary, I mean, definitions are reversed. 

I am sorry, I am not a masochist. To me, an enemy is enemy and friend is friend.

---------- Post added at 08:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 PM ----------




cloneman said:


> Whats the better relation with India? And better relation for what?



God knows...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

huzihaidao12 said:


> Also, a few days ago, I saw some Indian members of the remarks in a discussion, I agree it was a good discussion, and even Indian opposition China to develop economic relations with South Asia countrys. what a mentality? I can understand the military relationship, which is reasonable, but what is right in India against China and any country to develop economic relations? Any country and East Asia, Southeast Asia, the development of economic relations, China will not oppose, China has no right to oppose, I really do not understand what it is a state of mind, most Indians think so?



I beg your pardon for flooding you with small replies on a dozen different issues, but I just saw this; it is remarkable enough to require immediate mention.

It is appalling that any person, of any country, should object to economic and other relations developing between any other two nations under discussion. Such a person, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or Chinese, needs psychoanalytical help immediately.

I am very sorry that you have encountered such an attitude. I am even more unhappy that an Indian is said to have expressed such bizarre and anti-people views. This is deeply regrettable.

I hope that it does not need saying that such a quarrelsome and aggressive point of view is one that is completely unacceptable to any reasonable Indian.


----------



## huzihaidao12

Joe Shearer said:


> Please provide me with some facts that I can respond to, rather than conjecture.
> 
> This is like asking an unmarried man to stop beating his wife.
> 
> You mention Sri Lankan, Nepalese and Bhutanese people giving the same answer. What answer? Where? Can you cite some instances? Suppose I were to respond saying I have personally met all the people you heard from, satisfied them, and they are now happy? Would you not find it ridiculous?
> 
> We can resolve border issues when there are border issues. With these three states, there are in fact no border issues. If you believe that there are, again, please cite facts.
> 
> Regarding territorial ambition, dedication and foreign relations, I can categorically inform you, and this is a knowledgeable and fact-based statement, it is a fact that Indian policy from 1947 onwards is confined to relations with her immediate neighbours, whereas British Indian policy was hugely different. For instance, Aden and Burma were part of the British Indian military command. Independent India has no such territorial ambitions, as the paper that we have been discussing puts forth in such authentic academic detail. If you have contrary evidence, can you please produce it?
> 
> If you have no such facts, do you not agree that it is incorrect to continue to make accusations?



Do you mean India and China, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh border without any problem? Sri Lanka's maritime disputes? Not long ago I saw a news in the PDF. Bhutan some cases, you can doubt it. For now, I can not give evidence. I have my sources, I believe, however, I think it is not enough to make you believe, here are some different. Do not debate, all my direct attitude

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

challenger said:


> There is a kind of psychological disorder. I think its genetic, or may be birth defection.
> 
> Its called masochism. What happens here is that a person feels extreme pleasure (psycho-sexual type) by receiving punishment (physical and psychological).
> 
> Those Chinese members who feel great... e x t r e m e pleasure... when indians bash them are victims of this psychological disorder. It might happen in reality that if any indian punches on his face, he considers him his friend. If the indian does not punch, the person feels unhappy and reject the indian from his friends' list.
> 
> There are people who themselves want to be beaten by their enemies. They are masochists and to them the enemies are friends and friends are enemies. That is their dictionary, I mean, definitions are reversed.
> 
> I am sorry, I am not a masochist. To me, an enemy is enemy and friend is friend.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 08:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> God knows...



It is interesting to read this post.

After having made a detailed confession of being dependent on facts, and on historical materialism, it is interesting to read the opposite point of view, one independent of fact, based entirely on figments of the imagination, and put forward by a self-confessed sufferer from delusions.

While these statements about masochists and psychiatry are fascinating as providing a clinical insight into the personality of the maker of the statements, they are of course devoid of any facts - as is to be expected. That is entirely consistently with this delusionary mindset. 

It is also consistent with the person who admits that he is not Chinese but insists on displaying a Chinese flag as identification. How much more delusionary can we get?


----------



## justanobserver

> Do you mean India and China, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh border without any problem?



India and Nepal, Bhutan and Srilanka have absolutely *no* disputes,

China, Pakistan and Bangladesh and India have disputes




> Sri Lanka's maritime disputes? Not long ago I saw a news in the _PDF._ Bhutan some cases, you can doubt it.



Remember that this is PDF afterall


----------



## huzihaidao12

Joe Shearer said:


> I beg your pardon for flooding you with small replies on a dozen different issues, but I just saw this; it is remarkable enough to require immediate mention.
> 
> It is appalling that any person, of any country, should object to economic and other relations developing between any other two nations under discussion. Such a person, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or Chinese, needs psychoanalytical help immediately.
> 
> I am very sorry that you have encountered such an attitude. I am even more unhappy that an Indian is said to have expressed such bizarre and anti-people views. This is deeply regrettable.
> 
> I hope that it does not need saying that such a quarrelsome and aggressive point of view is one that is completely unacceptable to any reasonable Indian.





In that discussion, the majority of the members of India there is no objection, and now 1 VS N. I hope you can represent the views of most Indians, I had reservations, temporary.


----------



## huzihaidao12

justanobserver said:


> India and Nepal, Bhutan and Srilanka have absolutely *no* disputes,
> 
> China, Pakistan and Bangladesh and India have disputes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remember that this is PDF afterall



Even India's news?

India and Nepal border issue, I'm sure.

Bhutan, I think, if you do not see any, held in abeyance.


----------



## challenger

I would like to ask all the great proponents of China india friendship to go to indian forums and sing the friendship song. 

But I know they would not go there. Because, if they join the indian forums as Chinese members, not only the indian forum members but also the administrators and moderators together would start verbally abusing them with racist overtones. 

Still, I think, those great proponents of friendship should not deprive themselves of the great experience they will enjoy in the indian forums. 

Just don't forget to count how many times the management of that indian forum calls you 'chink', a racist offensive term. Please go and enjoy incredible india...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cloneman

huzihaidao12 said:


> The relationship between stability and rational.



Then its a normal country to country relation.Nothing about better.


----------



## cloneman

challenger said:


> I would like to ask all the great proponents of China india friendship to go to indian forums and sing the friendship song.
> :



Any Chinese here has basic political sence will not do it.Theres no friendship between these two.The so called better relationship to China is justont bother to disrrupt me.Thats all.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## huzihaidao12

cloneman said:


> Then its a normal country to country relation.Nothing about better.



The problem is that it is not. Now the atmosphere is the tone of the conflict from time to time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## challenger

cloneman said:


> Any Chinese here has basic political sence will not do it.Theres no friendship between these two.The so called better relationship to China is justont bother to disrrupt me.Thats all.



Then get ready to translate some Chinese phrases to prove that you are a Chinese. 

Otherwise, you are using false flags and you are a Pakistani, not Chinese.  

They poisoned the spirit of the forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## siegecrossbow

challenger said:


> Then get ready to translate some Chinese phrases to prove that you are a Chinese.
> 
> Otherwise, you are using false flags and you are a Pakistani, not Chinese.
> 
> They poisoned the spirit of the forum.



If not participating in international mudslinging and treating others with condescension counts as poisoning the spirit of the forum then yes, I'm a great "poisoner".

No Chinese member accused you of being Pakistani. I don't care what nationality you are. What I want is for you to apologize for your idiotic remarks supporting Japanese brutalities during WWII.


----------



## cloneman

challenger said:


> Then get ready to translate some Chinese phrases to prove that you are a Chinese.
> 
> Otherwise, you are using false flags and you are a Pakistani, not Chinese.
> 
> They poisoned the spirit of the forum.



No friendship is true.But also no need to spread hate between the two countries.The best China India or Pak India relationships are that all the three countries calm down to live a real life.We dont need to cooperate,neither fight.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## maxx

challenger said:


> I would like to ask all the great proponents of China india friendship to go to indian forums and sing the friendship song.





challenger said:


> Still, I think, those great proponents of friendship should not deprive themselves of the great experience they will enjoy in the indian forums.


You are making a big drama out of nothing. There is no wedding here.



challenger said:


> But I know they would not go there. Because, if they join the indian forums as Chinese members, not only the indian forum members but also the administrators and moderators together would start verbally abusing them with racist overtones.





challenger said:


> Just don't forget to count how many times the management of that indian forum calls you 'chink', a racist offensive term. Please go and enjoy incredible india...


Who the f cares what they call you or me? Why do you even have interest in joining such juvenile forum in the first place? You should've just laughed and left.

Open your eyes and see the world, different people hold different opinions and will be like this until the end of time. If they don't hurt me, I don't care, and words shouldn't hurt you.

There are mature and immature people from both sides. Frankly, the mature people from either sides prefer to engage with their counterpart.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## challenger

cloneman said:


> No friendship is true.But also no need to spread hate between the two countries.The best China India or Pak India relationships are that all the three countries calm down to live a real life.We dont need to cooperate,neither fight.



I don't need to spread hatred wasting my time and paying internet charges. Indian media, politicians and public themselves are enough for that. 

Now, not fighting does not mean that China should support india to get UNSC membership. Why such contradictory moves by Beijing?


----------



## CardSharp

challenger said:


> I don't need to spread hatred wasting my time and paying internet charges. Indian media, politicians and public themselves are enough for that.
> 
> Now, not fighting does not mean that China should support india to get UNSC membership. Why such contradictory moves by Beijing?



Change your flag. Whatever the hell you are, you are not Chinese.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## challenger

siegecrossbow said:


> If not participating in international mudslinging and treating others with condescension counts as poisoning the spirit of the forum then yes, I'm a great "poisoner".
> 
> No Chinese member accused you of being Pakistani. I don't care what nationality you are. What I want is for you to apologize for your idiotic remarks supporting Japanese brutalities during WWII.



Again Japan!! 

OK, I will discuss with you in this matter. But not in SinoDef, not in PDF, I will discuss it in a state owned official Chinese media's forum. If you really are bothered then tell me where to meet. But not outside any official Chinese forum. You choose any official media which one is comfortable to you. 

Apart from PDF, I only trust official Chinese forums. I am sorry.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

challenger said:


> Now, not fighting does not mean that China should support india to get UNSC membership. Why such contradictory moves by Beijing?



You wouldn't understand because you're not Chinese.

Here is the official CCP line from Premier Wen Jiabao.

*China, India not opponents but partners: Chinese Premier - People's Daily Online*



> China and India were not competitive opponents but cooperative partners, said Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in Beijing on Tuesday.
> 
> "Only if China and India achieve common development and prosperity could we have a real Asia century," Wen Jiabao told Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry Anand Sharma.
> 
> Both China and India were large developing nations in Asia, and the total population of the two countries accounted for 40 percent of the world, Wen noted.
> 
> *The premier said his country would work with India to boost good-neighborly friendship*, increase coordinations in major international issues, and expand cooperation in trade, investment and other sectors in line with the principles of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefits.



So what this thread is doing, is simply an extension of what the CCP has already started to do.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> Change your flag. Whatever the hell you are, you are not Chinese.



Do you need any address of any indian forum?  

Tell me, how you will react to the indian mods of an indian forum when the mods will call you "chink...", a racist offensive term. I am curious to know.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## challenger

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You wouldn't understand because you're not Chinese.
> 
> Here is the official CCP line from Premier Wen Jiabao.
> 
> *China, India not opponents but partners: Chinese Premier - People's Daily*



Great read. Don't miss this one. 

*Who will protect Wen Jiabao?*

United Daily News: Who will protect Wen Jiabao? - CNA ENGLISH NEWS


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

challenger said:


> Great read. Don't miss this one.
> 
> *Who will protect Wen Jiabao?*
> 
> United Daily News: Who will protect Wen Jiabao? - CNA ENGLISH NEWS



That is a TAIWANESE news source, lol. 

Here are some news sources from *Offical CCP state media*. The People's Daily is an official mouthpiece of the CCP.

*'Dragon,' 'elephant' cooperation most rational choice - People's Daily Online*

*China, India not opponents but partners: Chinese Premier - People's Daily Online*


----------



## siegecrossbow

challenger said:


> Again Japan!!



Of course again Japan. How many times did I mention that I was born and raised in Nanjing?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

challenger said:


> Do you need any address of any indian forum?
> 
> Tell me, how you will react to the indian mods of an indian forum when the mods will call you "chink...", a racist offensive term. I am curious to know.



The only Indian forum I have seen doing that is BR, and it's impossible to join there anyway.

I'm a member of other forums and I have not seen such behaviour there. It depends on the moderation.


----------



## challenger

OK, I hate to say this, but sooner or later things will come out in public. Division has already been created in the leadership. I am with the PLA. You guys decide with whom you are.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

challenger said:


> OK, I hate to say this, but sooner or later things will come out in public. Division has already been created in the leadership. I am with the PLA. You guys decide with whom you are.



You are with the Japanese war criminals. You speak no Chinese at all, but you do speak Hindi/Urdu, so you are obviously not Chinese.

The CCP controls the PLA, you would know that if you were Chinese. 

The PLA is the military arm of the CCP. Hu Jintao is the head of the CMC which is the command and control of the Chinese armed forces.


----------



## challenger

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You are with the Japanese war criminals.
> 
> The CCP controls the PLA, you would know that if you were Chinese. The PLA is the military arm of the CCP, and civilian leaders are at the top of the CMC.



Yeah.. see who is teaching China's internal politics whom? 

That theoretical BS 'gone with the wind'. Its no longer existent.


----------



## siegecrossbow

challenger said:


> OK, I hate to say this, but sooner or later things will come out in public. Division has already been created in the leadership. I am with the PLA. You guys decide with whom you are.



So you are for a military coup so China could militarize and follow Japan's WWII example. You want China to go on a rampage against her neighbors and brutally kill millions of civilians in the process. Is that right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CardSharp

siegecrossbow said:


> So you are for a military coup so China could militarize and follow Japan's WWII example. You want China to go on a rampage against her neighbors and brutally kill millions of civilians in the process. Is that right?



It doesn't matter what he thinks. He has nothing to do with China. Simple as that. You guys keep forgetting he's not a Chinese citizen, he is not ethnic Chinese, he doesn't have family and ancestors in China. It would be like someone from Nigeria saying I support the PLA against the CCP. Ok? so what.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

challenger said:


> Yeah.. see who is teaching China's internal politics whom?
> 
> That theoretical BS 'gone with the wind'. Its no longer existent.



I'm teaching it to you because you obviously don't know anything about China.



CardSharp said:


> It doesn't matter what he thinks. He has nothing to do with China. Simple as that. You guys keep forgetting he's not a Chinese citizen, he is not ethnic Chinese, he doesn't have family and ancestors in China. It would be like someone from Nigeria saying I support the PLA against the CCP. Ok? so what.



Exactly right.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> It doesn't matter what he thinks. He has nothing to do with China. Simple as that. You guys keep forgetting he's not a Chinese citizen, he is not ethnic Chinese, he doesn't have family and ancestors in China. It would be like someone from Nigeria saying I support the PLA against the CCP. Ok? so what.



Hoy, what do you want? 

Do you want I abandon this account? 

Who sent you?


----------



## Anonymous_Clown

challenger said:


> Hoy, what do you want?
> 
> Do you want I abandon this account?
> 
> Who sent you?



It would be better for you if you abandon this account and come back in a different avatar with a new flag. You will save some face that way.

I'm sure I am not the only one who is finding it astounding that even after being so cleanly busted as being a flase-flag walla, you continue to brazen it out and accuse everyone else of being 'agents' and 'spies' and come up with conspiracy theories of 'why are all three online at the same time' (that is not even true btw, I paid special attention to that today).

And yeah, what's with all these heavy and deep, dire, dark conspiratorial hints, like this one:



> OK, I hate to say this, but sooner or later things will come out in public. Division has already been created in the leadership. I am with the PLA. You guys decide with whom you are.



Who are you, Wen's personal secretary or something? You have a ripe imagination!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## challenger

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I'm teaching it to you because you obviously don't know anything about China.
> 
> Exactly right.




I told five minutes. Let me see how much Chinese you are. Thats official forum. No no no, kid... proxies won't work there. Come. Lets talk. Errr... two mins left. 

One min... few secs.

Time Up.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> No, I suggest you abandon your hindi grammar mistakes and learn what grammar mistakes people who actually speak chinese make...
> 
> But I suspect that's too much to ask
> 
> You're a joke. Your proof of Chineseness is membership on a public forum?



I wanted to see how much Chinese the Chinese dragon is. Thats public forum but owned by the Chinese govt. If he is Chinese, then what is his problem to come to there? 

Or is he afraid that his IP will be documented there? 

You also wanna speak Chinese, no? You too can join. Open invitation to all who say they are Chinese. Let me see how much Chinese you guys are and how much Chinese you can speak. 

Thats your own country's forum, buddy... your own govt's website.



> Again how about a picture, a passport with a Chinese place of birth. I'll match document for document including birth certificate.



I will give you every details of mine, but one condition, you have to join that govt website.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> Fine give me the URL but why are you afraid to post here?
> 
> Why can't you read or understand Chinese? Answer me that.



Check PM box. I will tell you everything... but let me first know who you are. Lecturing me... about Chinese.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> Haha this is funny. You say you would send me your details when I register and now you say I have to send mine first? No one here doubts my being Chinese except you. I think the burden of proof is on you. Send proof or shutup
> 
> I choose the name challenger23 btw



Thanks. I never asked you to send anything. Your IP is more than enough. Don't put fake words into my mouth. I am leaving this forum. See you there. Some mod will be waiting for you there.


----------



## Anonymous_Clown

Errrm... this is insane. Why go and get the IP logged on a web site and make oneself possibly traceable in response to an anonymous request on the internet from someone obviously fake?


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> I'm still logged in on the people's daily bbs and waiting for your documents. Crayon on construction paper doesn't count as official documents btw.
> 
> What is your deal you don't speak Chinese, you write english like a hindi/urdu speaker, and you won't show anyone what you look like.
> 
> You're pathetic.



What the.... !! Where is chllenger23? No body got registered by that name in the past one hour. 

Did I give you people's daily link? Are you kidding me? You check the link, I gave you. 

Are you harassing me?


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> This retarded. Posts reported.



This retarded? 

You think, mods can't access to your PM box.  

Chineseness vanished...


----------



## pankaj agrawal

@cardsharp..buddy, challenger is not a chinese member, few days back he got busted.


----------



## Kharavela

cloneman said:


> No friendship is true.But also no need to spread hate between the two countries.The best China India or Pak India relationships are that all the three countries calm down to live a real life.We dont need to cooperate,neither fight.



I really appriciate


----------



## CardSharp

pankaj agrawal said:


> @cardsharp..buddy, challenger is not a chinese member, few days back he got busted.



You're right, I don't why I bothered.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> You're right, I don't why I bothered.



This guy *cardsharp* has no relationship with PRC. He may speak Chinese, but has no relationship with PRC. 

I gave this guy CD BBS link, but he deliberately tried to confuse others by saying i gave him People's Daily forum link. 

Mods, you are free to check his PM box and see what I am saying is right or wrong. 

Now, Chinese dragon... well, I need to expose him too. 

Only siegecrossbow... seems to be genuine, as far as i latest info is concerned.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

pankaj agrawal said:


> @cardsharp..buddy, challenger is not a chinese member, few days back he got busted.



Exactly right.


----------



## CardSharp

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Exactly right.



This is going totally off topic. I've wasted a whole page of posts arguing with this idiot. Let's keep it on topic.


----------



## Anonymous_Clown

Damn, this thread is getting retarded. Accusations, counter accusations, conspiracies, etc. etc. I feel like I'm watching a detective story.


----------



## challenger

CardSharp said:


> This is going totally off topic. I've wasted a whole page of posts arguing with this *idiot*. Let's keep it on topic.



Go, call your own father *idiot.*.. 

Please report my post. I am too tired to report it.


----------



## challenger

For information, 

ChinaDaily is a state run news website which has its own forum. ChinaDaily is in Beijing. So I gave him a govt website link.

*China Daily Website*

Add: 6/F, B3 Tower, Ziguang Building, No.11 Huixin Dongjie, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029, PRC

Tel: +86(10) 84883300

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## justanobserver

Urdu/Hindi translated into english, its a cultural thing 



> You* too* can join.



tum *bhi* join karsakte ho 

Why not "you can also join?"




> Thats *your own* country's forum



yeh *tumahare hi* desh ka forum hai 

Why not "That forum belongs to your own country"

You don't fool us dude, you're from the subcontinent

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kharavela

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Exactly right.



To be very honest ...i strongly feel all asian countries should emulate and follow the growth pattern that China has acheived. This is a remarkable feet for chinies Gov. I think, indian people always think different to China because its involvement and supporting Paksitan for its wrong deeds....Otherwise i strongly think there is a great deal of simillarity and respect for China and its people in India.....

When Indian Gov is preparing itself against China that should not be considered as offensive major...The reason is it is an acceptable fact that China is too poewrful to India. And if China and India can improve more about people to people to contact and i feel lot many misunderstanding can be removed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## siegecrossbow

I don't know about actual diplomatic relations but if we want to improve relations between Chinese and Indian members on this forum we need to see less threads like this:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/75086-dragon-closing-india-2.html#post1179062


----------



## CardSharp

siegecrossbow said:


> I don't know about actual diplomatic relations but if we want to improve relations between Chinese and Indian members on this forum we need to see less threads like this:
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/75086-dragon-closing-india-2.html#post1179062



There have been such articles since time immemorial. They are rubbish but they do reflect a general Indian mistrust of China. Government misinformation in 1962 plays a huge part in generating such opinions.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

CardSharp said:


> There have been such articles since time immemorial. They are rubbish but they do reflect a general Indian mistrust of China. *Government misinformation in 1962 plays a huge part in generating such opinions.*


----------



## baconlover

CardSharp said:


> There have been such articles since time immemorial. They are rubbish but they do reflect a general Indian mistrust of China. Government misinformation in 1962 plays a huge part in generating such opinions.



Indian media (hype) is oh so      

It's like the grand assembly of trolls from 4chan

(latest accomplishment: dumping turd on CWG)


----------



## Kharavela

siegecrossbow said:


> I don't know about actual diplomatic relations but if we want to improve relations between Chinese and Indian members on this forum we need to see less threads like this:
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/75086-dragon-closing-india-2.html#post1179062



I agree with you...


----------



## Developereo

challenger said:


> I would like to ask all the great proponents of China india friendship to go to indian forums and sing the friendship song.



Going to an Indian forum would mean getting a true representation of Indian views on China and Chinese people. Here on PDF we get two types of Indians: honest ones who share their personal opinions (pro- or anti-Pakistan); and devious ones whose main purpose is to spread propaganda (both anti-Pakistan and pro-India).



siegecrossbow said:


> No Chinese member accused you of being Pakistani.



Yes, but the Indians have been badgering him for ever.
According to them, Indians have a monopoly on certain phrases and nobody else in the world may use them.



challenger said:


> I am leaving this forum.



Please don't leave. We want to hear from more honest Chinese like you.

We want balance against the Indian apologist tag team of CardSharp/Chinese-Dragon who both show up at the same time, always support each other's posts, attack anyone who posts against India, and always post pro-India posts themselves.



justanobserver said:


> Urdu/Hindi translated into english, its a cultural thing
> 
> 
> 
> tum *bhi* join karsakte ho
> 
> Why not "you can also join?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeh *tumahare hi* desh ka forum hai
> 
> Why not "That forum belongs to your own country"
> 
> You don't fool us dude, you're from the subcontinent



These phrases are perfectly normal in everyday English, across the world.
If you think Indians have a monopoly on these phrases, you really need to get out more often.



siegecrossbow said:


> I don't know about actual diplomatic relations but if we want to improve relations between Chinese and Indian members on this forum we need to see less threads like this:
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/75086-dragon-closing-india-2.html#post1179062



Or this
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...ias-growth-will-outpace-chinas-economist.html

started by ... Chinese-Dragon (_quelle surprise_!)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Developereo said:


> We want to hear from more honest Chinese like you.



You do know that he is an apologist for Japanese war crimes? And that he's not even Chinese?

Side with the Hindi/Urdu speaking fake Chinese guy if you want.

You'll just alienate the real Chinese, like you have already done to me.


----------



## Kharavela

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You do know that he is an apologist for Japanese war crimes? And that he's not even Chinese?
> 
> Side with the Hindi/Urdu speaking fake Chinese guy if you want.
> 
> You'll just alienate the real Chinese, like you have already done to me.



I beleive....sensible people should not involve with fighting who is chines or not...I always find a strange thing ....all of Pakistani friends always cites example of China and its progress to showcase that India is lagging behind and they make themselves happy...But the fact is even India and its people accept that China and its growth is a reallity and its a growing superpower..but why you guys are jumping about....becoz..you should take credit for the things that you have done rather than someone else has done.....

Simillarly here, if any chinies friends support India...then Pak friends are behind him to prove that he is not from China...how ridiculous...Come on man...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Kharavela said:


> Simillarly here, if any chinies friends support India...then Pak friends are behind him to prove that he is not from China...how ridiculous...Come on man...



Exactly. 

I challenge "Developereo" to look through my post history, and find even ONE SINGLE post in which I say something negative about Pakistan. It doesn't exist.

But when I say nice things about India, suddenly he starts calling me a "cyberagent" and other such nonsense.

Developereo, even the CCP Government says nice things about India. Does that mean our Premier Wen Jiabao is also a "cyberagent"?

*China, India not opponents but partners: Chinese Premier - People's Daily Online*


----------



## Developereo

Joe Shearer said:


> [History of Buddhism in India]



Nobody is disputing the history of Buddhism in India or its influence on Hinduism. The point under discussion is how much of that is relevant today. We are not living in the 12th century, this is the 21st century and the fact is that Buddhism is all but non-existant in modern day India, except for some historical sites.

An average Chinese or Japanese Buddhist would find precious little in common if he went to a Hindu temple.



Joe Shearer said:


> Finally, measuring culture by percentage points of a population is strange practice.



In a thread full of vague assertions and irrelevant ancient history, this is one of the few contemporary facts to disprove the patently false assertion of 'common culture'.



Joe Shearer said:


> We have already looked at the cultural factor, so sadly misunderstood by your lack of knowledge of the religions involved, and their overlap.



Not misunderstood, exposed.
If you want to dress up ancient history as indicative of modern day shared culture, keep trying. But it will be an uphill battle against the facts.

Like I said, your entire premise is analogous to saying that the USA has 'common culture' with Iraq because they still use the ancient Babylonian system of base-60. (60 seconds, 60 minutes, 360 degrees, ...)



Joe Shearer said:


> What about economic cooperation?



What about economics? Like I said, bilateral trade is insignificant in terms of total GDP for either country.

And, in any case, it is irrelevant. China's trade with the West is far greater but both side are well aware of the two-way threat-perception.

Why on Earth would China want to build up India as a regional competitor?



Joe Shearer said:


> Second, quoting a chest-thumping thread on this very forum is not a substitute for authentic information



The chest-thumping thread quoted an official statement by the Indian military chief.

That's the point, and one which you have already acknowledged. India is building up militarily against China. Point closed.



Joe Shearer said:


> At least you did not seek to defend the indefensible. We must be thankful for small mercies.



Actually, I already demolished your lame argument of a 'shared culture' between India and China, so there was nothing more to do.



Joe Shearer said:


> Why should we abandon an argument because it displays the fallacy of yours? Why should we not pin you down to the fact that *greater* cultural compatibility within the sub-continent - shared languages, shared ethnicity, shared religions, shared cultures of private life, food, clothing, the works, does not lead to greater compatibility?



I see the problem.
You are displaying the classic logical fallacy of reverse causation, so let's have a little lesson in logic...

My statement is that shared culture is a necessary condition for a voluntary shared union, such as the EU, to exist. I never claimed that it, by itself, is a sufficient condition for such a union.

In logic, there is the concept of "necessary, but not sufficient". For example, oxygen is necessary for (aerobic) life to exist, but it doesn't mean that life will be present everywhere just because there is oxygen.



Joe Shearer said:


> The factors that drive a union are partly cultural and partly economic, and both factors exist in Asia in general, and between India and China in particular.



No they don't. The concept of an India-China union is missing the essential ingredient of shared anything. India and China do not share culture, religion, language, history, nothing!

It doesn't preclude trade relations and cautious 'friendship' but don't believe for one second that India wouldn't stab China in the back if it got a better deal with the West.



Joe Shearer said:


> You must remember that a state in dissolution is unlikely to remain a viable member of a partnership, however ardently both sides desire it.
> 
> No doubt you will work out the implications by yourself.



Pakistan/China relations, and the political future of Pakistan, are not the subject of this discussion.



Joe Shearer said:


> Again, it is necessary to point out that this is a view developed in ignorance of history and historical facts.



You say I am ignorant, then you confirm what I just wrote. Let's review...

I wrote:



> it was mostly a geographical accident because of the Himalayas. There were some brief clashes, but neither side followed through



And you wrote:



Joe Shearer said:


> First, India and China never faced each other across the Himalayas for nearly 1,600 years of recorded history.[...]
> Second, it is a myth that there was no military or political activity across the Himalayas. The Tibetans had penetrated across in the West all the way upto the Hindu Shahi kingdom at one stage; directly to the south, the greater Tibetan Empire extended into Bengal and parts of the Gangetic plains.



So you are saying that Tibetans (whom Indians consider Indians, not Chinese, by the way) penetrated India. Wonderful! But there was no Indian entry into China proper, ever, other than Buddhism.



Joe Shearer said:


> You will appreciate that a reference to unnamed Akhand Bharat friends is hardly either a factual or a logical response.
> 
> As a student of history, I can assure you that I am not aware of any such conquests, other than Chola domination of parts of South East Asia. None other existed historically.
> 
> It is pathetic to cite the hypothetical statements of hypothetical others, when you are confronted with details and dates.



Here's one of many assertions by Indians about 'ancient India'.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/23654-future-china-india-relations-27.html#post1176703

Maybe you guys can compare notes and figure out which version of the propaganda you want to promote...



Joe Shearer said:


> Really? How embarrassing. We should perhaps reach for the skies in future, and try to achieve, say, the corresponding Pakistan-China trade figures.



Again, you are resorting to detractions when you can't refute a point.



Joe Shearer said:


> What does that remark add to the discussion? Besides adding local colour and drama?



It sums up the whole debate. Indian propagandists want to promote a false image of 'friendship' with China, but India's actions and history belie that claim. You yourself are surely sincere in your belief of friendship, but the Indian leadership, and much of Indian media, is not with you.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> Here's one of many assertions by Indians about 'ancient India'.
> Future China India Relations



What are many Indians assertions? In your point of view?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Developereo said:


> *Indian propagandists want to promote a false image of 'friendship' with China, but India's actions and history belie that claim.*



Do you consider our Premier Wen Jiabao to be an "Indian propagandist"?



> "Only if China and India achieve common development and prosperity could we have a real Asia century," Wen Jiabao told Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry Anand Sharma.
> 
> Both China and India were large developing nations in Asia, and the total population of the two countries accounted for 40 percent of the world, Wen noted.
> 
> *The premier said his country would work with India to boost good-neighborly friendship*, increase coordinations in major international issues, and expand cooperation in trade, investment and other sectors in line with the principles of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefits.



http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6873372.html


----------



## StingRoy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Do you consider our Premier Wen Jiabao to be an "Indian propagandist"?


No, He wants to prove that just because China and Pakistan are strong allies, India (Pakistan's arch enemy) cannot have friendly ties with China. I can understand his frustration trying to impose an opinion on a few Chinese members who are trying to look beyond history and into the future growth of their economies.

Both India and China realize the importance of working together to fight off western dominance over the world economy.


----------



## oceanx

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You do know that he is an apologist for Japanese war crimes? And that he's not even Chinese?
> 
> Side with the Hindi/Urdu speaking fake Chinese guy if you want.
> 
> You'll just alienate the real Chinese, like you have already done to me.




Are you in charge of the Hong Kong tea party, little dragon? What's a "real Chinese"? One who attended international school in HK? Name me one "real Chinese" beside yourself who would call Hiroshima and Nagasaki "genocide" ... 

For the record, I just read some of Challenger's exchange with the new "posse", I agree that Challenger should be proud of his "actual" identity and show no fear of speaking his mind. 

I would've defended him if it wasn't for the fact that I, too, have doubts about the flags he wears. If he is from China and can't read Chinese, then just give us an explanation and let it be the end of it.

For the record also, I don't entirely agree with Developereo's stance wrt to "Challenger", but Developereo himself is a member whose view I have come to respect and generally enjoy reading.

If he (or she) "alienated" your International School-trained highness, then perhaps he would strike a chord with _real Chinese_ by chance?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

dezi said:


> Both India and China realize the importance of working together to fight off western dominance over the world economy.



I think cooperation is always a good thing. Not necessarily for the purposes of changing the world order from a Western one to an Asian one... but more importantly because cooperation makes sense in the modern world.

And the CCP agrees with this. If you read the articles above from the People's Daily, it's clear that "peaceful development" is always the top priority. For example, Hu Jintao's vision of "China's peaceful rise".

The fact that the center of gravity in the world, is moving from the West to Asia... is just a side-effect in my opinion. The main goal is for us, is to improve the lives of our people.

And that will be achieved via cooperation, not by conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

oceanx said:


> For the record, I just read some of Challenger's exchange with the new "posse", I agree that Challenger should be proud of his "actual" identity and show no fear of speaking his mind.
> 
> I would've defended him if it wasn't for the fact that I, too, have doubts about the flags he wears. If he is from China and can't read Chinese, then just give us an explanation and let it be the end of it.
> 
> For the record also, I don't entirely agree with Developereo's stance wrt to "Challenger", but Developereo himself is a member whose view I have come to respect and generally enjoy reading.



So basically you agree that challenger is a false-flag, but you decided to troll as usual anyway.

"Tea-party" implies some very "conservative" views. Would you mind pointing out what views I hold, that you find to be very conservative?


----------



## below_freezing

oceanx said:


> Are you in charge of the Hong Kong tea party, little dragon? What's a "real Chinese"? One who attended international school in HK? Name me one "real Chinese" beside yourself who would call Hiroshima and Nagasaki "genocide" ...
> 
> For the record, I just read some of Challenger's exchange with the new "posse", I agree that Challenger should be proud of his "actual" identity and show no fear of speaking his mind.
> 
> I would've defended him if it wasn't for the fact that I, too, have doubts about the flags he wears. If he is from China and can't read Chinese, then just give us an explanation and let it be the end of it.
> 
> For the record also, I don't entirely agree with Developereo's stance wrt to "Challenger", but Developereo himself is a member whose view I have come to respect and generally enjoy reading.
> 
> If he (or she) "alienated" your International School-trained highness, then perhaps he would strike a chord with _real Chinese_ by chance?



i have no idea what your argument is. challenger has no argument, he's making something out of nothing. also, calling hiroshima a "genocide" is far fetched for a chinese person, but not totally impossible. however supporting japanese occupation of china is 100&#37; non-chinese, and only stupid and violent losers would do so.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## StingRoy

Developereo said:


> Nobody is disputing the history of Buddhism in India or its influence on Hinduism. The point under discussion is how much of that is relevant today. We are not living in the 12th century, this is the 21st century and the fact is that Buddhism is all but non-existant in modern day India, except for some historical sites.
> 
> An average Chinese or Japanese Buddhist would find precious little in common if he went to a Hindu temple.



Again you are trying to derive conclusions from the percentage numbers of some surveys. Buddhism is on a revival in India, although it may be a small number, the principles of Buddhism are still accepted and respected by many Indians (You can refer to several links posted earlier in this threat about Buddhism in India). Your problem is that you perceive India as an overly Hindu country with principles rooted deeply in Hinduism... this could be because you fail to see how a multi-religious country could exist when your own country was created purely based on religion and not on a common culture.



> In a thread full of vague assertions and irrelevant ancient history, this is one of the few contemporary facts to disprove the patently false assertion of 'common culture'.


Agreed here... but we are not discussing a common culture... we are discussing about the commonalities that we share religiously. Just because Buddhism is a minority religion in India does not disprove the fact that the origins are from Hinduism and its root emanating from India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

below_freezing said:


> i have no idea what your argument is. challenger has no argument, he's making something out of nothing. also, calling hiroshima a "genocide" is far fetched for a chinese person, but not totally impossible. however supporting japanese occupation of china is 100&#37; non-chinese, and only stupid and violent losers would do so.



I called it genocide as a response to CAPTAIN AMERICA who was giggling about the Japanese invasion of China. So it was an angry retort, rather than a statement of fact.

Anyway I will retract that statement. Now oceanx can only resort to making fun of me for going to an "expensive school".

God knows why that makes him so upset.


----------



## CardSharp

Guys let's end this here. We don't need to air our problems in public. If we can't say anything nice it's better if we say nothing at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

CardSharp said:


> Guys let's end this here. We don't need to air our problems in public. If we can't say anything nice it's better if we say nothing at all.



Man I don't know why some Chinese people love to troll their own countrymen, it speaks of very deep-seated social problems.

You're right though, I'll ignore him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## oceanx

Developereo said:


> ....
> We want balance against the Indian apologist tag team of CardSharp/Chinese-Dragon who both show up at the same time, always support each other's posts, attack anyone who posts against India, and always post pro-India posts themselves. ...



On that, my man, you are going a little too far I am afraid. I first of all confess that I am somewhat of an "Indian apologist" myself.

That "tag team", in all honesty, is to me infinitely more preferable to the poisonous posse consisting of "SIF, Greyboy 1/2/3, and SHChinese" from the days I first joint the forum ...

Really, I say the above despite my frequent disagreement with the tag-team.

I think Cardsharp indistinctively understands something that's largely unspoken (base on his posts that I read in the past), i.e., the real future China-India Relationship significantly despends on the health of India-Pakistan relationship, whereas India-Pakistan relationship does not necessarily turn on India-China relationship.

But little Dragon, in his "cooperation is the end-all and be-all" mantra, may or may not get this.

I could be wrong, of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

dezi said:


> Again you are trying to derive conclusions from the percentage numbers of some surveys. Buddhism is on a revival in India, although it may be a small number, the principles of Buddhism are still accepted and respected by many Indians (You can refer to several links posted earlier in this threat about Buddhism in India). Your problem is that you perceive India as an overly Hindu country with principles rooted deeply in Hinduism... this could be because you fail to see how a multi-religious country could exist when your own country was created purely based on religion and not on a common culture.
> 
> Agreed here... but we are not discussing a common culture... we are discussing about the commonalities that we share religiously. Just because Buddhism is a minority religion in India does not disprove the fact that the origins are from Hinduism and its root emanating from India.



That's right dezi 

Someone posted an article from the Times (I think it was you) that showed a lot of people practice Buddhism "alongside" their traditional belief systems.

Buddhism is seen as very "non-demanding" belief system, and does not require you to give up other religious practices. Basically, following the "middle path" does not contradict any other religious teachings.

So in fact (according to the article) there are many Indians who practice Hinduism and also follow the tenets of Buddhism, because the belief systems are very compatible with each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

Varghese said:


> What are many Indians assertions? In your point of view?



Too many to count. Please feel free to search for old threads about ancient India, ancient Pakistan, mehulla, harappa, Indus valley civilization, etc. etc.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> You do know that he is an apologist for Japanese war crimes?



Well, he has offered to clarify his stance on Chinese boards.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> And that he's not even Chinese?
> 
> Side with the Hindi/Urdu speaking fake Chinese guy if you want.



I am satisfied that he is Chinese. His English usage pattern is similar to other Chinese people I know.

As for his alleged use of Hindi/Urdu phrases, you are just repeating the position of Indian posters who think they somehow have a monopoly on certain phrases. Their claim is so ridiculous, it is not even worthy of further discussion.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> You'll just alienate the real Chinese, like you have already done to me.



Why would you feel alienated if I ask for good manners from our guests? Praising our enemy at our own dinner table is not the most gracious of manners. We accept it from the Indian members because they are speaking for their own country and they have the right to put their country in the most favorable light. But when Chinese members jump up and down singing India's praises, then it makes one wonder...



Chinese-Dragon said:


> I challenge "Developereo" to look through my post history, and find even ONE SINGLE post in which I say something negative about Pakistan. It doesn't exist.



I never said you came here to bash Pakistan; only to promote India.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Developereo, even the CCP Government says nice things about India. Does that mean our Premier Wen Jiabao is also a "cyberagent"?



No, he is a diplomat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Developereo said:


> Why would you feel alienated if I ask for good manners from our guests? Praising our enemy at our own dinner table is not the most gracious of manners. We accept it from the Indian members because they are speaking for their own country and they have the right to put their country in the most favorable light. But when Chinese members jump up and down singing India's praises, then it makes one wonder...
> 
> I never said you came here to bash Pakistan; only to promote India.



Praising the enemy at the dinner table? Sort of like this?



Developereo said:


> The Japanese are one of the most committed, focussed and goal-driven cultures out there. *If they set their minds to it, they can literally dominate Asia again -- or share it with China.*
> 
> In almost every technological field (rocketry, nuclear, biotech) they are held back by their own self-restraint, not lack of ability.



I'll tell you this, the CCP can say nice things about India because they are NOT our enemy, as Wen Jiabao said himself...

And so can I. As long as I'm not bashing your country then I don't understand why it is your business, and why you keep insulting me, and calling me a "cyberagent".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brotherhood

CardSharp said:


> Guys let's end this here. We don't need to air our problems in public. If we can't say anything nice it's better if we say nothing at all.



I second you, solve all our differences or doubts through PM just like old time, not in public.
Its really getting out of hand, embarrassing i must say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> Too many to count. Please feel free to search for old threads about ancient India, ancient Pakistan, mehulla, harappa, Indus valley civilization, etc. etc.



Are you talking about this whole Bharat movement? Bro get really, must Indians do not want to unite all of S. Asia. Why add more to our population? The current borders are fine with me. Those who say that over the internet are just keyboard warriors.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/24823-indias-defence-requires-reunification-india-pakistan-3.html

Look at this, what Indian took him seriously?

*Go back to the topic............*


----------



## Developereo

dezi said:


> Agreed here... but we are not discussing a common culture... we are discussing about the commonalities that we share religiously. Just because Buddhism is a minority religion in India does not disprove the fact that the origins are from Hinduism and its root emanating from India.



Actually, we are discussing common culture, more specifically, common contemporary culture. Nobody is disputing the history of Buddhism in India; the question here is how much does modern Indian culture have in common with Buddhism?

The factual answer is "not much", except for sites of historical significance. And the repeated claims of Buddhist revival in India are beyond ridiculous. There is more Buddhist "revival" going on in Western countries than in India.

You guys can continue to spout this nonsense propaganda, but the hard facts (0.8% Indian Buddhists compared to 1.7% in USA) demolish your attempts.



oceanx said:


> On that, my man, you are going a little too far I am afraid. I first of all confess that I am somewhat of an "Indian apologist" myself.



But you have a balanced view: hopeful optimism tempered with caution and a realistic appraisal of India's behavior regionally.



oceanx said:


> That "tag team", in all honesty, is to me infinitely more preferable to the poisonous posse consisting of "SIF, Greyboy 1/2/3, and SHChinese" from the days I first joint the forum ...
> 
> Really, I say the above despite my frequent disagreement with the tag-team.
> 
> I think Cardsharp indistinctively understands something that's largely unspoken (base on his posts that I read in the past), i.e., the real future China-India Relationship significantly despends on the health of India-Pakistan relationship, whereas India-Pakistan relationship does not necessarily turn on India-China relationship.
> 
> But little Dragon, in his "cooperation is the end-all and be-all" mantra, may or may not get this.



Well, I don't want to talk about people behind their back since CardSharp is supposedly ignoring me, but the other half of the dynamic duo, Chinese-Dragon, is reading so he can respond for the both of them. 

To be honest, I don't really keep track of people's posts and their biases, except some very obvious posters, so I was quite taken aback at CardSharp's over-the-top tantrum when I seconded challenger's question why some India-loving Chinese members would showcase their lvoefest on PDF, rather than taking it to an Indian forum.

I specifically said I wasn't questioning anyone's integrity or implicating any specific poster. However, CardSharp went ballistic, in the classic "the lady doth protest too much" fashion and it got me to thinking...

When I started looking back at some of the posts, I noticed the tag-team pattern between these two and the consistent pro-India apologist streak.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Praising the enemy at the dinner table? Sort of like this?



In all my dealings with Chinese people in real life, I have not found any that hated the Japanese. Maybe it's a generational thing and the younger people are more forgiving about the past, or maybe it's because the subject never came up. So, while I understand there is historical baggage between China and Japan, I don't see the two countries as being adverserial in the same way as India/Pakistan.

At least, that is my understanding and, of course, individual Chinese or Japanese members may have a different view.

So, yes, I did write the above, but I also wrote that Japanese have committed crimes in the past and it is an internal matter for the Chinese if and when to forgive them.



Varghese said:


> Are you talking about this whole Bharat movement?



No, no, I am talking about the claim that, throughout its history, India has been peaceful and restrained. You yourself showed one of the maps which showed the alleged breadth of ancient Indian empires.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Developereo said:


> Well, I don't want to talk about people behind their back since CardSharp is supposedly ignoring me, but the other half of the dynamic duo, Chinese-Dragon, is reading so he can respond for the both of them.
> 
> To be honest, I don't really keep track of people's posts and their biases, except some very obvious posters, so I was quite taken aback at CardSharp's over-the-top tantrum when I seconded challenger's question why some India-loving Chinese members would showcase their lvoefest on PDF, rather than taking it to an Indian forum.
> 
> I specifically said I wasn't questioning anyone's integrity or implicating any specific poster. However, CardSharp went ballistic, in the classic "the lady doth protest too much" fashion and it got me to thinking...
> 
> When I started looking back at some of the posts, I noticed the tag-team pattern between these two and the consistent pro-India apologist streak.



"Dynamic duo", "pro-India tag team"... tell me why do you insist on these continuous insults.

I've explained it before and I'll explain it again, the reason why we have a problem with challenger is this:

1) He apologizes for Japanese war criminals, and said that the Imperial Japanese army was only trying to "liberate" China.
2) He calls us "Chinese Kommunist Dogs".
3) He cannot read or speak a *single word* of Chinese, yet he can somehow speak Hindi/Urdu.
4) He claims that Hans are not Chinese.

The Imperial Japanese Army butchered 20 million innocent Chinese civilians, so Chinese people will always react strongly to this issue.

Despite that, I did not insult you when you said that Japan would "dominate" Asia again, because you can praise who you want. Apparently you don't think I'm allowed to, but we'll let the forum rules decide that one.


----------



## CardSharp

Chinese-Dragon said:


> "Dynamic duo", "pro-India tag team"... tell me why do you insist on these continuous insults.
> 
> I've explained it before and I'll explain it again, the reason why we have a problem with challenger is this:
> 
> 1) He apologizes for Japanese war criminals, and said that the Imperial Japanese army was only trying to "liberate" China.
> 2) He calls us "Chinese Kommunist Dogs".
> 3) He cannot read or speak a *single word* of Chinese, yet he can somehow speak Hindi/Urdu.
> 4) He claims that Hans are not Chinese.
> 
> The Imperial Japanese Army butchered 20 million innocent Chinese civilians, so Chinese people will always react strongly to this issue.
> 
> Despite that, I did not insult you when you said that Japan would "dominate" Asia again, because you can praise who you want. Apparently you don't think I'm allowed to, but we'll let the forum rules decide that one.



Let it go. I don't mind the insults (and you're off ignore). This little argument is disrupting other construct threads.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Water Car Engineer

self delete


----------



## siegecrossbow

Help me out here guys. Keep the arguments to PMs please! If you really want other's to read them you can PM them to me.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

CardSharp said:


> Let it go. I don't mind the insults (and you're off ignore). This little argument is disrupting other construct threads.



You're right, I'm just repeating myself, because I've said it before. More than once.

To get back on topic... I think we were most recently discussing Buddhism, and the cultural transfer that occurred over the Himalayas.

My family is mostly Buddhist, although I am personally atheist/agnostic. Most of the "pilgrimage" sites in the Buddhist system, are in India, however I think it is quite rare for your average Buddhist to go on a "pilgrimage".

There don't seem to be many direct flights between China and India, which is a shame because I think that there are many Buddhists in China who would like to travel to those locations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodh_Gaya

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

I agree we should bring this discussion back on topic, so I will simply close the side-discussion with this:



Chinese-Dragon said:


> challenger



I don't like people talking behind other people's back, so you should leave him out of our discussion. Take it up with him directly.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Despite that, I did not insult you when you said that Japan would "dominate" Asia again



Please don't quote me out of context again. I said Japan could dominate Asia economically -- or share it with China. The only country I left out of my list was India, which seems to have annoyed some people... 



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Most of the "pilgrimage" sites in the Buddhist system, are in India, however I think it is quite rare for your average Buddhist to go on a "pilgrimage".



That brings up an interesting point. Are Buddhists more like Muslims and Jews or Christians when it comes to pilgrimage? I know that Muslims and Jews put great emphasis on religious sites, but the average Christian doesn't seem too bothered. In the West I have found that it is Western converts to Buddhism who are more interested in the ancient sites than Asian Buddhists themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## justanobserver

Developereo said:


> That brings up an interesting point. Are Buddhists more like Muslims and Jews or Christians when it comes to pilgrimage? I know that Muslims and Jews put great emphasis on religious sites, but the average Christian doesn't seem too bothered.



That is your problem, you're looking at Buddhism thorough an Abrahamic prism and therefore can't comprehend how interconnected it is to Hinduism or other Dharmic belief systems

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> That is your problem, you're looking at Buddhism thorough an Abrahamic prism and therefore can't comprehend how interconnected it is to Hinduism or other Dharmic belief systems



Yes, Buddhism is very different compared to Abrahamic faiths.

The closest relation to Buddhism is, I believe, Hinduism.

Buddhism can be observed ALONGSIDE other religions without causing a problem. Buddhism is really just a guide on how to live your life, there are "recommendations" rather than "rules", like the Eightfold path for instance.


----------



## justanobserver

> The closest relation to Buddhism is, I believe, Hinduism.



And Janism 

Jainism

btw I did'nt know us Jains were so unpopular 

Infact the 'moderate' path in Buddhism is actually maintaining a balance between the strict practices of Jainism and the flamboyant rituals of Hinduism (that's what our textbooks taught us)



> Buddhism can be observed ALONGSIDE other religions without causing a problem. Buddhism is really just a guide on how to live your life, there are "recommendations" rather than "rules", like the Eightfold path for instance.



That is probably true for all dharmic belief systems, they are more of a philosophy (although Hinduism is too diverse)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> And Janism
> 
> Jainism
> 
> 
> btw I did'nt know us Jains were so unpopular
> 
> Infact the 'moderate' path in Buddhism is actually maintaining a balance between the strict practices of Jainism and the flamboyant rituals of Hinduism (that's what our textbooks taught us)



You're right of course, how could I forget about Jainism. 

I don't think Jains are unpopular at all, in fact I've only ever heard good things about them.

Also, can you tell me a bit about these "strict practices" vs "flamboyant rituals" etc?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

justanobserver said:


> That is your problem, you're looking at Buddhism thorough an Abrahamic prism and therefore can't comprehend how interconnected it is to Hinduism or other Dharmic belief systems



What does that have to do with the question of whether Buddhists put emphasis on pilgrimage to religious sites?



justanobserver said:


> That is probably true for all dharmic belief systems, they are more of a philosophy (although Hinduism is too diverse)



That is not true.
How can you believe in a Hindu god (one of many) and an Abrahamic God (singular) at the same time?


----------



## justanobserver

strict practices (Jainsm): Non Violence, ranging from strict vegetarianism to covering you mouth with cloth (avoiding insects), to avoiding boiled water (harm microbes. (for modren jains vegetarianism is enough). Actually I could go on, you can check wiki

Flamboyant rituals(Hinduism): myriad of expensive rituals and animals sacrifices to various gods, giving lots of gifts to bhramins




> What does that have to do with the question of whether Buddhists put emphasis on pilgrimage to religious sites?



Because you're downgrading the presence (and influence) of Buddhism in India to mere tourist sites, and quoting &#37; of Buddhists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

The interesting thing is that Buddhism in its pure form doesn't have any "God(s)" at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhism

Which is why many people regard it as a philosophy rather than a religion.


The idea of God in Jainism seems fascinating as well, I am doing some reading on that right now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Jainism


----------



## Developereo

justanobserver said:


> Because you're downgrading the presence (and influence) of Buddhism in India to mere tourist sites, and quoting &#37; of Buddhists.



Ah, so you are countering quantifiable facts with vague generalizations.

Got it!


----------



## justanobserver

> How can you believe in a Hindu god (one of many) and an Abrahamic God (singular) at the same time?



'Abrahamic God' ? I was talking about Dhramic religions, FYI Buddism rejects the concept of a creator and Jainism is atheistic (but not atheistic in the abrahamic sense  ) in nature. 

Hinduism like a said is too diverse, one school of thought says god is one and has many incarnations, another is an atheistic school of thought (from which Buddhism and Jainism originated)


> Ah, so you are countering quantifiable facts



That is the problem again, you're trying to quantify things, percentages etc. Won't work

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

I read that there are two main branches of Religion in the world.

1) *Abrahamic religions* e.g. Christianity, Islam, Judaism.

Abrahamic religions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) *Dharmic/Indian religions* e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikkism.

Indian religions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder if this could lead to future problems... I remember reading something on the "clash of civilizations" that mentioned this point. Luckily, Dharmic/Indian religions can often be practised alongside other religions, so I don't really see it being a point of conflict in the world at large.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I read that there are two main branches of Religion in the world.
> 
> 1) *Abrahamic religions* e.g. Christianity, Islam, Judaism.
> 
> Abrahamic religions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 2) *Dharmic/Indian religions* e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikkism.
> 
> Indian religions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> I wonder if this could lead to future problems... I remember reading something on the "clash of civilizations" that mentioned this point. Luckily, Dharmic/Indian religions can often be practised alongside other religions, so I don't really see it being a point of conflict in the world at large.



This is a fascinating subject, but vast. In addition, many very sensitive India-Pakistan issues are involved here. I have a suggestion to deal with this, and shall convey it to you separately.

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

Developereo said:


> At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.
> 
> - I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.
> 
> - Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?
> 
> - There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.
> 
> - Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.
> 
> - The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.
> 
> - Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.
> 
> So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.




A very thought-provoking post!

From Chinese point of view, historical security threats have been from the north: Xiongnu in ancient times and Soviet in mordent time. Since 1800s, threats were from eastern seas, brought forth by Whites and the Japanese: Sino-Japanese wars, Opium wars, Korea war, and Sino-Soviet conflicts. 

In a sharp contrast, from ancient time up to 1950s, there have been no major aggressions from the South in general and from Indian sub-continent in particular. There was a small conflict with one Indian tribe during Chinese Tang Dynasty, with victory went to Chinese-Nepal alliance. 

From India side of history, China never invaded India before 1950s.

The above shows that *there is no historical animosity between the two countries*. 

Culturally, the biggest religion in China, Buddhism, was originated from Nepal/India, and propagated to China, although the reason behind the flow of the religion from India to China was that Buddhists were prosecuted by Hinduism, as Buddhism rejects caste theory. Nonetheless, Chinese have been influenced by Indian culture in that sense. However, the reverse flow of culture seems small and insignificant.

Thus, probably we should not say that the two countries completely &#8220;share&#8221; a culture, as Buddhism is rejected by the people of India in general, and cultural flow from China to India is negligible. Yet, Chinese culture is indeed influenced by Indian culture.

So, there is no historical reason, nor cultural reason, why China and India can&#8217;t get along.

Problems only arise during modern time since British colonists occupied India and brain-washed Indians with their philosophies.

Western norms and British mentality influence Indian modern politicians that, why a small British could beat a vast India, this is because British is better than us, so we must learn from them, from head to heel, everything. So the results are: 

a) *Copy and paste British political system*. Being fully brain-washed by British education, Indian forefathers forgot the fact that India and UK have completely different social soils for a social system to healthily grow, resulting in a most time rambunctious democracy.

b) *Inherit British privileges as a second-hand imperialism*, completely forgetting that it is those privileges that brought pains to Indian people and Chinese people; and that it is those privileges that cause India want to be independent. 

c) *Blindly believe that India&#8217;s copy of British democracy is superior than, thus should naturally beat and win over, an evil system such as communist Chinese system*.

In summary, *rambunctious democracy, second-hand imperialism mentality and a blind believing of their superiority (jingoism) on the Indian side, non-yielding will and lack of study of democratic system on the Chinese side, plus some other minor factors, cause the most modern-time conflicts between India and China.*

A typical example is the 1962 war, where Nehru showed in many times his hesitation to provoke China too much, but was proud of being a British colonist heir, and was pushed by Indian jingoistic parliament members in the name of democracy, for &#8220;forwarding policy&#8221;.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Also, Ancient Chinese literature was highly influenced by Indian culture and Buddhism in particular. The most well-known example is "Journey to the West", where Sun Wukong and a Buddhist monk travel West to India, in order to obtain sacred Buddhist scrolls.
> 
> Journey to the West - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The Japanese then took our idea of the Monkey King, and turned it into Dragon Ball. The main character even has the exact same name as Sun Wukong, &#23403;&#24735;&#31354; (the Japanese pronounce it as Son Goku).



Buddy, I think the monkey is not the one to fetch Buddhism scripts, (he is not qualified, LOL!) but his master Tang Seng is. The monkey is only Tang's follower, a protector.

BTW, the monkey figure is also borrowed from India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gpit

justanobserver said:


> What border issues are you talking about?
> 
> Do you know we have an *open border* policy with Nepal and Bhutan? Their citizens can freely move into India and get all economic privleges
> 
> ...




Why do you deny your problem with Nepal?

Living in a state of denial won't help solve the problems.

Please check out this thread and many others:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/28538-indo-nepal-border-dispute-black-flags-greet-indian-foreign-secretary-menon-nepal.html

Open border is largely in India's advantage, so it may encroach the border.



> The absence of landmarks onon the topographical maps on the Indian side across the Nepal India border has been the major reson behind the encroachment of Nepalese territories across the border...
> 
> http://www.nepaldemocracy.org/documents/treaties_agreements/nep_india_open_border.htm


----------



## justanobserver

> Indo-Nepal border dispute: Black flags greet Indian foreign secretary Menon in Nepal
> 
> Open border is largely in India's advantage, so it may encroach the border.





> Nepal police said about* seven to eight young men*, seemingly students, tried to show the visiting envoy black flags as he alighted at the Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu.



 (funny how the only legitimate source is ToI)

Nepal really hates us, doesn't it. 

Do you know who the thread starter is? (Communist)

*
Do you know he's NOT a Nepali* (he claimed to be one, and it seems you fell for it)

Do you know he was questioned in Nepali by a Gurkha and got busted

Do you know, that he/she's was a pinoy working @50cents (who got banned because of false flag issues)

(btw Do you know even know who Gurkhas are? )

Do you now realize that you don't know anything about the subcontinent?


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> In a sharp contrast, from ancient time up to 1950s, there have been no major aggressions from the South in general and from Indian sub-continent in particular. There was a small conflict with one Indian tribe during Chinese Tang Dynasty, with victory went to Chinese-Nepal alliance.



Thats the Manchu-Qings not Tang empire.


----------



## Developereo

gpit said:


> *there is no historical animosity between the two countries*.



Acknowledged. Now let's turn to present and future relations.



gpit said:


> Yet, Chinese culture is indeed influenced by Indian culture.



This is again ancient influence.
Mainstream contemporary Indian culture has little or nothing to do with ancient Buddhism, despite isolated and miniscule pockets of "revival".



gpit said:


> Problems only arise during modern time since British colonists occupied India and brain-washed Indians with their philosophies.



Whatever the reasons, this is the India that China has to deal with, for better or for worse.



gpit said:


> *rambunctious democracy, second-hand imperialism mentality and a blind believing of their superiority (jingoism) on the Indian side, non-yielding will and lack of study of democratic system on the Chinese side, plus some other minor factors, cause the most modern-time conflicts between India and China.*



Bingo!

And the present India is only going to get more nationalistic, more jingoistic and more ambitious regionally and globally as it gets more powerful.

The writing's on the wall. Does China read it?


----------



## Sachin Tendulkar

I am not sure,as to ,what kind of relation India and China will share,but all i know for sure is that,it will be a matter of concern for the world and the world will be glancing at it.

Cuz the magnitude of India and China effectiveness nowadays is regularly rising at the Global level,so it will matter to the world as well.


----------



## Developereo

Actually, I had an epiphany and realized what game China is playing with India. (India also knows exactly what is going on.)

Bottom line: Pakistan has absolutely nothing to fear. Our relationship with China is 100% safe. 

Carry on, people...


----------



## cloneman

Sachin Tendulkar said:


> I am not sure,as to ,what kind of relation India and China will share,but all i know for sure is that,it will be a matter of concern for the world and the world will be glancing at it.
> 
> Cuz the magnitude of India and China effectiveness nowadays is regularly rising at the Global level,so it will matter to the world as well.



No,no.Again,this is how you Indians to see the relation,not the Chinese nor the else of the world.So far,the most important relationship to China is the US China relatiuon which concerns Chinas trade and energy security.Next,I will name several equal important relations,like China to EU,Russia,Japan,South East Asian,Pakistan and Iran and other Arabian contries which are also important to Chinas trade and energy security.The China India relationshíp to us is no more important than China Nigeria relation.
Once again,the importance of India to China is somehow like`The moment I am busy,please dont bother to disrup'.We dont see you as a power of superpower.
As for China's south Asian policy,Pakistan plays the central role which is not only important for Chinas energy security,but also important as a long term ally.


----------



## praveen

I think Developereo grasped the point that if there is a rapprochment between China and India .Pakistan will be the first casuality as the Chinese may withdraw their CHIC-4 nukes and once done...The Chinese won't be fighting us to the last pakistani and so it wwill become a casuality to the pakistanis.
Then again one doesn't know


----------



## Developereo

praveen said:


> I think Developereo grasped the point that if there is a rapprochment between China and India .Pakistan will be the first casuality as the Chinese may withdraw their CHIC-4 nukes and once done...The Chinese won't be fighting us to the last pakistani and so it wwill become a casuality to the pakistanis.
> Then again one doesn't know



China and Pakistan are solidly tied no matter what happens between China and India. That was my epiphany.

Hint: China and India will *never* have the kind of full trust that exists between China and Pakistan.


----------



## praveen

Developereo Pakistans only useful for the Chinese in containing India other than they don't care to hoots about the state of pakistan.To put you are nothing but a tool to them


----------



## mike05

praveen said:


> Developereo Pakistans only useful for the Chinese in containing India other than they don't care to hoots about the state of pakistan.To put you are nothing but a tool to them



And how do you justify a statement like that? From the observation and post of many Pakistani and Chinese members I can see that the relations between between China and Pakistan is very different from the one between the US and India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## praveen

the Chinese want to fight us to the last pakistani


----------



## mike05

praveen said:


> the Chinese want to fight us to the last pakistani



Thats not a justification that's an assumption.

China and Pakistan have a relationship going back decades, of course supporting Pakistan is also a means to control India but with everyone on the same continent war between any countries is bad news for everyone.

Assuming China did not back Pakistan with weapons and technological assistance would India still use diplomacy to settle disputes with Pakistan?


----------



## justanobserver

> Assuming China did not back Pakistan with *weapons and technological assistance* would India still use diplomacy to settle disputes with Pakistan?



YES!

We have never been the aggressor in any of our three wars with Pakistan (check any neutral sources, heck even their general admitted it on TV)


btw thanks for giving them nukes and ballistic missiles, did a lot to stabilize the subcontinent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## praveen

mike05 said:


> Thats not a justification that's an assumption.
> 
> China and Pakistan have a relationship going back decades, of course supporting Pakistan is also a means to control India but with everyone on the same continent war between any countries is bad news for everyone.
> 
> Assuming China did not back Pakistan with weapons and technological assistance would India still use diplomacy to settle disputes with Pakistan?



The Chinese were wary of USSR encirclement during the 70-80's and during that nukes were proliferated to pakistan so that they have one less nuke to lob against india in case of a war with USSR so began the bon homie.

Regarding the second part The Chinese are willing to use Pakistan as a front in case of a indo-sino war but in case of a indo-pakistan war they will leave pakistan to the wolves they may even remove the pakistan..sorry chinese nukes in pakistan .

Regarding the first case i spoke of during 1987-89 Deng wanted to have war with India to teach it a lesson so when he consulted PLA they said any offensive can only be launched only through a front in Kashmir .The tension was diffused after a CCP and Indian Foreign ministers had some talks.Without even consulting the PA

Regarding the second part the Pakistanis recieved a goose egg from the Chinese during the Kargil conflict hope you understand it


----------



## mike05

justanobserver said:


> YES!
> 
> We have never been the aggressor in any of our three wars with Pakistan (check any neutral sources, heck even their general admitted it on TV)



I've leave this for a Pakistan member to reply, I think they are better qualified to judge this for themselves.



justanobserver said:


> btw thanks for giving them nukes and ballistic missiles, did a lot to stabilize the subcontinent.



China did not provide Nukes, Pakistan developed the nukes herself and so did India using their civilian nuclear program.

Going by your logic Pakistan has not used the nukes or ballistic missiles to date so how is the region not stabilized?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> btw thanks for giving them nukes and ballistic missiles, did a lot to stabilize the subcontinent.



Firstly, are you being sarcastic?

If you were, I would say that even if it could be proved, it would hardly have been a collective decision.

And as a sidenote, how many wars have there been, since both sides developed their own nuclear weapons?


----------



## justanobserver

> I've leave this for a Pakistan member to reply, *I think they are better qualified to judge this for themselves.*



How come? They'll be biased too, that's why you should check some neutral source

How about the battle of 1971, in which all Pakistanis claim had been instigated by India.
TIME magazine provides a very detailed account of that time, btw in 1971 the USS Enterprise entered the Bay of Bengal to threaten us, so the article definitely isn't Indian propaganda



> China did not provide Nukes, *Pakistan developed the nukes herself*



No Pak did not, read about AQ Khan who got the know how from China and North Korea



> Even so, how many wars have there been, since both sides were nuclear armed?



One out of the three i.e Kargil


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> One out of the three i.e Kargil



Yes that conflict occurred one year after Pakistan nuclear tests.

How many wars have taken place after both sides developed mature nuclear arsenals? I.e. Enough for a full counter-attack?

Also is there any REAL proof that China gave nukes to Pakistan. And I'm not talking about side comments in articles, I mean REAL proof.


----------



## praveen

Why China Helped Countries Like Pakistan, North Korea Build Nuclear Bombs - US News and World Report


----------



## praveen

Pakistani nuclear scientist's accounts tell of Chinese proliferation - washingtonpost.com


----------



## justanobserver

> Yes that conflict occurred one year after Pakistan nuclear tests.
> 
> How many wars have taken place after both sides developed mature nuclear arsenals? I.e. Enough for a full counter-attack?



Well the reason that there has been no war (yet) is because Pak became involved in the WoT after 2001, forces spread too thin, USA muscling, Taliban gone rogue. Once things get back to 'normal', it'll be war. 



> Also is there any REAL proof that China gave nukes to Pakistan. And I'm not talking about side comments in articles, I mean REAL proof.



Here is an article in the Washington Post,(just googled it though), im sure more knowledgeable members can bring detailed proofs

*A nuclear power's act of proliferation*


> The uranium transfer in five stainless-steel boxes was part of a broad-ranging, secret nuclear deal approved years earlier by Mao Zedong and Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto that culminated in an exceptional, deliberate act of proliferation by a nuclear power, according to the accounts by Khan, who is under house arrest in Pakistan.
> 
> U.S. officials say they have known about the transfer for decades and once privately confronted the Chinese -- who denied it -- but have never raised the issue in public or sought to impose direct sanctions on China for it. President Obama, who said in April that "the world must stand together to prevent the spread of these weapons," plans to discuss nuclear proliferation issues while visiting Beijing on Tuesday.
> 
> According to Khan, the uranium cargo came with a blueprint for a simple weapon that China had already tested, supplying a virtual do-it-yourself kit that significantly speeded Pakistan's bomb effort. The transfer also started a chain of proliferation: U.S. officials worry that Khan later shared related Chinese design information with Iran; in 2003, Libya confirmed obtaining it from Khan's clandestine network.


----------



## justanobserver

> How many wars have taken place after both sides developed mature nuclear arsenals? I.e. Enough for a full counter-attack?



Also India did her first nuclear test in 1974, but strangely that did not deter Pakistan from doing a Kargil ? 

btw every senior (Pakistani) member here will agree, that in Kargil Pak was the agressor, their general told it on TV (there are youtube videos of it) 

So what gives? 

The Indo Pak conflict is more than just control of a piece of land....


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> Well the reason that there has been no war (yet) is because Pak became involved in the WoT after 2001, forces spread too thin, USA muscling, Taliban gone rouge. Once things get back to 'normal', it'll be war.



So war is inevitable? Pakistan doesn't have a No First Use policy, like China and India do. That will lead to nuclear war.



> U.S. officials say they have known about the transfer for decades and once privately confronted the Chinese -- who denied it -- but have never raised the issue in public or sought to impose direct sanctions on China for it.



So these officials have refused to say it in public?

What legitimacy does it have then?


----------



## justanobserver

> So war is inevitable? Pakistan doesn't have a No First Use policy, like China and India do. That will lead to nuclear war.



Pakistan won't do a first strike, it won't accomplish anything. Actually only two countries in the world can do first strikes : USA and Russia. Pak will launch weapons, when it's severely threatened imo, something like creation of Bangladesh



> So these officials have refused to say it in public?
> 
> What legitimacy does it have then?



AQ Khan's illegal nuclear network is well know, that's the reason he was put under house arrest.

Tell me, why would a country put the father of it's nuclear weapons program under house arrest(house arrest is a fact btw) !!

I also read a pdf written in 2001, I'll try to search for it and like I said many senior members can give better sources


----------



## praveen

China and India have a mutual NFU pakistanis i think are ambiguous they have some thing first use or first strike i don't what exactly it is clearly.India's and Chinas arsenals are there to deter bigger arsenals.Thank COAS sundarji and Field Marshall Nie for that


----------



## praveen

justanobserver said:


> Pakistan won't do a first strike, it won't accomplish anything. Actually only two countries in the world can do first strikes : USA and Russia. Pak will launch weapons, when it's severely threatened imo, something like creation of Bangladesh
> 
> 
> 
> AQ Khan's illegal nuclear network is well know, that's the reason he was put under house arrest.
> 
> Tell me, why would a country put the father of it's nuclear weapons program under house arrest(house arrest is a fact btw) !!
> 
> I also read a pdf written in 2001, I'll try to search for it and like I said many senior members can give better sources



Pakistani Nukes are Chinese CHIC-4 nukes recent reports are the chinese are willing to remove if the situation is out of hand in pakistan


----------



## mike05

justanobserver said:


> How come? They'll be biased too, that's why you should check some neutral source
> 
> How about the battle of 1971, in which all Pakistanis claim had been instigated by India.
> TIME magazine provides a very detailed account of that time, btw in 1971 the USS Enterprise entered the Bay of Bengal to threaten us, so the article definitely isn't Indian propaganda



Everyone's biased including you and me, you mentioned India's has never invaded another country but we can go on about the border skirmishes in 67 and who's fault it was that the first incursion was made etc. Point here is no one can say for certain if history will always hold true for a countries future actions. And Pakistan has not used its Nuclear weapons or missiles in any aggressive manner so who's to say they can't be non aggressors too?



justanobserver said:


> No Pak did not, read about AQ Khan who got the know how from China and North Korea



This link has a brief summary of the history of Pakistan Nuclear program, AQ Khan it seems already had great deal of knowledge about creating nuclear devices when he came into the picture. Similarly we can also debate if China would have helped Pakistan if India didn't herself pursue a nuclear weapon. 

Pakistan Nuclear Weapons

Ultimately all is fair in War US chooses to arm India similarity to how China chooses to arm Pakistan. Least with Nukes all round diplomacy is now the first choice in conflict negotiations because the alternative would be an endgame for all.


----------



## praveen

mike05 said:


> Ultimately all is fair in War US chooses to arm India similarity to how China chooses to arm Pakistan. Least with Nukes all round diplomacy is now the first choice in conflict negotiations because the alternative would be an endgame for all.



Ultimately the Chinese did this in the 70s and 80s even decades before the current US-India bon homie.The problem with the nukes you proliferated is incase of a nuke flying and landing and it being a CHIC-4 device.By using Nuclear forensics the original source will be determined and it will be considered a NFU violation by Beijing


----------



## gpit

Varghese said:


> Thats the Manchu-Qings not Tang empire.



Right that Qing Dynasty had more conflict with India, again due to Tibet, but the war happened in Tang Dynasty was trivial to China proper and is seldom known.

(Western) People find that, from historical point of view, if China is wholly ruled by minorities (Man, Mongol), it is more expansionistic and more imperialistic than when Han rules China.

It thats true, India should feel lucky that mainly Han is ruling China today. And I strongly suggest Indian friends support currently Chinese regime, instead of trying to hate or otherwise subvert it: it is for your own good.


----------



## siegecrossbow

gpit said:


> Right that Qing Dynasty had more conflict with India, again due to Tibet, but the war happened in Tang Dynasty was trivial to China proper and is seldom known.
> 
> (Western) People find that, from historical point of view, if China is wholly ruled by minorities (Man, Mongol), it is more expansionistic and more imperialistic than when Han rules China.
> 
> It thats true, India should feel lucky that mainly Han is ruling China today. And I strongly suggest Indian friends support currently Chinese regime, instead of trying to hate or otherwise subvert it: it is for your own good.



Technically the war was against one of the Indian city states but it was still pretty impressive given how the commander of the campaign was an ambassador and had to rely on a handful of Tibetan mercenaries to accomplish the feat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## praveen

mike05 said:


> Ultimately all is fair in War US chooses to arm India similarity to how China chooses to arm Pakistan. Least with Nukes all round diplomacy is now the first choice in conflict negotiations because the alternative would be an endgame for all.



Ultimately the Chinese did this in the 70s and 80s even decades before the current US-India bon homie.The problem with the nukes you proliferated is incase of a nuke flying and landing and it being a CHIC-4 device.By using Nuclear forensics the original source will be determined and it will be considered a NFU violation by Beijing


----------



## gpit

praveen said:


> Developereo Pakistans only useful for the Chinese in containing India other than they don't care to hoots about the state of pakistan.To put you are nothing but a tool to them




If so is your logic, then China is also useful to Pakistan for containing India. That is the biggest care that China can do to Pakistan.

What's wrong with that?

If you review your history correctly, it is largely due to India's imperialistic activities around 1950s that caused China-Pak to go together.

I repeated numerous times: *India's hostility to China is the single biggest failure of India foreign policy since its independence*. Had India have a good friendship with the north neighbor, India could have surpassed China long time ago when China was in such chaotic and foolish ideological movements as Great Leap Forward, Anti-Rightists, or Cultural Revolution.

Glad Indian politicians are gettign smarter these days...


----------



## gpit

praveen said:


> the Chinese want to fight us to the last pakistani




Again, if so is your logic, then *why are you so foolish as to be knowingly played into the Chinese hand? *


----------



## gpit

praveen said:


> Why China Helped Countries Like Pakistan, North Korea Build Nuclear Bombs - US News and World Report



This article is a sheer BULL$IT!

We can all guess, if any, why China proliferates.

General McArthur claimed to use nuclear weapons on Chinese soil. Why cant China think of the same with re-action?

Lots ideologist fools in Western world turn blind eyes to the fact that Chinese Army has withdrawn from Korea for decades, but US army is still there.

BTW, I know many of you are brain-washed by Western propaganda and lack the capability of independent thinking.


----------



## justanobserver

> Everyone's biased including you and me,



Yes yes and there's no such thing as absolute truth 

Their general said it, *on live TV* (you'll get a video on youtube) that Pakistan had started all wars with India!

And how can a US source (TIME) be biased during 1971! US hated india then, Richard Nixon called the Prime Minister of our country a b**** ! He ordered a Nimitz class nuclear powered carrier to set sail in the Bay of Bengal as a sign of solidarity with Pakistan !



> *you mentioned India's has never invaded another country* but we can go on about the border skirmishes in 67 and who's fault it was that the first incursion was made etc.



Nope, I never say said, what I said was "India was not the aggressor in *all wars with Pakistan*"



> AQ Khan it seems already had great deal of knowledge about creating nuclear devices when he came into the picture.



The article clearly says that the 'great deal of knowledge' was stolen from Europe, the rest was provided by China


----------



## praveen

gpit said:


> Again, if so is your logic, then *why are you so foolish as to be knowingly played into the Chinese hand? *



Why are the chinese playing into US hands ?foolishly....


----------



## mike05

justanobserver said:


> Yes yes and there's no such thing as absolute truth
> 
> Their general said it, *on live TV* (you'll get a video on youtube) that Pakistan had started all wars with India!
> 
> And how can a US source (TIME) be biased during 1971! US hated india then, Richard Nixon called the Prime Minister of our country a b**** ! He ordered a Nimitz class nuclear powered carrier to set sail in the Bay of Bengal as a sign of solidarity with Pakistan !
> 
> Nope, I never say said, what I said was "India was not the aggressor in *all wars with Pakistan*"



So whats your point? Are you saying because Pakistan started all wars with India in the past and India has never been an aggressor towards Pakistan an act of aggression by India will never happen in the future??




justanobserver said:


> The article clearly says that the 'great deal of knowledge' was stolen from Europe, the rest was provided by China



Its no doubt that China did provide assistance to Pakistan to develop its Nuclear Weapon technology but what of it? India developed her own Nuclear Arsenal using a civilian reactor which was obtained from Canada after agreeing that the reactor would be used only for peaceful uses." (talk about trying to take the moral high ground). Both sides obtain their weapons thru unorthodox means so there is no right and wrong in either case, what makes India's methods of obtaining its weapons any better then Pakistan's?


----------



## mike05

praveen said:


> Ultimately the Chinese did this in the 70s and 80s even decades before the current US-India bon homie.The problem with the nukes you proliferated is incase of a nuke flying and landing and it being a CHIC-4 device.By using Nuclear forensics the original source will be determined and it will be considered a NFU violation by Beijing



I'm not a nuclear expert but after the bomb has gone off can the forensics team even find the components which make up the bomb assuming they don't get fried at ground zero? I thought they usually check the signature pattern of the nuclear material to determine the origin of the bomb.


----------



## justanobserver

> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> So whats your point? Are you saying because Pakistan started all wars with India in the past and India has never been an aggressor towards Pakistan an act of aggression by India will never happen in the future??



Well you started off with


> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> Assuming China did not back Pakistan with weapons and technological assistance would India still use diplomacy to settle disputes with Pakistan?



This implied that we have been the aggressors and you guys were defending poor Pakistan, I wanted to correct that perspective.

As for your second point, youth are finally entering politics in large numbers, there will come a day when India will have a young,confident and assertive leader. So yes in the *future* anything could happen.



> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> India developed her own Nuclear Arsenal using a civilian reactor which was obtained from Canada after agreeing &#8220;that the reactor would be used only for peaceful uses." (talk about trying to take the moral high ground). Both sides obtain their weapons thru unorthodox means so there is no right and wrong in either case, what makes India's methods of obtaining its weapons any better then Pakistan's?



In *obtaining* weapons we don't hold any moral high ground, completely agree with you on that point. 

BUT, *proliferation* is a completely different story, Pakistan through AQ Khan proliferated nuclear weapons to North Korea, Iran and Libya. That's where we get the moral high ground and that is also why AQ Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## praveen

mike05 said:


> I'm not a nuclear expert but after the bomb has gone off can the forensics team even find the components which make up the bomb assuming they don't get fried at ground zero? I thought they usually check the signature pattern of the nuclear material to determine the origin of the bomb.



google nuclear forensics


----------



## mike05

praveen said:


> google nuclear forensics



Mate if you know something to back the statement you mentioned about identifying the bomb based on *machination *please just lay it out and save us some time. Cheers


----------



## justanobserver

I'll repost what I said on the prev page so people don't miss it (all thanks to you praveen )



> Originally Posted by *justanobserver*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> So whats your point? Are you saying because Pakistan started all wars with India in the past and India has never been an aggressor towards Pakistan an act of aggression by India will never happen in the future??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well you started off with
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> Assuming China did not back Pakistan with weapons and technological assistance would India still use diplomacy to settle disputes with Pakistan?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This implied that we have been the aggressors and you guys were defending poor Pakistan, I wanted to correct that perspective.
> 
> As for your second point, youth are finally entering politics in large numbers, there will come a day when India will have a young,confident and assertive leader. So yes in the *future* anything could happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> India developed her own Nuclear Arsenal using a civilian reactor which was obtained from Canada after agreeing &#8220;that the reactor would be used only for peaceful uses." (talk about trying to take the moral high ground). Both sides obtain their weapons thru unorthodox means so there is no right and wrong in either case, what makes India's methods of obtaining its weapons any better then Pakistan's?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In *obtaining* weapons we don't hold any moral high ground, completely agree with you on that point.
> 
> BUT, *proliferation* is a completely different story, Pakistan through AQ Khan proliferated nuclear weapons to North Korea, Iran and Libya. That's where we get the moral high ground and that is also why AQ Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan.
Click to expand...


----------



## Joe Shearer

gpit said:


> Right that Qing Dynasty had more conflict with India, again due to Tibet, but the war happened in Tang Dynasty was trivial to China proper and is seldom known.



Please could you give us more information. Chinese history is not my subject, and I am therefore unable to link this to any corresponding Tibetan historical episode or to Indian reports.



gpit said:


> (Western) People find that, from historical point of view, if China is wholly ruled by minorities (Man, Mongol), it is more expansionistic and more imperialistic than when Han rules China.
> 
> It thats true, India should feel lucky that mainly Han is ruling China today. And I strongly suggest Indian friends support currently Chinese regime, instead of trying to hate or otherwise subvert it: it is for your own good.





siegecrossbow said:


> Technically the war was against one of the Indian city states but it was still pretty impressive given how the commander of the campaign was an ambassador and had to rely on a handful of Tibetan mercenaries to accomplish the feat.



Are you talking about the same incident? If so, the same request please: names, dates, sources.

Regards,


----------



## FSLN

freedom of speech.............


----------



## Brotherhood

FSLN said:


> freedom of speech.............



And most important of all, freedom for your indigenous drink


----------



## mike05

justanobserver said:


> This implied that we have been the aggressors and you guys were defending poor Pakistan, I wanted to correct that perspective.
> 
> As for your second point, youth are finally entering politics in large numbers, there will come a day when India will have a young,confident and assertive leader. So yes in the future anything could happen.)



Actually I was not implying anything and was not intending too anyway, my points were simply if Pakistan did not have a nuclear weapon back in 98 would India still use diplomacy to negotiate with them? Given that India is a lot stronger military and financially then it was 3 decades ago compared to Pakistan who can definitely say no despite who started to the previous conflicts? Also now that both sides have WMD there hasn't been a war of recent especially with the Kasmir conflicts and Mumbai attacks etc. 



justanobserver said:


> In obtaining weapons we don't hold any moral high ground, completely agree with you on that point.
> 
> BUT, proliferation is a completely different story, Pakistan through AQ Khan proliferated nuclear weapons to North Korea, Iran and Libya. That's where we get the moral high ground and that is also why AQ Khan is under house arrest in Pakistan.



Every Nuclear power is guilty of proliferation at some point, China trusted the wrong person to work with for assisting in the Pakistan Nuclear pro gramme though he was the best person for the job (Just like the US trusting Osama BL to help them in Afghanistan). If China wanted North Korea to have a bomb that badly they can gift wrap one and drop it at the border.

India on the hand even invited Iraq scientist to work together on Nuclear related work and a host of similar proliferations. Thats a lot of discussion in this other link which I won't bother to put here.

As said all Nuclear are guilty of proliferation some way of the other regardless of who did and did not signed the NPT. The only country that can take the moral high ground on this is the country without any nukes period and that is why should not even compare who is bigger proliferation baddy because its pointless.


----------



## prototype

Finally back here after a long ban....but what r we discussing here 

Future Sino-Indian relation or past Sino-Pak-India relation


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> Please could you give us more information. Chinese history is not my subject, and I am therefore unable to link this to any corresponding Tibetan historical episode or to Indian reports.





I think it was against Nepalis. Not Indians.. I cant really remember. But Sikh Indians fought the Tibetans.

"Ten Great Campaigns" is an interesting war. When the Manchus fought several enemies. Including the Gurkhas.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Varghese said:


> I think it was against Nepalis. Not Indians.. I cant really remember. But Sikh Indians fought the Tibetans.
> 
> "Ten Great Campaigns" is an interesting war. When the Manchus fought several enemies. Including the Gurkhas.



Several of the later campaigns ended in near disaster but were called victories any ways since Qianlong was getting senile during the later phases of his reign.


----------



## justanobserver

mike05 said:


> Actually I was not implying anything and was not intending too anyway, my points were simply if Pakistan did not have a nuclear weapon back in 98 would India still use diplomacy to negotiate with them?



Look at it both ways:

Pakistan got nukes in 1998 and Kargil war happened in 1999

India had a nuclear weapon in 1974, still Kargil war happened in 1999

Having nukes, doesn't mean there won't be war. 



> Given that India is a lot stronger military and financially then it was 3 decades ago compared to Pakistan who can definitely say no despite who started to the previous conflicts?



India was always a lot stronger than Pak that's why we won the 3 wars (Pakistanis here would say otherwise, but then *neutral sources* are your friend), rather it's their constant goal of seeking parity with India that has left them in their current state. 



> Also now that both sides have WMD there hasn't been a war of recent especially with the Kasmir conflicts and Mumbai attacks etc.



Which recent 'kashmir conflicts' are you talking about?

Mumbai was tragic, but we didn't retalite because of one major reason: USA (many would say moral high ground, but thats not the case).

It would have totally jeopardized the American WoT operation (that was probably the goal of the terrorists).

In fact the Bob Woodward book actually quotes Bush saying "we absolutely have to stop them from going to war"



> Every Nuclear power is guilty of proliferation at some point, China trusted the wrong person to work with for assisting in the Pakistan Nuclear pro gramme though he was the best person for the job (Just like the US trusting Osama BL to help them in Afghanistan). If China wanted North Korea to have a bomb that badly they can gift wrap one and drop it at the border.





> India on the hand even invited Iraq scientist to work together on Nuclear related work and a host of similar proliferations. Thats a lot of discussion in this other link which I won't bother to put here.





Wow just...wow you gave me a link to thread (on Pakistan Defence Forum !) which has the article from BS blogs ! 

It's almost as if you guys don't want to listen. I post credible articles and you go on like 'lalalalallalalallala can't hear you'




> As said all Nuclear are guilty of proliferation



Not India. Give me one *credible* article (not from blogs and bogus sources)


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> It's almost as if you guys don't want to listen. I post credible articles and you go on like 'lalalalallalalallala can't hear you'



OK then, let's cut to the chase. What do you want to say?



justanobserver said:


> Look at it both ways:
> 
> Pakistan got nukes in 1998 and Kargil war happened in 1999
> 
> India had a nuclear weapon in 1974, still Kargil war happened in 1999
> 
> Having nukes, doesn't mean there won't be war.



As I said before, Pakistan only tested nuclear weapons in 1998, and Kargil was in 1999. One year is not enough to develop a mature stockpile of nuclear weapons. 

At that point there was no option of a massive nuclear retaliation. In addition, India had a "No first use" policy so there was no threat of using nukes in a conventional conflict at that time.

What war has taken place, between two nuclear powers that both had the *capability* of massive nuclear retaliation?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## justanobserver

> OK then, let's cut to the chase. What do you want to say?



About the 'lalalalalal' part, fine I got pissed. I mean how the hell are articles from 
*owlstree.blogspot.com* credible?!!



> What do you want to say?



Hmm good question, thread started off with India-China relations and now has meandered off.

Ignoring the China-Pakistan part and focusing only on India-Pakistan, I would say that there is a high possibility of future war.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Joe Shearer said:


> Please could you give us more information. Chinese history is not my subject, and I am therefore unable to link this to any corresponding Tibetan historical episode or to Indian reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about the same incident? If so, the same request please: names, dates, sources.
> 
> Regards,



Sir I was referring to this individual.

Wang Xuance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The article links to English sources on the battles.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> Hmm good question, thread started off with India-China relations and now has meandered off.
> 
> Ignoring the China-Pakistan part and *focusing only on India-Pakistan, I would say that there is a high possibility of future war.*



I disagree on this point, considering that both sides now have mature nuclear stockpiles (therefore making war more costly). 

However I would welcome your views on such a topic. 

Since Pakistan does not have a "No first use" policy, and India has greater conventional forces, don't you think a war between India-Pakistan has a very high chance of turning nuclear?


----------



## justanobserver

> Originally Posted by *Chinese-Dragon*
> As I said before, Pakistan only tested nuclear weapons in 1998, and Kargil was in 1999. One year is not enough to develop a mature stockpile of nuclear weapons.
> 
> At that point there was no option of a massive nuclear retaliation. In addition, India had a "No first use" policy so there was no threat of using nukes in a conventional conflict at that time.
> 
> What war has taken place, between two nuclear powers that both had the capability of massive nuclear retaliation?



You guys had the Red Army march on your soil in 1969 and both you had nukes!

1965/1971 all out type wars won't occur, but a war like Kargil (albeit of a smaller scale) could definitely happen in the future.

Like I said a war which threatens the very existence of Pakistan or balkanization would definitely trigger a nuclear response. But border skirmishes are bound to happen


----------



## mike05

justanobserver said:


> Wow just...wow you gave me a link to thread (on Pakistan Defence Forum !) which has the article from BS blogs !
> 
> It's almost as if you guys don't want to listen. I post credible articles and you go on like 'lalalalallalalallala can't hear you'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not India. Give me one *credible* article (not from blogs and bogus sources)



My god you are peanut, I put the link because there are comments linking to other reports by US congressional findings indicating that India too is guilty of proliferation. Can you 100% say that India has *never *proliferated any Nuclear Technology to other nations???

I did not deny any of what you said is inaccurate except for how you like to paint the GOI as some kind of saint in this affairs.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> You guys had the Red Army march on your soil in 1969 and both you had nukes!



That wasn't a full-blown war, that was just border clashes. And at that time China did not have a significant nuclear stockpile either.

Like you said, even without a large nuclear stockpile, it becomes limited to "conflicts" rather than full-blown "wars".

Anyway I'm not sure what I'm trying to convince you of. If you feel a future "war" between India and Pakistan is inevitable, then what can I say.


----------



## corporate_slave

mike05 said:


> My god you are peanut, I put the link because there are comments linking to other reports by US congressional findings indicating that India too is guilty of proliferation. Can you 100% say that India has *never *proliferated any Nuclear Technology to other nations???
> 
> I did not deny any of what you said is inaccurate except for how you like to paint the GOI as some kind of saint in this affairs.



I have not heard of anyone claiming that India is guilty of proliferation, except by the Pakistani propaganda machine. I would be obliged if you could provide the link right here. Until I see a link (a Pakistani Jingo site won't do, neither will some blogspot/wordpress thing), I will maintain that India has 100% never proliferated any nuke technology. (by the way, when you speak of 'Nations', which nation are you referring to? There can't be too many which you have in mind!). I accept, as does the other Indian poster, that India is also guilty of obtain tech through 'underhand means' (for lack of a better word), but that is very different from proliferation.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

corporate_slave said:


> I have not heard of anyone claiming that India is guilty of proliferation, except by the Pakistani propaganda machine. I would be obliged if you could provide the link right here. Until I see a link (a Pakistani Jingo site won't do, neither will some blogspot/wordpress thing), I will maintain that India has 100% never proliferated any nuke technology. (by the way, when you speak of 'Nations', which nation are you referring to? There can't be too many which you have in mind!). I accept, as does the other Indian poster, that India is also guilty of obtain tech through 'underhand means' (for lack of a better word), but that is very different from proliferation.



OK, for the sake of argument, let's assume that China is guilty of proliferation, and India is not. (Neither of which can be proved officially).

What now?


----------



## justanobserver

> Originally Posted by *mike05 *
> My god you are peanut, I put the link because there are comments linking to other reports by US congressional findings indicating that India too is guilty of proliferation.



What such comments (regarding to India proliferating nukes) are there ?

The lone article (whos author is some Pakistani with an anglo name, happens a lot, google 'Christina Palmer') only appears on a *blog*, a questionable *pakistani defense journal* (stopped in 2006) and a *third rate pakistani newspaper*, heck the article even mentions the Hindu caste system !



> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> I did not deny any of what you said is inaccurate except for how you like to paint the GOI as some kind of saint in this affairs.



In obtaining nukes, yeah we employed every dirty trick in the book , converting a Canadian research reactor into a military one, probably took help from Russians too

In proliferation yes we're saints  . But I don't get it, why are you trying to implicate us? No credible source exists, you've taken a stance of 'guilty until proven innocent' (which we are when we got the NPT exemption)


----------



## Illusive

mike05 said:


> My god you are peanut, I put the link because there are comments linking to other reports by US congressional findings indicating that India too is guilty of proliferation. Can you 100% say that India has *never *proliferated any Nuclear Technology to other nations???
> 
> I did not deny any of what you said is inaccurate except for how you like to paint the GOI as some kind of saint in this affairs.



The only proliferation India did was 74 nuke testing. Faced lot of sanctions, other than that its clean, clean that numerous nations are willing to give India nuclear deals. Surely there were objections but in the end they trust India.


----------



## justanobserver

> Originally Posted by *Chinese-Dragon*
> OK, for the sake of argument, let's assume that China is guilty of proliferation, and India is not. (Neither of which can be proved officially).



There are plenty of articles showing China proliferating nukes to Pakistan, two links were posted from the Washington Post and FAS. However countries can't be sued, heck you're in the P5.

Other countries have proliferated too, France to Israel is one such example I can think of (FAS again has articles on it), but what is anyone going to do about it? Sue France?




> Originally Posted by *Illusive*
> The only proliferation India did was 74 nuke testing.



We didn't proliferate it to *other countries*, that is the main point


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

justanobserver said:


> There are plenty of articles showing China proliferating nukes to Pakistan, two links were posted from the Washington Post and FAS. However countries can't be sued, heck you're in the P5.
> 
> Other countries have proliferated too, France to Israel is one such example I can think of (FAS again has articles on it), but what is anyone going to do about it? Sue France?



I'll wait until China is officially recognized as a proliferator by other governments, rather than just some news stories.

And like I said, assuming this is true, what now?

Does that mean that South Asia will forever be bound in the alignment of China and the USA supporting Pakistan? (Russia supports both India and China so it cancels out).


----------



## corporate_slave

Chinese-Dragon said:


> OK, for the sake of argument, let's assume that China is guilty of proliferation, and India is not. (Neither of which can be proved officially).
> 
> What now?



Actually, I wasn't even talking about China! 

I was contradicting the posters presumption that India proliferated Nuke tech!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## corporate_slave

Illusive said:


> The only proliferation India did was 74 nuke testing.



That's not called 'proliferation'. Poliferation means selling the nuke tech to other countries. What we did was obtain the nuke tech under the guise of civilian tech.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

corporate_slave said:


> Actually, I wasn't even talking about China!
> 
> I was contradicting the posters presumption that India proliferated Nuke tech!



Sorry, I was directing that comment towards justanobserver.

(For the record I never accused anyone of proliferating anything.)


----------



## Illusive

As far as China and India relationship is concerned, both are important nations in Asia. World watches our progress, publishes blogs articles about our economy. But sadly both see each other as threat, but those issues are small which can be solved diplomatically. It will grow if the governments put an effort to it, if media puts effort into it. People will then definitely like each other. 

The relations have stalled a bit, but there are these rough patches, we have to live together, because we are people, people of two great countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mirza Jatt

India has a very good record in proliferation..one of the reasons why Japan agreed to go for a nuclear deal with India.


----------



## justanobserver

> Originally Posted by *Chinese-Dragon*
> I'll wait until China is officially recognized as a proliferator by other governments, rather than just some news stories.
> 
> And like I said, assuming this is true, what now?



What? There is no official body of "recognition of proliferation" outside of the P5, the P5 can do what they wish



> And like I said, assuming this is true, what now?



Dude the links are from FAS!
FAS is not some joke agency, it's the Federation of American Scientists!



> The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) is a nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to using science and scientific analysis to make the world more secure. FAS was founded in 1945 by scientists who worked on the Manhattan Project to develop the first atomic bombs.



My thinking is not "oh lets sue china" but responses for the following statements made by mike



> Originally Posted by *mike05*
> China did not provide Nukes, Pakistan developed the nukes herself





> Originally Posted by* mike05*(talk about trying to take the moral high ground). Both sides obtain their weapons thru unorthodox means so there is no right and wrong in either case, what makes India's methods of obtaining its weapons any better then Pakistan's?



My point point being, we do hold the moral high ground (against pakistan) as we didn't *proliferate* weapons, but again that's not totally related to the title of the thread


----------



## Mirza Jatt

If majority of Indian and Chinese on this forum agree that the relation between two countries will be/should be good and warm...this itself proves what the majority of the learned men in both the countries want.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Illusive said:


> The relations have stalled a bit, but there are these rough patches, we have to live together, because we are people, people of two great countries.



That's how I feel as well.


----------



## captonjohn

*So the first thing we want is leadership in Aisa, or better, leadership of aisa-africa. Can india abide that? If you can, we could form a US-canada relationship----assuming the potential of india, I think you would not agree.*

Wow so you want leadership at any cost? Tell me any country who don't have a dream to be no. 1 or lead their region? So if you can wish leadership then why can't we wish to do same and wish to lead world? 

*Can india abide that?*

And what do you mean by this? Can you abide this? Can you leave your will to take leadership of world? You are indirectly saying that china wants leadership at any cost and we can be friend to india only if india leave his will to lead india and choose to be a puppet nation for china. How can you think like that? 

*Secondly, for our influence in SE,NE asia and our own energy security, the control over India occean and Southern china sea is essential for China. The basest level should be our own safe passage through the Malacca , the highest level should be the ability of denial to all other passage through the Occean if we dictated it so----Does not mean that we will ever do it, Just like the US, it is not about what you do, but what you can do. 

Once that was achieved, NE nation, like Japan, korea will fall to our camp lilke the apple in autumn.
*

There are many nations has their interests in other nation's soil and sea but that doesn't mean they starts creating naval or military bases to encircle those countries or frighten them by your power. You are directly saying that we have interests in Indian ocean and hence either india should share it with us or we'll take it by force. Indian ocean is not anybody's personal property and India has got its' natural leadership and ownership and you can't deny this. 


*Lets we imaging every country has a globle of influence and a globle of interests. our globle of interests has reached far far to every corner in the world. The most important points is: 1 NE aisa, 2 MEest, 3 africa 4 N america 5 EU. But now our globle of influence are locked inside the NE by US and cannot go further away from our border. And no one outside our influence globle would dare to join us because US has every possible leverage to dictate them--from aid to embargo to invasion. So when the ultimate confliction between us and US came, they will certainly fall to their camp whether they like it or not.

NE, ME EU, NA all are the strongest fortress of US which we cannot take by conventional means. But for NE and ME, there is SE and SA, which has always been chaotic and weak in US influence and that is where we can take. SE asia and S asia connects the world energy pool to the world factory, everyone with the sanity would understand that dominance over these two area would neutralize the US dominance over NE and ME.
*

I was thinking that china is a threat is just a thinking and not a reality but after reading your views I'm sure that you are the most overconfident fool who thinks that only he has intelligence and power and others are weak. Do you think that if you go ahead on your plan India would just see and do nothing? Do you believe that India can't have any solution? You should reconsider your thinking.


*can india abide our dominance of south east aisa?*
Why should India abide your dominance in their region? Can you do the same? You have just one two advantage, one is population and another is economy but you are directly underestimating world's second largest population and fast growing economy here. 


*can india share the dominance of india occean with us?*
Can you share chinese ocean with india? If yes then India too can. If NO then it's impossible for you and for us too.


*can we trust india as the greater share holder of india occean?*
You won't get any share of indian ocean as it's belongs to india and india has authority to use it.


*can india trust us as the greater share holder of SE aisa?
can we cooperate to jam US out of these two area?*

These two questions become useless after reading your question and my answer. 

You are actually suffering with NAZI philosophy and syndrome of expansionism. You directly saying we can't see stronger india hence we can't be friend. Your overconfidence is reminding me Adolf Hitler who had suffered same thinking that "it's just a rotten structure, just a kick would down whole structure".

If you thinks same then also read the result of this. My good advise to you "DON'T CONSIDER INDIA AS A ROTTEN STRUCTURE WHICH CAN BE DOWN BY A KICK!! IF YOU DOES THEN YOU WON'T HAVE LEGS!!".


----------



## Rig Vedic

*China gets an ashram near Beijing*







_Sri Sri Ravishankar, founder of the Art of Living, inaugurated an Art of Living ashram near Beijing on Monday._ 

On Monday, the People&#8217;s Republic of China got its first ashram.

Located a two-hour drive away from here and nestled amid the industrial suburbs of this fast-expanding metropolis, the 165-acre retreat for yoga and meditation was opened by Sri Sri Ravishankar&#8217;s Art of Living foundation. Billing itself as the first authentic Indian retreat in a country where spirituality is on the rise, the ashram will offer a range of courses.

&#8220;There is a yearning for spiritual thought in today&#8217;s China, and this centre will provide people [with] a path to have cleaner, calmer and happier lives,&#8221; Sri Sri Ravishankar told The Hindu.

This is his first visit to China. On Monday, he interacted with religious leaders as well as officials of the Communist Party, who had given sanction for the project. The centre will accommodate 160 students at a time. The teachers, who are from all over China, had undergone training in India.

On Sunday, the centre held a ceremony with dance performances and lectures. It was attended by around 500 people. The organisers said they could have received a greater audience &#8220;of more than 3,000,&#8221; but doing so would have required a special permission from the local authorities.

*Interaction*

Most of the questions from the Chinese audience in an interaction with Sri Sri Ravishankar on Sunday revolved round how people could deal with the stress of modern life and preserving family values in a society that is being increasingly influenced by Western ideas.

Among those who attended was Man Hu, a middle-aged entrepreneur from Shanghai, who runs a manufacturing plant. &#8220;Like everyone else in today&#8217;s China, I am under great stress and looking for a way to manage by life in a better way and find some purpose,&#8221; she said.

Those connected with the project said they were surprised by the positive response from the authorities, who are usually careful about allowing foreign institutions, particularly those with spiritual leanings, to spread their word in China.

On Monday, Sri Sri Ravishankar met with Chen Haosu, a former vice-minister in the Propaganda Department and the president of the Chinese People&#8217;s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC), which invited him to China. &#8220;India and China are naturally close, in culture, family values, music and dance,&#8221; he told Mr. Chen. &#8220;The East has a lot to offer to the world to counter the stress and ills of society that the West is facing.&#8221;

*&#8220;Great expectations&#8221;*

Mr. Chen said he had &#8220;great expectations&#8221; of the visit. &#8220;We hope this will bring happiness to people. Chinese people have an enthusiasm and passion for Indian culture. In the past 30 years, we have seen fast development of the Chinese economy. Now, people will also require more spiritual activities.&#8221;

Sri Sri Ravishankar said the centre would look to engage with the Chinese civil society, and even involve itself, as it has in the United States, Canada and Germany where it has centres, in environmental campaigns such as tree-planting drives. It is also in talks with the local police here to involve itself in a drug rehabilitation programme.

As Sri Sri Ravishankar left Monday&#8217;s meeting with Chinese officials, he was surprised by a gift he did not quite expect, and one that was at odds with the message of peace he was looking to bring to China &#8212; a bamboo panel with engravings from Sun Tzu&#8217;s Art of War.

*http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article851154.ece*


----------



## SpArK

*India and China to begin high-level meetings ahead of Chinese PM visit​*

Published: Saturday, Nov 13, 2010, 21:36 IST



A series of high-level meetings, starting from external affairs minister S M Krishna's bilateral with his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi, will take place between India and China ahead of Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to New Delhi in the mid of next month.

India's concerns over the presence of Chinese troops in P0K, the issue of stapled visas to residents of Jammu and Kashmir, among other issues are expected to dominate the agenda of these high-level bilaterals, which are going to set the tone for the meeting between the Premiers of the two countries during Wen's India visit, officials said.

Krishna, who is arriving in China tomorrow for the meeting of the foreign ministers of the three-nation Russia, India and China (RIC) grouping, will also hold a bilateral meeting with his Chinese counterpart here.

Krishna is expected to take up a number of issues, including US President Barack Obama's endorsement of India's bid for permanent membership of the UN Security Council, which has left only China, among the veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council, to make its stand clear.

The other four  US, Russia, UK and France  have already conveyed their consent for India's bid.

India's concerns over reports of the presence of troops in P0K are also expected to figure in the talks in the run-up to Wen's visit, Indian officials here told Press Trust of India.

India has already conveyed its concerns to China following reports in the US media about a large presence of Chinese troops in the region.

China subsequently informed Indian Ambassador S Jaishankar that Chinese personnel were present in Gilgit and Baltistan only to carry out relief activities for flood affected victims.

But Indian officials said India's concerns in this regard persisted, especially over personnel building projects in P0K as it is a disputed area.

Also relating to Kashmir is the contentious stapled visa policy of China for residents of Jammu and Kashmir.

India had put on hold defence exchanges with China following denial of visa to General Lt Gen B S Jaswal on the ground that he headed troops in Jammu and Kashmir which China regards as a disputed area.

Krishna's talks with Yang will be followed by the annual strategic dialogue with the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing on November 16, for which foreign secretary Nirupama Rao is accompanying the external affairs minister.

Rao would hold talks with Chinese vice foreign minister Zhang Zhijun and also call on Yang for another round of talks.

Her visit would be followed by the visit of National Security Advisor (NSA) Shivshankar Menon who would hold the 14th round of border talks with Chinese special representative state councilor Dai Binggu on November 29 here.

The meetings are expected to prepare adequate ground work for Wen, who Indian officials hope, would address the concerns that emerged as major road blocks for development of Sino-India ties.

Hopes of a movement towards resolution of the issues were raised after the recent meeting in Hanoi between Wen and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on sidelines of the East Asia Summit during which the Chinese Premier announced his visit to India before which the two sides should address the mutual concerns.

The issues being flagged by India include more trade access to Indian goods and services to address the skewed trade balance.

India wants access for IT, pharmaceuticals, agro products and engineering goods and has conducted several awareness campaigns all over China during the past few months to scout for business.



India and China to begin high-level meetings ahead of Chinese PM visit - World - DNA


----------



## Hulk

2 more years at max, Indian Chinese friendship will be visible.


----------



## Rig Vedic

*Kumarajiva&#8217;s Passage*

_Dunhuang&#8217;s majestic Buddhist murals ought to be known better here_
M.S. GILL






Recently, I spent two days in Shanghai, and felt like doing something different, seeing some unknown part of this vast country. Buddhism was taken long ago to China, by Chinese monks, and it flourished and expanded there, and beyond, with regular sustenance from the monks of Nalanda university and other great teachers from India. In Tibet and China, they watered the plant of this great faith, with the teachings and scriptures which the monks had brought from India. I had read of a famous set of Buddhist caves, much like those in Ajanta, deep in the Gobi desert, far west of Beijing, in a place called Dunhuang.

From Shanghai, I flew for many hours, glued to the window, to see the great desert. The dunes were mountainous. Occasionally, there was a green valley sandwiched between the dunes. Eventually, I came over flat lands, flew over some irrigated squares of agriculture, with summer crops, and landed at a huge airfield. The China of Shanghai and Beijing was very far away.

The next day, I went to see the grottoes. A wide and straight highway ran from the town to the sand dunes, located five km away. The sand mountains enclosed a small oasis lake, called the &#8216;Moon lake&#8217;. Tourists from around the world were climbing the sand dunes and sand-skating down. Others were riding Central Asian double-humped camels. Dunhuang and the Moon lake comprise the oasis, for which the caravans from Kashgar and Khotan steered themselves across the great desert, navigating by the stars. From there, they carried on eastwards to Lanzhou, Xian and beyond to the coast. It was but natural that Dunhuang became a centre of Buddhist culture.

In the gravelly sand-packed hills, caves were carved from about 400 AD, over centuries, and a Buddhist establishment came up. The Mogao grottoes are said to be dated from around 366 AD, when the first of the caves was carved by the monk Le Zun. There are many more nearby, in other hills of the Mingsha mountains. The surviving caves today can be traced back to 430 AD, and originated from the Indian Chaitya caves. Three of these have large sculptures of the Buddha, the largest being 34.5 metres. This is second only to the great Buddha of Leshan, 71 m tall. In one cave in an oblong chamber rests a sculpture of the Sakyamuni in nirvana.

The paintings are amazing; most of them are so carefully preserved that you get complete scenes of the life of the monks, the Buddhist Jataka stories, even pictures of rich donors. Indian monks and princes, who over the centuries came and taught and watered the plant of Buddhism, are all there in the murals, and the curators are proud to point them out to me. The monk Kumarajiva is there, with his Indian features, Indian dress, and seated on a horse. All these testify to the region&#8217;s links with India. To paint on the less stable surface in Dunhuang, quite unlike the granite caves of Ajanta, and for these to be somehow sustained over centuries is a miracle of the dry Gobi desert.

In May 1900, Wang Yuanlu, a monk, accidentally discovered the Library Cave, No. 17. It was packed with manuscripts and silk paintings, and preserved for centuries. In March 1907 Aurel Stein, the famous Hungarian explorer, came on an expedition, persuaded the monk, and took away 24 boxes of manuscripts, and five boxes of silk paintings and textiles. He came again in 1914, and bought another 570 scrolls. In 1908, the Frenchman Paul Pelliot visited the caves and numbered all the accessible caves, copied inscriptions and took photos. He also took away part of the treasure. In 1910-11, Tachibana and Koichiro, from the Japanese Otani expedition, took away cartloads of manuscripts, and even two sculptures. In 1914-15, the Russian explorer Sergei Oldenburg collected 18,000 manuscripts and 100 silk paintings. He also cut off more than 10 pieces of murals, and took 10 sculptures. In 1924, American Landon Warner removed and took away 26 pieces of murals as well as two sculptures. Finally, in 1943, the establishment of a National Research Institute for Dunhuang ended the vandalism. About two-thirds of the manuscripts and paintings are in western countries, China has the rest, and today they are guarded and cared for with dedication.

I spent a whole day in the desert heat, going from cave to cave. It came as an eye-opener, and I want to say this to all Indians: Do not stick to the soft, urban Shanghai comforts. Our people must visit Dunhuang, and make it known in the Buddha&#8217;s own land.

(The author is the Union minister of sports)
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267904


----------



## JayAtl

Some international news media signals, websites blocked in China - CNN.com


Beijing (CNN) -- On the eve of the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony in Oslo, Norway, CNN.com and CNN International are among the websites and television networks that have been blocked in mainland China.

The winner of the prize is imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. What's going on? CNN's Beijing Bureau Chief Jaime FlorCruz offers some insight.

Q: *There are reports that users in China can't access the CNN website and the websites of other news organizations. What's the situation in Beijing and across mainland China?*

A: CNN.com is completely blocked as of today. Because when I use [a privately secured network] the site works ok. But if I'm using the normal broadband connection at home, that most Chinese have, an error message comes up. It says "this website is not available." It's sort of the standard thing that happens when a website is blocked here in China.

Q: *Is television news also blocked?*

A: Every time our reports are broadcast about Nobel Prize winner [Liu, who is serving an 11-year sentence in a Chinese prison for what the government called "inciting subversion of state power"] the television screens black out. We are required to beam our signal through a Chinese satellite station before it is broadcast to mainland China. That creates a 12-second delay. Authorities use that time to black out specific parts of the signal. Whenever anything about WikiLeaks or the Nobel Prize is mentioned, the signal is blocked.


Q: *How common is this?*

A: They've been doing this many years. Usually anything having to do with the "three Ts and one F" -- Tibet, Taiwan, the '89 Tiananmen Square protests, and Falun Gong, a spiritual group banned in China. The process had abated for the last several months, and especially right after the Olympics. But in recent weeks we've noticed the practice has become more frequent. But now when anything about the Nobel Prize or WikiLeaks as it pertains to China is reported, our stories are blacked out.

Q: *Does this occur only in mainland China, or is it in Hong Kong as well?*

A: I believe it's just mainland China, that's what they can control.

Q: *How do Chinese authorities police this?*

A: They watch our stories and read our stories very closely. They probably have written directives over what kinds of stories need to be censored. I doubt that people pushing the buttons know English very well. But they probably base it on certain video they see, or key words that they hear. I think it's emblematic of how tightly controlled this is, and how sensitive authorities are about tomorrow's award ceremony in Oslo.

Q: *What are the Chinese sites saying about the Nobel Prize, if anything?*

A: The authorities are also blocking certain websites that may be touching on this or WikiLeaks. I think it's safe to say that most Chinese are not aware of the [Nobel Peace Prize winner]. And whatever they may have read about him has been through official talking points and state commentary.


----------



## abrahams

just wanted to know... is twitter, facebook, orkut, linkedin and other social networking sites banned in china...


----------



## conworldus

If CNN wants to operate in China, it has to follow our laws, plain and simple.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Is *"Zhongguo"* equivalent to *"Bharat"* to India?


----------



## JayAtl

Varghese said:


> Is *"Zhongguo"* equivalent to *"Bharat"* to India?



yes. it Chinese for china


----------



## JayAtl

conworldus said:


> If CNN wants to operate in China, it has to follow our laws, plain and simple.



I believe it allows limited access and but Big Zhongguo blocks it every time there is any news that they deem they want to hide from the world and its citizens.


----------



## Missing.Pieces

Nobel Peace prize is a joke. 

Obama won peace prize while his country was at with two other countries.

When it is said to them, why you make mischief on earth, they say, we are only making peace.


----------



## DesiGuy

why ban???? 

aren't people in china smart enough to figure out what's right/wrong for them!


----------



## JayAtl

Missing.Pieces said:


> Nobel Peace prize is a joke.
> 
> Obama won peace prize while his country was at with two other countries.
> 
> When it is said to them, why you make mischief on earth, they say, we are only making peace.



then ask your Nobel recipient from Pakistan to give it back.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

JayAtl said:


> then ask your Nobel recipient from Pakistan to give it back.



This peace award is given on political basis nothin else.


----------



## JayAtl

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> This peace award is given on political basis nothin else.



Okay then- if you suspect some fraud here from this organization, have your guy give his prize back. there are only hundreds of others attending and representing their countries. feel free to stand for a dictatorship and no free press. Your Army chief has already said last year he considering is another coup/ regime change.


----------



## PeacefulIndian

DesiGuy said:


> why ban????
> 
> aren't people in china smart enough to figure out what's right/wrong for them!



The issue is - they ARE smart enough to figure that out.... hence the ban


----------



## Abhishek_

Nobel: China blocks foreign websites ahead of ceremony
Padlock on a computer keyboard There has been no comment from Beijing

China has blocked several foreign news websites, including the BBC and Norwegian broadcaster NRK, on the eve of the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony.

Some Nobel-related reports on CNN were also reported to be inaccessible.

A furious China has denounced the Nobel award honouring activist Liu Xiaobo - who is serving a 11-year prison term for subversion - as an "obscenity".

The Nobel Foundation has praised Mr Liu for his "long and non-violent struggle" for political reform in China.

Beijing has criticised Norway, which is hosting Friday's Nobel ceremony, and suggested that Western nations are trying to impose their values on China.

In a statement, the BBC said: "We can confirm that all BBC sites, not just news, are blocked to users in China. We are not alone. It is the same for many other sites belonging to international news organisations.

"We are disappointed that our audiences in China are denied access to our impartial and editorially independent journalism."

There has been no comment from Beijing.

BBC News - Nobel: China blocks foreign websites ahead of ceremony

*My personal Opinion: The world needs to leave china alone, why do western nations try to shove their culture down china's throat. Let the people of china decide what's good for them. So far it looks like most them are fine with CPC.

As for CPC, it would serve them better if they stay calm; jumping up and down only makes matters worse for them since it seems they are threatening other countries (most countries wouldn't like that attitude). *


----------



## DesiGuy

PeacefulIndian said:


> The issue is - they ARE smart enough to figure that out.... hence the ban








Post of the day for me!


----------



## JayAtl

Abhishek_ said:


> *My personal Opinion: The world needs to leave china alone, why do western nations try to shove their culture down china's throat. Let the people of china decide what's good for them. So far it looks like most them are fine with CPC.
> 
> As for CPC, it would serve them better if they stay calm; jumping up and down only makes matters worse for them since it seems they are threatening other countries (most countries wouldn't like that attitude). *



your personal opinions are noble, but when you have china slowing the worlds economic recovery through currency manipulation, hacking into other countries systems through state supported subversive efforts, you have china supporting the world's pariah nations, you have china disregarding climate change, you have china trying to bully smaller countries by enforcing ridiculous arbitrary borders, when you have china abetting terrorist sympathizers with nuclear and weapons technology- Then we say WHEN china learns to afford the rest of the world the same respect- the world will reciprocate.


----------



## rohailmalhi

When u keep poking China what will it do it will obviously retailiate .
As one of the member already said leave china alone and Let chinese decide what is better for them or not.


----------



## below_freezing

in the US before 1970's, black parents in the US usually tried to shield their children from white racism. when met with someone calling them a subhuman dark ape, their parents would say, they just don't understand our culture. when some KKK clan members burn a cross on their yard, the parents say, it's because they need to get to know us better. and when a black is killed by a white mob, they try to hide it from their kids, and turn off the TV when they hear the commenter praise the killers.

but the truth comes out eventually, and when it does, the children will first be angry at their parents, but will be much more angry at the white man.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

On that afternoon in 2003, Hong Kong looked like a scene from a zombie movie  deserted streets, empty storefronts, even a bus seemingly abandoned in an intersection. I was the only shopper on the fourth floor of the Landmark, one of Hong Kong's most fashionable malls. The shop attendants, wearing surgical masks, leaned on the glass-topped counters and stared vacantly at racks of on-sale clothes; an employee at Kenzo told me the shop was averaging two customers a day. And she was counting me as one of them.

As the SARS virus exploded in early 2003 out of southern China, infecting thousands of people and killing hundreds, it was hard at first to piece together what was happening. We journalists focused on the biological and epidemiological aspects of the outbreak  the symptoms, the number infected, the path of the epidemic, which we traced on maps with our fingers. Yet as we tried to understand, there always seemed to be an obfuscating layer: something or someone was working against comprehension.


Read more: China: Too Little Information - TimeFrames - TIME #ixzz17jhXGJdL


----------



## HongWu

This is my blog post on future China-India relations. As you can see, things are very bad and could destabilize even more.



> China's defense strategy should be to achieve its strategic interests in 5 theaters: Northeast, East, South, South Asia and Middle East.
> 
> 
> *Northeast: Hold the Line and Counterattack*
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Northeast theater is to directly threaten and put pressure on Japan's home islands and dominate the Korean peninsula against a potentially hostile South Korea. At sea, China must defend the Yellow Sea and counter any pressure from US naval presence in South Korea.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should base large numbers of long range artillery rockets (such as WS-2D) in North Korea that can blanket Tokyo in case of a war.
> 
> It should also guarantee North Korea's security by supplying it with weapons, advisers or even direct military intervention in case of a war with the South.
> 
> It should also counter the US naval presence in South Korea with PLAN. In case of a war, remove the US naval presence by moving PLA elite armor T-99A2 into South Korea and put into power a China-friendly government.
> 
> 
> *East: Hold the Line and Counterattack*
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Eastern theater is to control the East China Sea and support Ryukyu independence.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should lease a PLAN base in Taiwan from the nationalist government if politically feasible. Of course, it cannot tolerate any move toward de jure independence by Taiwan.
> 
> It should also have an amphibious strike force of 6 071 LPD that can land about 10,000 troops and armor on the Ryukyus or even Japan's home islands.
> 
> 
> *South: Project Power and Deter*
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Southern theater is to have a naval base further South in the South China Sea and eventually control access to Malacca Straits from the Eastern Side.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should lease a PLAN base in Cambodia and build a railroad from China through Laos to Cambodia.
> 
> It should also deploy an amphibious strike force of 6 071 LPD to simultaneously evict in a quick operation the military presence of South East Asian countries on China's islands in the South China Sea.
> 
> If Vietnam tries to go nuclear, it should also quickly take down Hanoi and control the entire Vietnam coastline down to Ho Chi Ming City (Saigon). Set up a China-friendly government in Vietnam.
> 
> 
> *South Asia: With Help from Pakistan, Regime Change India*
> 
> China's strategic interest in the South Asia theater is to contain, weaken, cripple and finally break apart India because it appears certain the Hindu civilization has decided to oppose the Chinese civilization in the 21st century.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should complete the railroad into Pakistan through Kashmir. Station PLA infantry expeditionary units in Kashmir ready to overrun India positions. Station elite PLA armor T-99A2 on the plains of South Asia ready to overrun India positions. Station a giant PLAN fleet at Gwadar threatening to land combat marines on India's western coastline.
> 
> It should also complete the railroad into Nepal. Station PLA infantry on the Nepal-Indian border ready to overrun India positions.
> 
> It should also build up troops levels at mountain passes in the Eastern Sector facing India. The Indians expect to move heavy artillery on to the Himalayan plains to counter China.
> 
> If India refuses to cease its hostility to China, China should drive elite PLA armor to New Delhi, surround the city, overthrow the Indian government and install a pro-Pakistan / pro-China government in New Delhi. The map of South Asia can be redrawn to form new buffer states for Pakistan and China.
> 
> This armored drive against New Delhi should be supported by simulatenous infantry attacks in Kashmir, Sikkim and Tawang supported by J-10 air superiority and Z-10A helicopter close air support. The first major engagement of the war should be a massive Chinese cruise missile CJ-10 and EMP attack against the main strength of the Indian army defending the capital city.
> 
> Indian army nuclear missile units should be hunted down by satellite reconnaisance and H-6K strategic bomber cruise missile strikes. The Chinese ballistic missile defense system successfully tested a year ago should be fully developed and deployed in Tibet.
> 
> Simultaneous with the land war, PLAN submarines (the new Type 095 class) based from Gwadar should enforce a shipping blockade against the west coast of Southern India. PLAN submarines based from Myanmar should enforce a shipping blockade against the East coast of Southern India.
> 
> 
> *Middle East: Support Iran*
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Middle East theater is to support countries opposed to US domination and persuade Middle East oil producers to sell their oil in RMB not dollars, thus fatally undermining the US dollar.
> 
> A US-led war against Iran by 2013 is very likely if a Republican president is voted in in 2012. From the recent Wikileaks episode, we can see Iran can build a basic nuclear deterrent arsenal with nuclear warhead and medium-range missile by about 2013.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should build a railway from Xinjiang in China through Central Asia to Iran's northeast. Through this railway, supply Iran with air defence weapons like HQ-9 and coastal defense weapons like C-803 to defend against US airstrikes or naval blockade. This railway could also transport energy supplies from Iran to China if the US imposes a blockade through the Gulf of Aden.
> 
> If Iran wants a basic nuclear deterrent against Israel, China should not get in its way.
> 
> China should also form an RMB denominated oil trading bloc with Iran and persuade other Middle East countries to join. This will give China an economic advantage of having the preeminent reserve currency.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Masterchief

I yearn for the day when china and india become friends again,and i believe that the day is near when we both will march together showing the world what peace really is,when we shall march together for a sustainable development,and i believe this idea of mine is not utopian ,its real.


----------



## Typhoon

HongWu said:


> This is my blog post on future China-India relations. As you can see, things are very bad and could destabilize even more.
> 
> China's defense strategy should be to achieve its strategic interests in 5 theaters: Northeast, East, South, South Asia and Middle East.
> 
> 
> Northeast: Hold the Line and Counterattack
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Northeast theater is to directly threaten and put pressure on Japan's home islands and dominate the Korean peninsula against a potentially hostile South Korea. At sea, China must defend the Yellow Sea and counter any pressure from US naval presence in South Korea.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should base large numbers of long range artillery rockets (such as WS-2D) in North Korea that can blanket Tokyo in case of a war.
> 
> It should also guarantee North Korea's security by supplying it with weapons, advisers or even direct military intervention in case of a war with the South.
> 
> It should also counter the US naval presence in South Korea with PLAN. In case of a war, remove the US naval presence by moving PLA elite armor T-99A2 into South Korea and put into power a China-friendly government.
> 
> 
> East: Hold the Line and Counterattack
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Eastern theater is to control the East China Sea and support Ryukyu independence.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should lease a PLAN base in Taiwan from the nationalist government if politically feasible. Of course, it cannot tolerate any move toward de jure independence by Taiwan.
> 
> It should also have an amphibious strike force of 6 071 LPD that can land about 10,000 troops and armor on the Ryukyus or even Japan's home islands.
> 
> 
> South: Project Power and Deter
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Southern theater is to have a naval base further South in the South China Sea and eventually control access to Malacca Straits from the Eastern Side.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should lease a PLAN base in Cambodia and build a railroad from China through Laos to Cambodia.
> 
> It should also deploy an amphibious strike force of 6 071 LPD to simultaneously evict in a quick operation the military presence of South East Asian countries on China's islands in the South China Sea.
> 
> If Vietnam tries to go nuclear, it should also quickly take down Hanoi and control the entire Vietnam coastline down to Ho Chi Ming City (Saigon). Set up a China-friendly government in Vietnam.
> 
> 
> South Asia: With Help from Pakistan, Regime Change India
> 
> *China's strategic interest in the South Asia theater is to contain, weaken, cripple and finally break apart India because it appears certain the Hindu civilization has decided to oppose the Chinese civilization in the 21st century.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should complete the railroad into Pakistan through Kashmir. Station PLA infantry expeditionary units in Kashmir ready to overrun India positions. Station elite PLA armor T-99A2 on the plains of South Asia ready to overrun India positions. Station a giant PLAN fleet at Gwadar threatening to land combat marines on India's western coastline.
> 
> It should also complete the railroad into Nepal. Station PLA infantry on the Nepal-Indian border ready to overrun India positions.
> 
> It should also build up troops levels at mountain passes in the Eastern Sector facing India. The Indians expect to move heavy artillery on to the Himalayan plains to counter China.
> 
> If India refuses to cease its hostility to China, China should drive elite PLA armor to New Delhi, surround the city, overthrow the Indian government and install a pro-Pakistan / pro-China government in New Delhi. The map of South Asia can be redrawn to form new buffer states for Pakistan and China.
> 
> This armored drive against New Delhi should be supported by simulatenous infantry attacks in Kashmir, Sikkim and Tawang supported by J-10 air superiority and Z-10A helicopter close air support. The first major engagement of the war should be a massive Chinese cruise missile CJ-10 and EMP attack against the main strength of the Indian army defending the capital city.
> 
> Indian army nuclear missile units should be hunted down by satellite reconnaisance and H-6K strategic bomber cruise missile strikes. The Chinese ballistic missile defense system successfully tested a year ago should be fully developed and deployed in Tibet.
> 
> Simultaneous with the land war, PLAN submarines (the new Type 095 class) based from Gwadar should enforce a shipping blockade against the west coast of Southern India. PLAN submarines based from Myanmar should enforce a shipping blockade against the East coast of Southern India.
> 
> *
> Middle East: Support Iran
> 
> China's strategic interest in the Middle East theater is to support countries opposed to US domination and persuade Middle East oil producers to sell their oil in RMB not dollars, thus fatally undermining the US dollar.
> 
> A US-led war against Iran by 2013 is very likely if a Republican president is voted in in 2012. From the recent Wikileaks episode, we can see Iran can build a basic nuclear deterrent arsenal with nuclear warhead and medium-range missile by about 2013.
> 
> To achieve these goals, China should build a railway from Xinjiang in China through Central Asia to Iran's northeast. Through this railway, supply Iran with air defence weapons like HQ-9 and coastal defense weapons like C-803 to defend against US airstrikes or naval blockade. This railway could also transport energy supplies from Iran to China if the US imposes a blockade through the Gulf of Aden.
> 
> If Iran wants a basic nuclear deterrent against Israel, China should not get in its way.
> 
> China should also form an RMB denominated oil trading bloc with Iran and persuade other Middle East countries to join. This will give China an economic advantage of having the preeminent reserve currency.



Nice analysis to *destroy India* in particular and o*thers such as Japan, S.Korea*, however, knowing CCP and China well I just wanted to know were these your thoughts or CCPs? Secondly how can you destroy India by arming Pakistan as one of your generals had quoted "China will fight till last pakistani"? Can in Geo-politics and Commerce China heavily depends on US, which it can never supersede! But you missed out your real competitor ie Russia which can Nuke you to stone age any day, as they had planned earlier! Reality of Chinese economy is known to everyone who reads, so how will you do all this??


----------



## Typhoon

LOL planning for another 1962 for India is on the cards!! 

Someone had said History repeats itself, and when it does fools dig their own grave.....Present Indian politicians seems to be so involved in filling Swiss bank accounts that they don't give a Damn about the nation, if thats not the case then I don't see any change in the attitude of present Indian Govt. and the one in 1962


----------



## HongWu

Typhoon said:


> Nice analysis to *destroy India* in particular and o*thers such as Japan, S.Korea*, however, knowing CCP and China well I just wanted to know were these your thoughts or CCPs?


I think CCP is the status quo power in China and gets its legitimacy through economic achievement and national military might.



Typhoon said:


> Secondly how can you destroy India by arming Pakistan as one of your generals had quoted "China will fight till last pakistani"?


I do not think Pakistan army really needs to be involved in an Indian operation. All China needs is permission to base and food / fuel supplies from Pakistan.



Typhoon said:


> Can in Geo-politics and Commerce China heavily depends on US, which it can never supersede!


Historically, China has always been a huge economic power. Chinese GDP is 4 times bigger than India. China is surpassing US in total GDP in about 15 to 20 years. 

As long as China can get oil from Iran through a railroad, it does not depend on challenging US in blue waters. So China does fine in both commerce and geo-politics!



Typhoon said:


> But you missed out your real competitor ie Russia which can Nuke you to stone age any day, as they had planned earlier!


This is not 1963 you know. China is actually ahead of Russia on strategic arms in quality. Russia used to be the world's number 2, now China is the world's number 2. China has its JL-2 fully operational, but where is the Bulava?



Typhoon said:


> Reality of Chinese economy is known to everyone who reads, so how will you do all this??


Nearly every Indian who comes to China has a surprising frown expression because they are confused how can China be so much more advanced than their imagination. Look at the difference between Beijing 2008 Olympics and Commonwealth Games 2010. Even the second-tier Guangzhou 2010 Asian Olympics was better than India. This is not a turtle and the hare problem you have here. China's comprehensive national power is at least 5 times that of India and it is growing even faster.


----------



## justanobserver

You know what, Chinese are *really* seeing India through Pakistan, this


> it appears certain the Hindu civilization has decided to oppose the Chinese civilization


 isn't new.

I've seen on some Chinese forums people going on how the 'Chinese should arm Pakistan' as they are the 'heirs of the Mughal Empire'. Moin Ansari is more effective than we know ! (they quoted one of his blogs) !


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Typhoon said:


> Nice analysis to *destroy India* in particular and o*thers such as Japan, S.Korea*, however, knowing CCP and China well I just wanted to know were these your thoughts or CCPs? Secondly how can you destroy India by arming Pakistan as one of your generals had quoted "China will fight till last pakistani"? Can in Geo-politics and Commerce China heavily depends on US, which it can never supersede! But you missed out your real competitor ie Russia which can Nuke you to stone age any day, as they had planned earlier! Reality of Chinese economy is known to everyone who reads, so how will you do all this??



China and Russia are allies now. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Sino-Russian_Treaty_of_Friendship

And I wonder if India still wants to join the SCO...


----------



## Jade

I am very optimistic on future Indo-China relations; As neighbors, we don't have any choice, but to live together.


----------



## Typhoon

Chinese-Dragon said:


> China and Russia are allies now.
> 
> 2001 Sino-Russian Treaty of Friendship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> And I wonder if India still wants to join the SCO...



Go tell this to Russians and see their reactions.....Mao ditched soviets and their alliance in favor of being on the lap of USA....Russians never like Chinese and its a fact after you have fought war and skirmishes!!

Now Russia is again Rising and being very assertive under Putin, surely China is not an ally as you may suggest!

P.S: shaking hands and signing few contracts you dont become allies in geo-politics!


----------



## Typhoon

HongWu said:


> I think CCP is the status quo power in China and gets its legitimacy through economic achievement and national military might.
> 
> 
> I do not think Pakistan army really needs to be involved in an Indian operation. All China needs is permission to base and food / fuel supplies from Pakistan.
> 
> 
> Historically, China has always been a huge economic power. Chinese GDP is 4 times bigger than India. China is surpassing US in total GDP in about 15 to 20 years.
> 
> As long as China can get oil from Iran through a railroad, it does not depend on challenging US in blue waters. So China does fine in both commerce and geo-politics!
> 
> 
> This is not 1963 you know. China is actually ahead of Russia on strategic arms in quality. Russia used to be the world's number 2, now China is the world's number 2. China has its JL-2 fully operational, but where is the Bulava?
> 
> 
> Nearly every Indian who comes to China has a surprising frown expression because they are confused how can China be so much more advanced than their imagination. Look at the difference between Beijing 2008 Olympics and Commonwealth Games 2010. Even the second-tier Guangzhou 2010 Asian Olympics was better than India. This is not a turtle and the hare problem you have here. China's comprehensive national power is at least 5 times that of India and it is growing even faster.



I was just curious how CCP or China would dismantle India after a war and install a puppet govt. like US did in Iraq? Because China's economic status is knwon to the west and how you cook your books has been admitted by your own leaders!! I just wanted to know how China will achieve this task...as China is no US and India is surely no Iraq!

P.S: I hope you are a Chinese not someone else!


----------



## HongWu

The current Indian government is ideologically incompatible with China, so it is in China's national interest to change that government while India is still much much weaker than China. The best way is through Pakistan once we build the railroad.

The two countries are so far apart in military power. China is building J-10, J-11B and soon J-10B. These are all better than the MKI in IAF. While China has the upper hand, it should reshape South Asia to be a more peaceful and harmonious environment for China and its allies.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

HongWu said:


> I do not think Pakistan army really needs to be involved in an Indian operation. All China needs is permission to base and food / fuel supplies from Pakistan.



If such a large scale military operation ever happens the following course of events will follow.

1.The Indian army will do everything in its power to repel the invasion.(We"ve never used our full force so far.)

2.Hypothetically,If that fails there"ll be the Hindu nationalist militia/revolutionary army(population army) ,who"ll drive out the _foreign devils_ .

3.Of course there"ll be foreign nations intervening ,(though i wouldn't much rely on them),but they"ll eventually force it status quo,before option 2 

4.After this whole military stunt,almost every nation around China will turn into a Western satellite state.

The eventual victor being the West.

With India and China being bitter enemies for the centuries.

Remember your nation could not save your all time ally in 1971,even with the West on your side. (though USSR no longer exists.)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Typhoon

HongWu said:


> The current Indian government is ideologically incompatible with China, so it is in China's national interest to change that government while India is still much much weaker than China. The best way is through Pakistan once we build the railroad.
> 
> The two countries are so far apart in military power. China is building J-10, J-11B and soon J-10B. These are all better than the MKI in IAF. While China has the upper hand, it should reshape South Asia to be a more peaceful and harmonious environment for China and its allies.




The answer is not writing Blogs in favor of yourself and your allies pakistan and North Korea...but come up with a grand plan.....and still the question remains how China will destroy India? Surely the notion of arming pakistan and "China fighting till last pakistani soldier" does not suffice!!

P.S: Chinese tech is something which even Pakistan never longed for, so going into superiority of Chinese tech when China buys everything from Russia and reverse engineers is a Joke (Chinese tech)


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

HongWu said:


> While China has the upper hand, it should *reshape* South Asia to be a more peaceful and harmonious environment for China and its allies.



The last people to do something similar were the British ,and its consequences can seen and felt to this day.

But unlike Britain China isn't a small island,thousands of miles away from SA ,China is direct geographical neighbor and will feel the impact of an unstable SA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HongWu

Typhoon said:


> I was just curious how CCP or China would dismantle India after a war and install a puppet govt. like US did in Iraq?


China needs to take military control over New Delhi and then make bargains with major powers in India to agree to being part of a Chinese-led bloc of developing countries.



Typhoon said:


> Because China's economic status is knwon to the west and how you cook your books has been admitted by your own leaders!!


The statistics are bad but the increase in China's national wealth is reality. China's consumption of electricity, iron and concrete is reality. China's urbanization and building massive new city infrastructure is reality. Most importantly, China's huge advances in technology in the last few years is the start of a new trend.



Typhoon said:


> I just wanted to know how China will achieve this task...as China is no US and India is surely no Iraq!


India's military today is qualitatively no better than Iraq of 1991. India is just a lot bigger. On the other hand, China today technologically matches the USA of 1991!
 
A flurry of CJ-10, plus precision strikes on Indian air defense, plus bombing of Indian Army positions, plus close air support from Z-10A helicopters, plus much more advanced T-99A2 tank will all make Indian Army completely powerless to stop a drive on New Delhi by PLA.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

@Typhoon

Lets ignore him before it turns into a flame war,hez just a fanboy afterall.

let him grow up.


----------



## HongWu

Bombensturm said:


> If such a large scale military operation ever happens the following course of events will follow.
> 
> 1.The Indian army will do everything in its power to repel the invasion.(We"ve never used our full force so far.)
> 
> 2.Hypothetically,If that fails there"ll be the Hindu nationalist militia/revolutionary army(population army) ,who"ll drive out the _foreign devils_ .


It's impossible for an expeditionary army to overcome a country of more than a billion like India. The most that China can do is take over New Delhi and work together with some powerful Indian people to install a new government. We can give trading privileges to people who work with the Chinese-installed government.



Bombensturm said:


> 3.Of course there"ll be foreign nations intervening ,(though i wouldn't much rely on them),but they"ll eventually force it status quo,before option 2


The only nation that might intervene is USA but New Delhi is too far away from the coast to be protected by navy carriers. The US army will need to be based in India to protect it.



Bombensturm said:


> 4.After this whole military stunt,almost every nation around China will turn into a Western satellite state.


If China is successful, then all countries in Asia will know great risk comes with being an anti-China country - look at the example of India.



Bombensturm said:


> Remember your nation could save your all time ally in 1971,even with the West on your side. (though USSR no longer exists.)


China now cannot be compared to 1971. China is modernizing very fast and now leads the world in many fields like supercomputing, high speed trains, wireless communications and missile technology.


----------



## Typhoon

Bombensturm said:


> @Typhoon
> 
> Lets ignore him before it turns into a flame war,hez just a fanboy afterall.
> 
> let him grow up.



Hey I like to know how loonies think and how they feed their ego....he was sounding more like an Internet Jihadi/ninja than a real analyst, hence I was having some fun with him, by above posts he has proved himself to be well on the target!!


----------



## HongWu

Bombensturm said:


> The last people to do something similar were the British ,and its consequences can seen and felt to this day.
> 
> But unlike Britain China isn't a small island,thousands of miles away from SA ,China is direct geographical neighbor and will feel the impact of an unstable SA.


That is correct. That is why China cannot allow a hostile India. Only by making India a more balanced society economically can the people living in India achieve harmony. The current Indian government system is too expansionist. It has crazy dreams about being the #1 power in Asia. Regime change might be the only solution if India is a hostile power.


----------



## Joe Shearer

A truly breathtaking thread, especially the last ten to fifteen posts. Only on Internet.....


----------



## HongWu

Typhoon said:


> P.S: Chinese tech is something which even Pakistan never longed for, so going into superiority of Chinese tech when China buys everything from Russia and reverse engineers is a Joke (Chinese tech)


China nowadays is ahead of Russia is some areas of military technology (electronics, army vehicles and shipbuilding) and we're at the same level in many too (space, strategic missiles, nuclear technology, fighter aircraft). Russia is still ahead of China in turbofan engine technology, heavy helicopters, transport aircraft and strategic bombers.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Joe Shearer said:


> A truly breathtaking thread, especially the last ten to fifteen posts. Only on Internet.....



I'm curious about your opinion ,on Hindu nationalism's rise in the event our current Govt collapse.


----------



## Dalai Lama

HongWu said:


> The current Indian government is ideologically incompatible with China, so it is in China's national interest to change that government while India is still much much weaker than China. The best way is through Pakistan once we build the railroad.
> 
> The two countries are so far apart in military power. *China is building J-10, J-11B and soon J-10B. These are all better than the MKI in IAF.* While China has the upper hand, *it should reshape South Asia to be a more peaceful and harmonious environment for China and its allies.*



1) That's a completely different topic, you need evidence to back up your claims. Don't post jingoistic comments like that on an unrelated thread.

2) What exactly do you mean by *reshape*. Quite ironic actually since Chine claims that it does not seek to be the police man yet your words seem to suggest otherwise. No wonder GoI considers China a threat.


----------



## Dalai Lama

HongWu said:


> India's military today is qualitatively no better than Iraq of 1991. India is just a lot bigger. On the other hand, China today technologically matches the USA of 1991!
> 
> A flurry of CJ-10, plus precision strikes on Indian air defense, plus bombing of Indian Army positions, plus close air support from Z-10A helicopters, plus much more advanced T-99A2 tank will all make Indian Army completely powerless to stop a drive on New Delhi by PLA.




You know what, I'm not going to argue with you. I'm going to let you keep your opinion and hope that GoC thinks like you too. After all it's better for us if you keep underestimating India.


----------



## RajeHind

this hung reminded me schinese, just ignore him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HongWu

TheDeletedUser said:


> 1) That's a completely different topic, you need evidence to back up your claims. Don't post jingoistic comments like that on an unrelated thread.


There is nothing jingoistic. China's advancements in all fields are reality. You have to understand that China is nothing like India. Chinese cities are more comparable to Tokyo than Mumbai. Look at Hong Kong for example. There are lots of Indians there.

Our progress is due to our hard work and smarts. Being upset about our progress is pointless and trying to get in our way is very dangerous for India.



TheDeletedUser said:


> 2) What exactly do you mean by *reshape*. Quite ironic actually since Chine claims that it does not seek to be the police man yet your words seem to suggest otherwise. No wonder GoI considers China a threat.


India is a hostile country toward China. China has no choice now but to remove the hostile government. The 1.2 billion Indian people need a new government rather than the system they currently have. India needs a government that accepts Chinese influence in South Asia, and then the two civilizations can be at peace.


----------



## HongWu

TheDeletedUser said:


> You know what, I'm not going to argue with you. I'm going to let you keep your opinion and hope that GoC thinks like you too. After all it's better for us if you keep underestimating India.


The GoI has made a serious miscalculation by not accepting China's rise. It will continue to miscalculate by bringing heavy artillery to Tawang and deploying them on the front against China. Very soon after that, the Indians soldiers will be tempted to use those artillery guns and press their local numerical advantage.

I think Chinese government has understood that another 1962 is necessary at this point. Unfortunately, China showed weakness in the 1980's when India first made this place an Indian "state." But we are back now and both sides want a showdown.


----------



## Joe Shearer

@Bombensturm

Your enquiry in an earlier post, &#167;643, on whether or not Hindu nationalism will rise in case the present government collapses.

Very unlikely. 

First, permit me to point out that the categories of Hindu nationalist, and the Sangh Parivar are far from identical. Many Hindus are nationalists, as well as liberal, secular, democrats, and they may not appreciate conflation with the Parivar. The Parival is a tightly-linked but loosely-managed alliance of social organisations and two political organisations, all but one of the political organisations being managed ideologically by the RSS. A Hindu nationalist might belong to one or the other of such groups, but again, might not. 

I take it that you are referring to the Parivar, specifically, and in political terms to one or the other of the BJP and the Shiv Sena, or these two acting in combine.

The present government is paying the price for years of neglect of basics, for neglecting rampant and egregious corruption, for allowing scum like the DMK, known to concentrate only on enriching its ruling dynasty, like the NCP, which is dedicated to milking the aviation sector to the fullest, at the earliest, irrespective of the short-term and long-term damage to the sector, or like the Trinamool, where Mamta Mindless rampages endlessly in small, tight circles while the Railways mysteriously runs into itself, runs off its wheels and runs into elephants. 

It hasn't been too clean itself; the nasties of 84 are still to be punished, twenty six years later, Suresh Kalmadi is still slouching around preceded ten minutes before by his belly, the CBI is clearly no longer anything but an instrument of bureaucratic malevolence, set loose on enemies of the regime, and held back when those reported and sought to be investigated turn out to be friends of the regime instead. 

Our diplomacy under the fumbling Krishna is in the worst shape it has been since Gujral rolled his own, and our military are starved and neglected to the point that its its flag officers have taken to golf and to whatever it takes to keep the game of golf going. The IAS competes for maximising of corruption. The IA&AS are as hotly sought as before; it is well known that the pickings are richest here. The IPS is sadly approaching the status of uniformed hoods. This story of decline does not improve in the viewing with the equally sad thought that things are worse next door; that doesn't help.

So who walks in instead? Are we going to see a swing in the pendulum? Will the Sangh Parivar move back into power at the centre? I believe that is what you are asking. 

That depends. The Sangh Parivar has understood, as Communist, or, for that matter, as totalitarian regimes everywhere have understood, that the ability to form the minds, opinions and attitudes of the ages from young children to young adults is of paramount importance. It recruits young, it embeds poisonous points of view into people, it has started moving into the media big-time, and, of course, the Parivar has a front organisation for every sub-set of society.

As a result, I believe that certain states may be deeply coloured; certain states swing in the balance, and are guided by various factors; and certain states have gone all out to achieve forward, progressive status.

Those states that are deeply coloured will probably stay BJP; this includes Gujarat and MP. 

Those that are parti-coloured will swing away to them, or get deeper in their clutches, like HP, Karnataka, Orissa, Jharkhand and Bihar. 

Finally, most of the rest will vote for modernity and progress, and good governance, more or less away from them, the extent depending on local alliances and local political conditions. This should include Rajasthan, West Bengal and Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur and Sikkim, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Leaving probably Tripura to stay red.

My guess is a reduced majority for the UPA. Will it limp along as it is doing now? Probably worse; they will probably have less courage with which to stand up to an even more sordid bunch of allies than they have had so far. 

Lots of assumptions here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aakash_2410

Guys let's not get carried away please! This thread is about "FUTURE CHINA-INDIA RELAIONS"

And I think they will be not 'extremly friendly' nor 'threat' to each other? It would be healthy bilateral relaions as both country are growing pretty fast and both nations have coexisted in peace for millennia and NEVER went on full scale war with each other for almost 5000 years now[1965 was nehru's stupid mistake though it was just a conflict]!! Both are one of the oldest civilisation in the world and both are preety good in maths and science sectors!

As I've said many times, it's not china OR india!!

Future is all about china AND india!!

PEACE!!


----------



## Lankan Ranger

*Chinese Foreign Affairs News & Discussions (Strictly)*

China's foreign policy and strategic thinking is highly influential. China officially states it "unswervingly pursues an independent foreign policy of peace. The fundamental goals of this policy are to preserve China's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, create a favorable international environment for China's reform and opening up and modernization construction, maintain world peace and propel common development.

In recent years, China's leaders have been regular travelers to all parts of the globe, and it has sought a higher profile in the UN through its permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and other multilateral organizations.


----------



## JayAtl

I presume you are inviting people to discuss Chinese foreign policy in here too and only in this dedicated thread? 

If so- is that a meme? the world seems to think otherwise. See their policy on NK, Iran as the biggest case studies of foreign policy blunders, ticking off most all of the developed nations. Their nefarious resource for aid deals in Africa- and their posturing /threatening their neighbors borders. Their threatening of other nations over something as mute as the noble peace prize and making it now an international embarrassment. If you want a foreign policy discussion then these cannot be side stepped, IMO.


----------



## gpit

JayAtl said:


> your personal opinions are noble, but when you have china slowing the worlds economic recovery through currency manipulation, hacking into other countries systems through state supported subversive efforts, you have china supporting the world's pariah nations, you have china disregarding climate change, you have china trying to bully smaller countries by enforcing ridiculous arbitrary borders, when you have china abetting terrorist sympathizers with nuclear and weapons technology- Then we say WHEN china learns to afford the rest of the world the same respect- the world will reciprocate.



Your brain is seriously twisted in a fanatic way. China slows down world economy? You got to be too hilarious! Unless you are cognitively handicapped, the fact is, China is now the engine of world economy. It is USA first, then the Europe second that slow the world economy.

Current manipulation? That is a more appropriate word for Japan who intervened current market recently, and for USA who initiated EQ2. *China has pegged its Yuan with USD for more than a decade.* Instead, it is US who forces China to manipulate the Yuan to dilute US debt.

Hack computer? Who didn't do that? Indians recently hacked into Chinese family planning website.  I saw that by my own eyes.

India is the biggest pariah nation where kids died of poverty every year is unprecedented in human history. While China resolves all land dispute with every its neighbor except India, India resolves none of the land dispute with its neighbors. Since India arbitrarily imposes its boarder against its neighbor. In fact, Bharat politicians invented and then apply Kautalya doctrine that neighbors are all enemies.

Disregarding climate change? Then why you India following the disregarding foot steps of China?

In fact, India encroaches the boarders, in addition with China, with Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, all small countries around it.

About terrorism, India is a country that hosts the most amount of terrorist organizations in this world. In addition, communal violence is no longer news to the world...



> *India - Terrorist, insurgent and extremist groups*
> 
> Assam
> 
> 
> 1. United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA)
> 2.
> National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB)
> 3. United People's Democratic Solidarity (UPDS)
> 4. Kamtapur Liberation Organisation (KLO)
> 5. Bodo Liberation Tiger Force (BLTF)
> 6. Dima Halim Daogah (DHD)
> 7. Karbi National Volunteers (KNV)
> 8. Rabha National Security Force (RNSF)
> 9. Koch-Rajbongshi Liberation Organisation (KRLO)
> 10. Hmar People's Convention- Democracy (HPC-D)
> 11. Karbi People's Front (KPF)
> 12. Tiwa National Revolutionary Force (TNRF)
> 13. Bircha Commando Force (BCF)
> 14. Bengali Tiger Force (BTF)
> 15. Adivasi Security Force (ASF)
> 16. All Assam Adivasi Suraksha Samiti (AAASS)
> 17. Gorkha Tiger Force (GTF)
> 18. Barak Valley Youth Liberation Front (BVYLF)
> 
> 
> 
> 19. Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam (MULTA)
> 20. United Liberation Front of Barak Valley
> 21. Muslim United Liberation Front of Assam (MULFA)
> 22. Muslim Security Council of Assam (MSCA)
> 23. United Liberation Militia of Assam (ULMA)
> 24. Islamic Liberation Army of Assam (ILAA)
> 25. Muslim Volunteer Force (MVF)
> 26. Muslim Liberation Army (MLA)
> 27. Muslim Security Force (MSF)
> 28. Islamic Sevak Sangh (ISS)
> 29. Islamic United Reformation Protest of India (IURPI)
> 30. United Muslim Liberation Front of Assam (UMLFA)
> 31. Revolutionary Muslim Commandos (RMC)
> 32. Muslim Tiger Force (MTF)
> 33. People&#8217;s United Liberation Front (PULF)
> 34. Adam Sena (AS)
> 35. Harkat-ul-Mujahideen
> 36. Harkat-ul-Jehad
> 
> Jammu & Kashmir
> 
> Terrorist Outfits
> 
> 1. Lashkar-e-Omar (LeO)
> 2. Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM)
> 3. Harkat-ul-Ansar (HuA, presently known as Harkat-ul Mujahideen)
> 4. Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT)
> 5. Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM)
> 6. Harkat-ul Mujahideen (HuM, previously known as Harkat-ul-Ansar)
> 7. Al Badr
> 8. Jamait-ul-Mujahideen (JuM)
> 9. Lashkar-e-Jabbar (LeJ)
> 10. Harkat-ul-Jehad-i-Islami
> 11. Al Barq
> 12. Tehrik-ul-Mujahideen
> 13. Al Jehad
> 14. Jammu & Kashir National Liberation Army
> 15. People&#8217;s League
> 16. Muslim Janbaz Force
> 17. Kashmir Jehad Force
> 18. Al Jehad Force (combines Muslim Janbaz Force and Kashmir Jehad Force)
> 19. Al Umar Mujahideen
> 20. Mahaz-e-Azadi
> 21. Islami Jamaat-e-Tulba
> 22. Jammu & Kashmir Students Liberation Front
> 23. Ikhwan-ul-Mujahideen
> 24. Islamic Students League
> 25. Tehrik-e-Hurriat-e-Kashmir
> 26. Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqar Jafaria
> 27. Al Mustafa Liberation Fighters
> 28. Tehrik-e-Jehad-e-Islami
> 29. Muslim Mujahideen
> 30. Al Mujahid Force
> 31. Tehrik-e-Jehad
> 32. Islami Inquilabi Mahaz
> 
> 
> Other Extremist and Secessionist Groups
> 
> 1. Mutahida Jehad Council (MJC) -- A Pakistan based coordination body of terrorist outfits active in Jammu and Kashmir
> 2. Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF)-- The dominant faction of this outfit declared a ceasefire in 1994 which still holds and the outfit restricts itself to a political struggle.
> 3. All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) -- an alliance engineered by Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) of 26 diverse political and socio-religious outfits amalgamated to provide a political face for the terrorists in the State.
> 4. Dukhtaran-e-Millat (DeM) -- an outfit run by women which uses community pressure to further the social norms dictated by Islamic fundamental groups.
> 
> 
> 
> Manipur
> 
> 
> 1. United National Liberation Front (UNLF)
> 2. People&#8217;s Liberation Army (PLA)
> 3. People&#8217;s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK)
> The above mentioned three groups now operate from a unified platform, the Manipur People&#8217;s Liberation Front (MPLF)
> 4. Kangleipak Communist Party (KCP)
> 5. Kanglei Yawol Kanna Lup (KYKL)
> 6. Manipur Liberation Tiger Army (MLTA)
> 7. Iripak Kanba Lup (IKL)
> 8. People&#8217;s Republican Army (PRA)
> 9. Kangleipak Kanba Kanglup (KKK)
> 10. Kangleipak Liberation Organisation (KLO)
> 11. Revolutionary Joint Committee (RJC)
> 12. National Socialist Council of Nagaland -- Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM)
> 13. People&#8217;s United Liberation Front (PULF)
> 14. North East Minority Front (NEMF)
> 15. Islamic National Front (INF)
> 16. Islamic Revolutionary Front (IRF)
> 17. United Islamic Liberation Army (UILA)
> 18. United Islamic Revolutionary Army (UIRA)
> 
> 
> 
> 19. Kuki National Front (KNF)
> 20. Kuki National Army (KNA)
> 21. Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA)
> 22. Kuki National Organisation (KNO)
> 23. Kuki Independent Army (KIA)
> 24. Kuki Defence Force (KDF)
> 25. Kuki International Force (KIF)
> 26. Kuki National Volunteers (KNV)
> 27. Kuki Liberation Front (KLF)
> 28. Kuki Security Force (KSF)
> 29. Kuki Liberation Army (KLA)
> 30. Kuki Revolutionary Front (KRF)
> 31. United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF)
> 32. Hmar People&#8217;s Convention (HPC)
> 33. Hmar People's Convention- Democracy (HPC-D)
> 34. Hmar Revolutionary Front (HRF)
> 35. Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA)
> 36. Zomi Revolutionary Volunteers (ZRV)
> 37. Indigenous People's Revolutionary Alliance(IRPA)
> 38. Kom Rem People's Convention (KRPC)
> 39. Chin Kuki Revolutionary Front (CKRF)
> 
> Meghalaya
> 
> 
> 1. Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC)
> 2. Achik National Volunteer Council (ANVC)
> 
> 
> 
> 3. People&#8217;s Liberation Front of Meghalaya (PLF-M)
> 4. Hajong United Liberation Army (HULA)
> 
> Nagaland
> 
> 
> 1. National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah) &#8211; NSCN(IM)
> 2. National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Khaplang) &#8211; NSCN (K)
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Naga National Council (Adino) &#8211; NNC (Adino)
> 
> Punjab
> 
> 1. Babbar Khalsa International (BKI)
> 2. Khalistan Zindabad Force (KZF)
> 3. International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF)
> 4. Khalistan Commando Force (KCF)
> 5. All-India Sikh Students Federation (AISSF)
> 6. Bhindrawala Tigers Force of Khalistan (BTFK)
> 7. Khalistan Liberation Army (KLA)
> 8. Khalistan Liberation Front (KLF)
> 9. Khalistan Armed Force (KAF)
> 10. Dashmesh Regiment
> 11. Khalistan Liberation Organisation (KLO)
> 12. Khalistan National Army (KNA)
> 
> 
> 
> Tripura
> 
> 
> 1. National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT)
> 2. All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF)
> 3. Tripura Liberation Organisation Front (TLOF)
> 4. United Bengali Liberation Front (UBLF)
> 5. Tripura Tribal Volunteer Force (TTVF)
> 6. Tripura Armed Tribal Commando Force (TATCF)
> 7. Tripura Tribal Democratic Force (TTDF)
> 8. Tripura Tribal Youth Force (TTYF)
> 9. Tripura Liberation Force (TLF)
> 10. Tripura Defence Force (TDF)
> 11. All Tripura Volunteer Force (ATVF)
> 12. Tribal Commando Force (TCF)
> 13. Tripura Tribal Youth Force (TTYF)
> 14. All Tripura Bharat Suraksha Force (ATBSF)
> 15. Tripura Tribal Action Committee Force (TTACF)
> 
> 
> 
> 16. Socialist Democratic Front of Tripura (SDFT)
> 17. All Tripura National Force (ATNF)
> 18. Tripura Tribal Sengkrak Force (TTSF)
> 19. Tiger Commando Force (TCF)
> 20. Tripura Mukti Police (TMP)
> 21. Tripura Rajya Raksha Bahini (TRRB)
> 22. Tripura State Volunteers (TSV)
> 23. Tripura National Democratic Tribal Force (TNDTF)
> 24. National Militia of Tripura (NMT)
> 25. All Tripura Bengali Regiment (ATBR)
> 26. Bangla Mukti Sena (BMS)
> 27. All Tripura Liberation Organisation (ATLO)
> 28. Tripura National Army (TNA)
> 29. Tripura State Volunteers (TSV)
> 30. Borok National Council of Tripura (BNCT)
> 
> Mizoram
> 
> 1. Bru National Liberation Front
> 2. Hmar People's Convention- Democracy (HPC-D)
> 
> 
> Arunachal Pradesh
> 
> 1. Arunachal Dragon Force (ADF)
> 
> 
> 
> Left-wing Extremist groups
> 
> 
> 1. Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-Maoist)
> 2. People's War Group
> 3. Maoist Communist Centre
> 4. People's Guerrilla Army
> 5. Communist Party of India-Marxist Leninist-Janashakti(CPI-ML-Janashakti)
> 6. Tritiya Prastuti Committee (TPC)
> 
> 
> Other Extremist Groups
> 
> 1. Tamil National Retrieval Troops (TNRT)
> 2. Akhil Bharat Nepali Ekta Samaj (ABNES)
> 3. Tamil Nadu Liberation Army (TNLA)
> 4. Deendar Anjuman
> 5. Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI)
> 6. Asif Reza Commando Force
> 7. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
> 8. Kamatapur Liberation Organisation (KLO)
> 9. Ranvir Sena
> 
> India - Terrorists Groups

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## para-site

@gpit

little knowledge is always harmful........why dont u reply those allegations first before making counter allegations.....


----------



## para-site

I did not want to post this here but here u go--> 

Liu on his wife: Your love will be as always:&#160;&#160;

"Ask me what has been my most fortunate experience of the past two decades, and I'd say it was gaining the selfless love of my wife, Liu Xia. She cannot be present in the courtroom today, but I still want to tell you, my sweetheart, that I'm confident that your love for me will be as always.
"Over the years, in my non-free life, our love has contained bitterness imposed by the external environment, but is boundless in afterthought. I am sentenced to a visible prison while you are waiting in an invisible one.
"Your love is sunlight that transcends prison walls and bars, stroking every inch of my skin, warming my every cell, letting me maintain my inner calm, magnanimous and bright, so that every minute in prison is full of meaning.
"But my love for you is full of guilt and regret, sometimes heavy enough to hobble my steps. I am a hard stone in the wilderness, putting up with the pummeling of raging storms, and too cold for anyone to dare touch. But my love is hard, sharp, and can penetrate any obstacles. Even if I am crushed into powder, I will embrace you with the ashes."

Liv Ullman's voice breaks reading out the part of Liu Xiaobo's speech on his wife. He continues...
Given your love, my sweetheart, I would face my forthcoming trial calmly, with no regrets about my choice and looking forward to tomorrow optimistically.
I look forward to my country being a land of free expression, where all citizens' speeches are treated the same; where different values, ideas, beliefs, political views ... both compete with each other and coexist peacefully; where, majority and minority opinions will be given equal guarantees, in particular, political views different from those in power will be fully respected and protected;
"where all political views will be spread in the sunlight for the people to choose; [where] all citizens will be able to express their political views without fear, and will never be politically persecuted for voicing dissent.


----------



## JayAtl

para-site said:


> @gpit
> 
> little knowledge is always harmful........why dont u reply those allegations first before making counter allegations.....



his post is void of so many truths that it becomes an exercise of futility to explain to this Chinese immigrant in the US. Take for example , his country China( he aint no US citizen- he lives off our scarps), just as recent as 40 yrs ago had 30 million people die of starvation. 

Chinese love to quote media sources but block any internal studies and news of equal worth in their country. They have the same mentality and infamous bigotry in the US when they get tongue tied.


----------



## peaceful

JayAtl said:


> I presume you are inviting people to discuss Chinese foreign policy in here too and only in this dedicated thread?
> 
> If so- is that a meme? the world seems to think otherwise. See their policy on NK, Iran as the biggest case studies of foreign policy blunders, ticking off most all of the developed nations. Their nefarious resource for aid deals in Africa- and their posturing /threatening their neighbors borders. Their threatening of other nations over something as mute as the noble peace prize and making it now an international embarrassment. If you want a foreign policy discussion then these cannot be side stepped, IMO.



if you like, I can help to report some interesting india news on your fancy india defense forum, starting from:

Kashmir teacher arrested over 'anti-India' exam

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## para-site

JayAtl said:


> his post is void of so many truths that it becomes an exercise of futility to explain to this Chinese immigrant in the US. Take for example , his country China( he aint no US citizen- he lives off our scarps), just as recent as 40 yrs ago had 30 million people die of starvation.
> 
> Chinese love to quote media sources but block any internal studies and news of equal worth in their country. They have the same mentality and infamous bigotry in the US when they get tongue tied.



Little things amuses small minds eehhh.....I guess he is overdoing himself.....

but hey I like elephant because they have a good momentum.......


----------



## gpit

This is a thorough bvllsh!t!

US has plenty of information, and is the only country that invaded two countries in 10 years. And the invasion of Iraq is totally illegal and put the world in risk

India also has plenty of information that 2 million children die every year unnaturally. And help? NONE! It also puts the world in risk.

In terms of information control, US president can shutdown internet if needed.


> New Bill Gives Obama Kill Switch To Shut Down The Internet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Bill Gives Obama Kill Switch To Shut Down The Internet


This bill has recently passed. So basically each sovereign country can make a decision based on its ow evaluation of interest.

Conclusion, too much information can make people mad and full of hatred towards other countries, such as the starter of the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## para-site

Actually these viruses are a major threat coz if any lethal strain mutates and acquires ability to transmit fast successfully......whole world is at risk....therefore we have sooooo much hoooha over viruses(specially influenza ones).......


----------



## peaceful

this is China Defense forum, if you don't have any idea what is called Defense, please learn it before you open a thread. 

reported.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## prototype

gpit said:


> Your brain is seriously twisted in a fanatic way. China slows down world economy? You got to be too hilarious! Unless you are cognitively handicapped, the fact is, China is now the engine of world economy. It is USA first, then the Europe second that slow the world economy.
> 
> Current manipulation? That is a more appropriate word for Japan who intervened current market recently, and for USA who initiated EQ2. *China has pegged its Yuan with USD for more than a decade.* Instead, it is US who forces China to manipulate the Yuan to dilute US debt.
> 
> Hack computer? Who didn't do that? Indians recently hacked into Chinese family planning website.  I saw that by my own eyes.
> 
> India is the biggest pariah nation where kids died of poverty every year is unprecedented in human history. While China resolves all land dispute with every its neighbor except India, India resolves none of the land dispute with its neighbors. Since India arbitrarily imposes its boarder against its neighbor. In fact, Bharat politicians invented and then apply Kautalya doctrine that neighbors are all enemies.
> 
> Disregarding climate change? Then why you India following the disregarding foot steps of China?
> 
> In fact, India encroaches the boarders, in addition with China, with Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, all small countries around it.
> 
> About terrorism, India is a country that hosts the most amount of terrorist organizations in this world. In addition, communal violence is no longer news to the world...



u fool more than 90 &#37; of the the organization's event dont operate from India,they just targets India,seems u r happy about it,from when Lashkar e tayeba and Jaish e mohammad became indian terrorist organization's,about the rest,who operate through India,we had already made most of them extinct


----------



## gpit

para-site said:


> I did not want to post this here but here u go-->
> 
> Liu on his wife: Your love will be as always:**
> 
> "Ask me what has been my most fortunate experience of the past two decades, and I'd say it was gaining the selfless love of my wife, Liu Xia. She cannot be present in the courtroom today, but I still want to tell you, my sweetheart, that I'm confident that your love for me will be as always.
> "Over the years, in my non-free life, our love has contained bitterness imposed by the external environment, but is boundless in afterthought. I am sentenced to a visible prison while you are waiting in an invisible one.
> "Your love is sunlight that transcends prison walls and bars, stroking every inch of my skin, warming my every cell, letting me maintain my inner calm, magnanimous and bright, so that every minute in prison is full of meaning.
> "But my love for you is full of guilt and regret, sometimes heavy enough to hobble my steps. I am a hard stone in the wilderness, putting up with the pummeling of raging storms, and too cold for anyone to dare touch. But my love is hard, sharp, and can penetrate any obstacles. Even if I am crushed into powder, I will embrace you with the ashes."
> 
> Liv Ullman's voice breaks reading out the part of Liu Xiaobo's speech on his wife. He continues...
> Given your love, my sweetheart, I would face my forthcoming trial calmly, with no regrets about my choice and looking forward to tomorrow optimistically.
> I look forward to my country being a land of free expression, where all citizens' speeches are treated the same; where different values, ideas, beliefs, political views ... both compete with each other and coexist peacefully; where, majority and minority opinions will be given equal guarantees, in particular, political views different from those in power will be fully respected and protected;
> "where all political views will be spread in the sunlight for the people to choose; [where] all citizens will be able to express their political views without fear, and will never be politically persecuted for voicing dissent.



Parasite, Dr. Liu said he wants China subject to Western colonial rule for 300+ years. This causes much resentment from the Chinese, and is well understood that many Indians are fine with that.

You know, the Chinese, unlike the Indians, never liked the idea of being colonized again. No, not even for a day for them, while that may be fine for many of you. Of course that will bring ecstasy to the colonial westerners, and thus the Prize bestowed.

Second thing people don't like Dr. Liu be cause he indirectly receives American money to work for Americans. In fact, he received $650,000 grant from NED (National Endowment for Democracy). This is usually cited as the justification for Chinese government jailing him. Since NED is funded by US congress.

So, regardless how emotional the westerners are, and their students/copycats follow the suit, it doesn't help.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## spin666

gpit said:


> Parasite, Dr. Liu said he wants China subject to Western colonial rule for 300+ years. This causes much resentment from the Chinese, and is well understood that many Indians are fine with that.
> 
> You know, the Chinese, unlike the Indians, never liked the idea of being colonized again. No, not even for a day for them, while that may be fine for many of you. Of course that will bring ecstasy to the colonial westerners, and thus the Prize bestowed.
> 
> Second thing people don't like Dr. Liu be cause he indirectly receives American money to work for Americans. In fact, he received $650,000 grant from NED (National Endowment for Democracy). This is usually cited as the justification for Chinese government jailing him. Since NED is funded by US congress.
> 
> So, regardless how emotional the westerners are, and their students/copycats follow the suit, it doesn't help.




Please go read his speach first,then commend on it. It wasn't what he means! You really need stop quoting the people's daily. For many chinese, most just don't care. It just one more guy that had read too many books and had way too western ways of thinking.

How many Indian did u know? To commend on their whole race/country you have to have know quite many. About colonism: Go read something about Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

Just as many westrn ppl is quite under the spell of media(who think everything print/type on the news is truth!), many chinese are under the lovely spell of nationalism. 

Peace prize is not a "peace prize". More like a human right/politic prize. They really should change the name.

Does the man belong to prison,yes and no. YES because chinese law, NO because he is just talking. YES because he is trying to start a revolution, NO maybe china really need to reform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## para-site

gpit said:


> Parasite, Dr. Liu said he wants China subject to Western colonial rule for 300+ years. This causes much resentment from the Chinese, and is well understood that many Indians are fine with that.
> 
> You know, the Chinese, unlike the Indians, never liked the idea of being colonized again. No, not even for a day for them, while that may be fine for many of you. Of course that will bring ecstasy to the colonial westerners, and thus the Prize bestowed.
> 
> Second thing people don't like Dr. Liu be cause he indirectly receives American money to work for Americans. In fact, he received $650,000 grant from NED (National Endowment for Democracy). This is usually cited as the justification for Chinese government jailing him. Since NED is funded by US congress.
> 
> So, regardless how emotional the westerners are, and their students/copycats follow the suit, it doesn't help.




no comments.......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CardSharp

para-site said:


> no comments.......



me neither. ps


----------



## Lankan Ranger

The Vice Premier of the Peoples Republic of China Hui Liangyu, along with his 20 member delegation who were on transit in Sri Lanka, visited the National Museum and the Independence Square. He was welcomed by Minister of Culture and Arts T B Ekanayake.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CardSharp

Joe Shearer said:


> @Bombensturm
> 
> Your enquiry in an earlier post, &#167;643, on whether or not Hindu nationalism will rise in case........


 
How did I miss this gem (on the China forum no less). I have a question for you about Indian politics. It has always seem to me that Congress and the Gandhi dynasty should be kicked out and its hold over Indian politics broken in order for a great leader to emerge. What is your view on the state of things. I am frankly a skeptic of political dynasties (no matter what their contribution to the nation years ago). It really seems that a political class has emerged in India. (am I wrong?)

I hope you can be patient with my question, I realize that Indian politics a labyrinth of twists and turns (someone once said that a phD thesis can be written on the politics of every Indian state)


----------



## Joe Shearer

CardSharp said:


> How did I miss this gem (on the China forum no less). I have a question for you about Indian politics. It has always seem to me that Congress and the Gandhi dynasty should be kicked out and its hold over Indian politics broken in order for a great leader to emerge. What is your view on the state of things. I am frankly a skeptic of political dynasties (no matter what their contribution to the nation years ago). It really seems that a political class has emerged in India. (am I wrong?)
> 
> I hope you can be patient with my question, I realize that Indian politics a labyrinth of twists and turns (someone once said that a phD thesis can be written on the politics of every Indian state)


 
Oh, dear!

You do have a happy habit of accidentally bumping into me with your elbow and getting me into the swimming pool.

I really would have liked to have avoided this question, as it is itself worth a PhD thesis. But perhaps it will make sense if I leave out all adjectives and adverbs and stick to the point. Let me try - meanwhile, don't hold your breath!

There are lots of people who wish that the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty should be got rid of. You find yourself in the company of Ram Manohar Lohia, a socialist and an iconoclast, who spent much of his political career pointing out the defects of the Nehru-Gandhis, to the point where he seemed like an bore to most people perusing their daily papers. For me, it is a matter for the voter, not for the chatterati, the chattering classes, as our brand of middle-class, westernised intellectuals tend to be grouped with, along with others who are far more affluent than middle-class, not westernised at all, and not intellectual, unless reading the papers and listening to the ubiquitous news programmes is a sign of intellect; many would disagree sharply. As long as the voter continues to believe in them as being, in some way, above the contempt that all Indians have for politicians. 

Before going further, a reality check: you are aware that these 'Gandhis' have nothing to do with Mohandas Karamchand 'Mahatma' Gandhi, of course. That Gandhi (Mohandas = devoted to Krishna; Karamchand = Moon of worldly achievement; Gandhi = of trader descent) was a Gujarati born to the minister of a tiny principality in the extreme west; these Gandhis are Gandhis because their mother-in-law/ grandmother married a handsome young Gujarati Congressman against her father's wishes. The political history starts with an Allahabad barrister named Motilal Nehru (= Precious as a pearl + lives on the banks of a canal, originally a Kashmiri brahmin), whose father was a less-than-distinguished police kotwal, or chief of a police station. Motilal rose from this origin to become a wealthy man, sent his son to Harrow, then to Trinity College, Cambridge, on to the bar and back to India, complete with an affinity for left wing politics of the Bloomsbury Set sort, and an accent which clearly informed those who mattered that he mattered. Jawaharlal was important because the common people saw him as the approachable, not even partially insane, welcome successor specially chosen by Gandhi (the other, older one) to be Gandhi's successor. Gandhi himself could seem unapproachable especially when he was doing his thing, some of them quite eccentric things. So Jawaharlal was the chosen son, and Indians treated him like that, in spite of being irritated by him, and finally fed up with him, especially after the mess he made of Chinese relations and of the military. When he died, a proper Congressman took over. Lal Bahadur Shastri (Beloved Brave One, the Brahmin) had nothing to do with the family. Under him, and his self-effacing ways, the powerful hierarchy of the Congress became very strong. Too strong to think straight, these 'bosses' picked on Nehru's shy, equally unassuming daughter, Indira Priyadarshini Gandhi, someone, they thought, who could be manipulated and told what to do. Probably the dumbest assessment of the century. When she was killed by her own disaffected security guard, after the clean-up of the Sikh Golden Temple of terrorists sheltering inside, Congressmen panicked, and put her son in. That is when a succession started, and it was going to happen, because Indira herself had been grooming not that son, but the younger one, for succession. And then, of course, the precedent was there; when this initially unwilling young man had himself been assassinated by one of the earliest suicide bombers recorded, it was natural to turn to the widow, who knew nothing about politics and who seems to have regressed since then. She naturally faces a lot of resentment because of her foreign origin and her sentimental attachment to a very sleazy italian businessman.

My personal views? I would like to finish this note this afternoon, another seven hours from now, if it isn't too inconvenient.

Warm regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CardSharp

Joe Shearer said:


> Oh, dear!
> 
> You do have a happy habit of accidentally bumping into me with your elbow and getting me into the swimming pool.
> 
> I really would have liked to have avoided this question, as it is itself worth a PhD thesis. But perhaps it will make sense if I leave out all adjectives and adverbs and stick to the point. Let me try - meanwhile, don't hold your breath!
> 
> There are lots of people who wish that the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty should be got rid of. You find yourself in the company of Ram Manohar Lohia, a socialist and an iconoclast, who spent much of his political career pointing out the defects of the Nehru-Gandhis, to the point where he seemed like an bore to most people perusing their daily papers. For me, it is a matter for the voter, not for the chatterati, the chattering classes, as our brand of middle-class, westernised intellectuals tend to be grouped with, along with others who are far more affluent than middle-class, not westernised at all, and not intellectual, unless reading the papers and listening to the ubiquitous news programmes is a sign of intellect; many would disagree sharply. As long as the voter continues to believe in them as being, in some way, above the contempt that all Indians have for politicians.
> 
> Before going further, a reality check: you are aware that these 'Gandhis' have nothing to do with Mohandas Karamchand 'Mahatma' Gandhi, of course. That Gandhi was a Gujarati born to the minister of a tiny principality in the extreme west; these Gandhis are Gandhis because their mother-in-law/ grandmother married a handsome young Gujarati Congressman against her father's wishes. The political history starts with an Allahabad barrister named Motilal Nehru (= Precious as a pearl + lives on the banks of a canal, originally a Kashmiri brahmin), whose father was a less-than-distinguished police kotwal, or chief of a police station. Motilal rose from this origin to become a wealthy man, sent his son to Harrow, then to Trinity College, Cambridge, on to the bar and back to India, complete with an affinity for left wing politics of the Bloomsbury Set sort, and an accent which clearly informed those who mattered that he mattered. Jawaharlal was important because the common people saw him as the approachable, not even partially insane, welcome successor specially chosen by Gandhi (the other, older one) to be Gandhi's successor. Gandhi himself could seem unapproachable especially when he was doing his thing, some of them quite eccentric things. So Jawaharlal was the chosen son, and Indians treated him like that, in spite of being irritated by him, and finally fed up with him, especially after the mess he made of Chinese relations and of the military. When he died, a proper Congressman took over. Lal Bahadur Shastri (Beloved Brave One, the Brahmin) had nothing to do with the family. Under him, and his self-effacing ways, the powerful hierarchy of the Congress became very strong. Too strong to think straight, these 'bosses' picked on Nehru's shy, equally unassuming daughter, Indira Priyadarshini Gandhi, someone, they thought, who could be manipulated and told what to do. Probably the dumbest assessment of the century. When she was killed by her own disaffected security guard, after the clean-up of the Sikh Golden Temple of terrorists sheltering inside, Congressmen panicked, and put her son in. That is when a succession started, and it was going to happen, because Indira herself had been grooming not that son, but the younger one, for succession. And then, of course, the precedent was there; when this initially unwilling young man had himself been assassinated by one of the earliest suicide bombers recorded, it was natural to turn to the widow, who knew nothing about politics and who seems to have regressed since then. She naturally faces a lot of resentment because of her foreign origin and her sentimental attachment to a very sleazy italian businessman.
> 
> My personal views? I would like to finish this note this afternoon, another seven hours from now, if it isn't too inconvenient.
> 
> Warm regards,


 
Awesome history lesson! I've wondered how the current family is related to the original Mahatma Gandhi. What a fortunate coincidence and what social impact! (most of the world would think that she is a direct descendant, including I until you informed me). Anyways I think I follow you along the progression of Indian politics. 

I also got that impression from Nehru that he is very much of the liberal western type. I read that when Mountbatten tried a personable tact with both Nehru and Jinnah, he was well received by Nehru and said of Jinnah "his eyes were cold as stone". Given Nehru's Oxbridge education, this makes more sense. 

You sir have cleverly dodged my question. What do you think would be best for Greater India? or what message would you try to convey to your fellow countrymen? Out with the old or Que Sera Sera?


----------



## Joe Shearer

CardSharp said:


> Awesome history lesson! I've wondered how the current family is related to the original Mahatma Gandhi. What a fortunate coincidence and what social impact! (most of the world would think that she is a direct descendant, including I until you informed me). Anyways I think I follow you along the progression of Indian politics.
> 
> I also got that impression from Nehru that he is very much of the liberal western type. I read that when Mountbatten tried a personable tact with both Nehru and Jinnah, he was well received by Nehru and said of Jinnah "his eyes were cold as stone". Given Nehru's Oxbridge education, this makes more sense.
> 
> You sir have cleverly dodged my question. What do you think would be best for Greater India? or what message would you try to convey to your fellow countrymen? Out with the old or Que Sera Sera?


 


> My personal views? I would like to finish this note this afternoon, another seven hours from now, if it isn't too inconvenient.



Well, actually, I wanted time to do my outside chores and return! Having returned briefly, and seen your queries, it seems better to me to reply in brief for the record, and to come back later for more detail if it seems to be needed.

I have in fact NO message for my fellow-countrymen; who am I to tell them what to do? If I wanted to start lecturing them, I would start with asking them to look for facts and for information before responding, instead of immediately striking belligerent postures and threatening nuclear war the very next second.

A change in this simple matter is unlikely to happen; why should I be so puffed-up as to think that a change in a fundamental matter might take place if I suggest it? No, indeed I wouldn't dream of advising anyone anything.

What I do stand for is to stand by and observe how the benefits and curative and healing properties of democracy get gradually deeper and deeper into our national system, until we have an asset which is of organic growth, native to the soil and unlikely to be vulnerable to dictatorship or to the mad impulses of a very popular leader who suddenly sees and opportunity for undying glory, or, worse, a military man who seeks power. This has become already something that we know about and we have had a brush with, in the form of the short but very fearful Emergency that Mrs. Gandhi declared some 35 years ago. We knew fear then; those of us who remember may kill to stop it recurring ever. The younger generations at least know that it was tried once, but did not 'take', and we can only hope that they will sense a bit of the overpowering suffocation that overtakes us when we are in such a state.

So my response is that the longer democracy is 'done' , the more its good effects. I keep telling Pakistani friends of a liberal disposition who cordially dislike Zardari that democracy includes suffering fools gladly, if those are elected fools. There are ways to upset them or to get rid of them, but within the system, not abruptly, not necessarily the first time that it becomes apparent that they are knaves or fools. 

So, too, with our democracy.

It is old enough for everyone to know the consequences. People understand that politicians need to be changed, just like diapers, and for the same reasons. People know that politicians steal, and have to be watched. Our shrill and hyper-active media and our increasingly short-tempered judges are genuinely guarding us against them, and making sure that they don't get away in the long-term. As we figure out how to do things, as the older democracies have, we will get rid of their evil consequences in the mid-term, perhaps, some day in future, even in the short-term.

Till then, if the Nehru-Gandhis are elected, so be it. Let them have a go. Their grandmother died; their father died. They've paid their dues. They are obviously clots, and perhaps it is better to have clots than to have the murderous bastards, filled with hate and busy breaking, tearing down and maiming, that is the alternative. They too may in time mellow into something not much worse than a surly head-waiter at a posh restaurant, who knows? 

My answer is Que Sera, Sera, I think, except that while it is Sera'ing, I would not sit idle but make sure that I have some say on the Que.

Warm regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## CardSharp

Hmmm I think you are right. There are no quick fixes (in the form of a fix-all leader) and those who seek such a person may find a bloody tyrant instead. 

organic growth, native to the soil. I like that. I suppose really that it is how all mature democracy come to be.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brotherhood

*China takes over UN Security Council presidency - People's Daily Online* March 02, 2011 

China on Tuesday took over the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council for the month of March.






UN Secretary-general Ban Ki-moon (R) meets with Li Baodong, permanent representative of the Chinese Mission to the United Nations, at the UN headquarters in New York, the United States, Feb 24, 2011. China assumes the rotating UN Security Council presidency for the month of March on Tuesday. (Xinhua Photo)

Li Baodong, the Chinese permanent representative to the United Nations, took over the rotating Council presidency from Brazilian UN Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, who held the presidency of the Security Council for February.

Li is expected to brief reporters on the work program of the 15-nation UN body on Wednesday.

The Security Council presidency rotates among the Council members in the English alphabetical order of their names. Each president holds office for one calendar month.

Under the UN Charter, the Security Council has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security in the world at large.

China will perform its duty as the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council in March in a fair, neutral way in order to effectively maintain international peace and security, Li told UN-based Chinese media last week.

"As the rotating president and a permanent member of the Security Council, we will adhere to the principle of being fair, neutral, pragmatic and efficient to ensure success of the work of the Security Council, so as to maintain international peace and security in an effective manner," Li said.

The Security Council has 15 members: five permanent members -- China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States -- and 10 non-permanent members elected by the UN General Assembly for two-year terms.

Source: Xinhua

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gpit

Joe Shearer said:


> Please could you give us more information. Chinese history is not my subject, and I am therefore unable to link this to any corresponding Tibetan historical episode or to Indian reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about the same incident? If so, the same request please: names, dates, sources.
> 
> Regards,


 
Joe,

Just come across the source during my leisure reading, luckily.

"India: a History" by John Keay, ISBN 0-87113-800-X, P167

Excerpt:


> ...
> 
> How Harsha eventually died is not known. But when in 647 his long reign finally ended, so did his empire; it simply fell apart. No Chandra-Gupta II stepped forward to round off his conquests and no Ashoka arose to consolidate his dominions.Confederate kingdoms simply allowed their allegiance to lapse; subject dynasties simply resumed their old rivalries.​The throne itself was usurped by one of Harsha's brahman ministers, who was then badly discredited by the mismanagement of a Chinese embassy. Harsha had cultivated good relations with the new T'ang empire and, thanks to his Buddhist sympathies and his generous treatment of visitors like Husan Tsang, several diplomatic missions had been exchanged. But, *according to Chinese sources,* a T'ang embassy which arrived immediately after his death found India in confusion. In what looks like an incident born more of sectarian than political rivalry, the Chinese were robbed and taken captive while the Celestial Emperor's emissary barely escaped to Tibet with his life.Thence he organised reprisals which apparently culminated in a resounding Chinese victory, 'whereupon Inida was overawed'.​Although *there is no mention in Indian sources of this first trans-Himalayan incursion*, and although it was probably no more than a raid into northern Bengal, it was inductive of the vacuum left by Harsha....​



Looks like this is the first ever Indo-China conflict recorded in history.


----------



## Joe Shearer

gpit said:


> Joe,
> 
> Just come across the source during my leisure reading, luckily.
> 
> "India: a History" by John Keay, ISBN 0-87113-800-X, P167
> 
> Excerpt:
> 
> 
> Looks like this is the first ever Indo-China conflict recorded in history.


 
@gpit

I was foxed at your post, since my questions were put to you such a long time ago, and it seemed as if you had lost interest. Your reference was fascinating, all the more so since over the last three or four days, I have been reading, with a mixture of deep satisfaction and irritation and frustration, about the re-discovery of Buddhism and its traces in India. One of the incidents mentioned was the lamentable treatment meted out by the usurping minister to the T'ang ambassador and his escape and return with mercenary troops to punish the culprit. I will revert to you with more details, but meanwhile, thank you for your courtesy in bearing this question in mind, and responding to it after so many days. This was very thoughtful and very encouraging. Thank you.


----------



## Brotherhood

*Giant neighbors' cooperative decade - People's Daily Online* June 19, 2011 







Visiting Chinese President Hu Jintao (L) shakes hands with his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev after they signed a joint statement on international situation and major international issues in Moscow, capital of Russia, June 16, 2011. (Xinhua/Li Xueren)

Chinese President Hu Jintao's just-concluded visit to Russia is the latest in a decade-long effort that has established a new era of cooperation between the two neighboring world powers.

The state visit, from June 15 to 18, is his fifth since 2003, and continues a process of closer ties between the two countries at all levels since they signed the landmark China-Russia Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation in July 2001.

Over the past decade, bilateral cooperation has borne rich fruit in many fields, fostering peace and prosperity in the two countries and for the world at large.

Hu's latest visit, on the 10th anniversary of the treaty, is believed to further promote bilateral cooperation and charter a course for future development of bilateral ties.

*MUTUAL POLITICAL TRUST*

The 25-article good-neighborly treaty stresses a new type of state-to-state relationship, which neither seeks alliance, confrontation nor targets against any third country.

Recalling the treaty, President Hu said Thursday the new security concept it contains served as an excellent example of a new type of bilateral relations.

"The treaty is an important landmark in the development of China-Russia relations. At the same time, it has blazed a trail in international relations," he said.

Over the past decade, China and Russia have made eye-catching progress in boosting their political trust.

Frequent high-level exchanges have demonstrated the steady and healthy development of bilateral relations.

In addition to his five state visits, Hu headed to Russia in 2005 and 2010 for the 60th and 65th anniversaries of Victory in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.

Last year alone, Hu and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev held six bilateral meetings and reached important agreements on further deepening the bilateral strategic partnership of cooperation.

In 2004, China and Russia inked an additional treaty over their eastern border, putting an end to 40 years of negotiations and making their 4,300-km-long border a symbol of good-neighborly relations and harmonious coexistence.

The two sides have also established mechanisms for regular meetings between their leaders and cooperation mechanisms between various government departments, and signed more than 200 cooperative documents to help improve the mechanisms and legal basis of bilateral ties.

Chinese Ambassador to Russia Li Hui, in a recent interview with Xinhua, said China-Russia ties were becoming a model for bilateral relations of the world's big powers.

Mikhail Titarenko, head of the Far East Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, told Xinhua Hu was a longtime close friend of Russia, and his visit definitely would encourage more joint efforts in both political issues and economic projects.

"The prospects for Russian-Chinese cooperation are really great," Titarenko said.

*PRAGMATIC COOPERATION*

Economically, cooperation has benefited both sides.

Two-way trade has increased sevenfold from some 8 billion U.S. dollars in 2000 to nearly 60 billion dollars in 2010.

Hu, during a meeting with Medvedev Thursday, said the two sides should work to further boost bilateral trade and set targets of 100 billion dollars a year by 2015 and 200 billion by 2020.

Medvedev, for his part, said the Russian side was fully satisfied with the development of bilateral relations over the past decade.

He specifically hailed the rapid development in bilateral economic and trade cooperation.

The two sides have carried out a number of large-scale cooperative projects in areas such as energy, infrastructure, and science and technology.

These include a China-Russia oil pipeline project linking Russia's Far East and northeast China, which began operation on Jan. 1. It runs smoothly and had delivered more than 6 million tons of crude oil from Russia to China by the end of May.

The 1,000-km-long pipeline will transport 15 million tons of oil annually from Russia to China from 2011 to 2030.

The two countries are now negotiating another two long-term gas projects. The projects, with a "west line" capable of supplying China with 30 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year and an "east line" of 38 billion cubic meters, would both be 30-year deals.

Culturally, China and Russia have actively learned about each other and deepened the friendship between the two peoples.

China hosted the "Year of Russia" in 2006 and "Year of Russian Language" in 2009, while Russia held the "Year of China" in 2007 and "Year of Chinese Language" in 2010. These activities increased the two peoples' understanding of each other.

People-to-people exchanges have witnessed robust development, with more than 3 million Chinese and Russians currently visiting each other's country every year.

China and Russia are also to stage s "Year of Tourism" to deepen bilateral exchanges

*INFLUENTIAL DUET ON WORLD STAGE*

China, as Asia's biggest country, has a land area of 9.6 million square km and a 1.34-billion population, while Russia is the biggest country in Euroasia, with a formidable 17 million square km and a population of 142 million.

Their friendly cooperation, without doubt, is of vital importance for peace and prosperity both in Eurasia and beyond.

China and Russia, both of which are UN Security Council permanent members, are heavyweights on the world platform and have cooperated effectively at the UN.

The two countries have maintained similar stances and substantially supported each other on a variety of hot and thorny international issues.

They also have cooperated effectively in other regional or international frameworks, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS and the Group of 20.

"These new organizations will help Russia and China, together with other countries, maintain stable development, not only of our own countries, but also of the whole mankind," Igor Rogachev, a member of the Federation Council, Russia's upper house of parliament, and a former ambassador to China, told Xinhua.

Moreover, Russia has firmly adhered to the one-China policy and recognized Taiwan as an inalienable part of China, while China has staunchly supported Russia's crackdown on Chechen separatists.

China-Russia cooperation is tremendously conducive to building a multipolar world and a fairer international order, and benefits world peace and stability.

Alexander Lukin, director of the Center for East Asia and SCO Studies at Moscow State University for International Relations, wrote in an article titled "Russia and Rising China" that, "both Russia and China are unwilling to see the world as dominated by a super power. Instead, they think the world should have many poles, which will cooperate with each other according to international laws and under the guidance of the UN Charter."

"They also dislike other countries bossing them around over their domestic policies, and deem the actions as intervention in their internal affairs," he said.

On Thursday, China and Russia issued a joint statement on a broad range of key international issues.

They expressed their common stances on a variety of international issues, including bilateral cooperation at the UN and the G20, global nuclear and security issues, Asia-Pacific regional cooperation, the Korean Peninsula and Iranian nuclear issues, and unrest in West Asia and North Africa.

They vowed to make concerted efforts to effectively cope with various global challenges and threats.

*COMMON CHALLENGES*

The two neighbors now are also confronted with a variety of similar daunting challenges, such as a widening wealth gap, corruption, poverty, unemployment, and environmental pollution, among others.

Some Western countries are skeptical of the two emerging powers' intentions, employing labels such as "China Threat Theory," "Russian Authoritarianism" and other appalling rhetoric. They have even attempted to deter their development.

Therefore, bilateral cooperation is of significant importance to the two neighbors for their sustainable development, for which stable external circumstances are crucial as they push forward their modernization drives.

During his meeting with Medvedev Thursday, Hu said the next decade would be a critical period for the two countries for their respective development and for deepening their partnership.

He said China was ready to work with Russia to develop a comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership featuring equality, mutual trust, mutual support, common prosperity and lasting friendship in the new decade.

Hu also stressed China would unswervingly pursue the road of peaceful development and work for the establishment of a harmonious world of long-term peace and common prosperity.

Rogachev said, "We have taken an important step forward in strengthening the principle of 'Russia and China are friends forever and will never become enemies'."

Leaders and peoples of the two countries have agreed to follow this positive practice and find new themes for cooperation, he said. (Additional reporting by Zhang Dailei)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brotherhood

*Wen tells Merkel: China to back up euro - People's Daily Online* June 29, 2011 





Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and German Chancellor Angela Merkel chat as they stroll in the garden of Villa Liebermann in Berlin yesterday. Wen wrapped up his two-day visit to Germany and left for Beijing with practical outcomes on cementing bilateral ties. Wen and Merkel agreed that they should work together to promote the global economic recovery. The countries also signed a series of contracts and agreements worth about US$15 billion. Germany was the last stop of Wen's Europe tour, that also took him to Hungary and Britain.(Shanghai Daily Photo)

*Premier Wen Jiabao told German Chancellor Angela Merkel Tuesday that the two largest economies in Asia and Europe could forge even closer economic and trade ties, as the two leaders reiterated belief they would back up the euro.*

*Wen offered Europe a "helping hand" to tackle its debt crisis during a visit to Berlin Tuesday, saying Beijing could buy the sovereign debt of some troubled euro-zone nations if needed.*

*Wen said that China is confident in Europe because it includes countries such as economically and technologically strong Germany,* and it has a skilled work force.* He said the current difficulties faced by Euro-zone countries are "only of temporary nature"*.

Merkel assured Premier Wen that Germany will do everything in its capacity to ensure euro-zone countries' competitiveness.

*Also Tuesday, the two leaders launched the first round of Sino-German inter-governmental economic and trade consultations*. Beijing and Berlin said the two countries will vigorously promote economic ties, *aiming at $280 billion trade between them by 2015 which is expected to bring huge benefits for the two peoples.*

Wen made it clear that the main point of the meeting between Chinese and German ministers and economic officials in Berlin was to *"boost the growth potential of bilateral trade and to once again double our bilateral trade volume in five years."*

*China and Germany signed deals worth $15 billion Tuesday.*

Wen told a news conference that Beijing has confidence in the 17-nation currency, the euro. *"China has expressed support for Europe at various times. In other words, when Europe is in difficulty we will extend a helping hand from afar," *he said.* "We will, according to need, definitely purchase certain amounts of sovereign debt."*

*Capital Economics estimated in a research note that China has bought more than 40 billion euros (US$57.45 billion) of euro-denominated assets this year, much of that in peripheral economies.*

*About a quarter of China's record foreign currency reserves of more than US$3 trillion are estimated to be held in euro assets* and China has reiterated its confidence in the euro since the debt crisis began.

Wen visited Germany on the final leg of a European tour taking in Hungary and Britain. *It was the first time China and Germany - the world's two biggest exporting nations - had held full ministerial consultations aimed at boosting trade.*

*Germany hopes for a rebalancing of investments between the two countries*, with Germany's direct investments in China now standing at 20 billion euros, compared to Chinese investments in Germany of only about 600 million euros, German officials said.

Wen took 16 ministers with him on the visit to meet their German counterparts, including Zhang Ping, chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission, Commerce Minister Chen Deming, and Governor of the People's Bank of China Zhou Xiaochuan.

*"The large scale of the lineup, the wide range of topics up for discussion and the substantial achievements are all pioneering work in the history of Sino-German relations and Sino-EU relations,"* Wen said during a joint press briefing with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

*"China has viewed Germany as an important strategic partner and such a strategic relationship will only be enhanced, rather than weakened, by such efforts,"* Wen said.

By People's Daily Online

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hejsansvejsan

The China Times ???? | Daily English News from China

President Barack Obama will receive the Dalai Lama Saturday, the White House announced on the eve of this new meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader who is likely to upset China.

&#8220;I can confirm that they will meet tomorrow,&#8221; said a White House official who requested anonymity.

&#8220;We are firmly opposed to any separation activity of the Dalai Lama during foreign visits,&#8221; said Hong Lei, spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. &#8220;We are firmly opposed to any foreign government or politician who supports and encourages such activities.&#8221;

The meeting scheduled for Saturday shows strong support of the president to the preservation of the religious, cultural and linguistic uniqueness of Tibet and the protection of human rights of Tibetans, the White House said in a statement.

The president will mark its support for dialogue between representatives of the Dalai Lama and the Chinese government to resolve their differences, said the American presidency.

The meeting is scheduled for 11:30 (1530 GMT) outside the gaze of the media and in the Map Room, not in the Oval Office where U.S. presidents are heads of state.

Obama met with the Dalai Lama last year, angering Beijing, which accuses the leader of the Tibetans to seek independence from the roof of the world. The Dalai Lama, who left his country in 1959 after a failed uprising against the Chinese presence, says that he only calls for genuine autonomy.


----------



## grey boy 2

*China, Thailand pledge to strengthen military ties - People's Daily Online* July 26, 2011 

Chen Bingde, Chief of the General Staff of China's People's Liberation Army met with Songkitti Jaggabatara, Chief of Defense Forces of Thailand on Monday.

China-Thailand relationship has become an example of friendly co-existence between countries with different social systems, Chen said.

He praised the cooperation between the two militaries, including military drills, personnel training and equipment and technology transfer.

The joint military exercise between the two countries' armies and navies has enhanced mutual understanding and experience exchanging, and deepened friendship between the two militaries' grass-roots officers and soldiers, Chen noted.

Chen said the Chinese military was willing to keep working with the Thai side to continually advance military-to-military relations.

Songkitti said China-Thailand defense cooperation benefits each nation's defensive and military construction, as well as regional peace and stability.

Thailand was willing to make joint efforts with China to strengthen military communication and cooperation, he said.

Source: Xinhua

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## grey boy 2

*China, Japan vow to deepen defense cooperation - People's Daily Online* July 26, 2011 

Visiting Chinese deputy chief of the general staff of the People's Liberation Army Ma Xiaotian met with Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa Monday in Tokyo, vowing to deepen communication between the two countries' defense departments.

Kitazawa said since the normalization of the relations, bilateral ties between China and Japan are improving amid twists and turns. Japan is ready to work with China to further boost exchanges in defense, so as to strengthen mutual trust and friendly cooperation.

Ma said the Chinese and Japanese people both value the hard- earned peace and stability in the region. Sticking to the strategic mutually beneficial bilateral relations conforms to the core interests of both nations. Defense is a sensitive but essential part in Japan-China ties, he hoped the defense ministries in both countries could deepen communications to consolidate friendship.

Ma expressed condolence to Japan on the loss of human life and properties following the March quake-tsunami disaster and the ensuing nuclear crisis. Kitazawa thanked the Chinese side for their support when Japan was having a difficult time.

Ma arrived in Tokyo on Monday. He is set to meet with his Japanese counterpart for the ninth dialogue between China and Japan on defense issues on Tuesday.

Source: Xinhua

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## unicorn

*A confidential cable from the US embassy in Beijing 
*
BBC News - What happens when China's president comes to dinner?


----------



## VKVM

unicorn said:


> *A confidential cable from the US embassy in Beijing
> *
> BBC News - What happens when China's president comes to dinner?



Why are things like this even news?


----------



## akinkhoo

Venkata Venmuri said:


> Why are things like this even news?


because BBC doesn't want their people to remember their reality, like how they are still trap in a war, how MI6 handover the opposition to torture, how their economy is broke, london was torched... etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## asad71

*China and India at War: Study Contemplates Conflict Between Asian Giants*
Posted by Ishaan Tharoor Friday, October 28, 2011 at 2:25 am


Read more: War-Gaming: Study Contemplates Conflict Between India and China - Global Spin - TIME.com

There are plenty of reasons why China and India won't go to war. The two Asian giants hope to reach $100 billion in annual bilateral trade by 2015. Peace and stability are watchwords for both nations' rise on the world stage. Yet tensions between the neighbors seem inescapable: they face each other across a heavily militarized nearly 4,000km-long border and are increasingly competing against each other in a scramble for natural resources around the world. Indian fears over Chinese projects along the Indian Ocean rim were matched recently by Beijing's ire over growing Indian interests in the South China Sea, a body of water China controversially claims as its exclusive territorial sphere of influence. Despite the sense of optimism and ambition that drives these two states, which comprise between them nearly a third of humanity, the legacy of the brief 1962 Sino-Indian war (a humiliating blow for India) still smolders nearly five decades later.
And it's alive on the pages of a new policy report issued by the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses in New Delhi, an independent think tank that is affiliated with India's Ministry of Defense. "A Consideration of Sino-Indian Conflict" is hardly a hawkish tract &#8212; it advocates "war avoidance" &#8212; but, by spelling out a few concrete scenarios of how conflict may look between the two countries, it reveals the palpable lack of trust on the part of strategists both in New Delhi and Beijing. The report applauds long-term Indian efforts underway to beef up defenses along the Chinese border, but warns that Beijing may still take action:
In future, India could be subject to China's hegemonic attention. Since India would be better prepared by then, China may instead wish to set India back now by a preventive war. This means current day preparedness is as essential as preparation for the future. A [defeat] now will have as severe political costs, internally and externally, as it had back in 1962; for, as then, India is yet again contemplating a global role.
While a lot of recent media attention has focused on the likelihood of Sino-Indian clashes at sea, the IDSA report keeps its scope trained along the traditional, glacial Himalayan land boundary, referred to in wonkish parlance as the LAC, the Line of Actual Control. Since the 1962 war, China and India have yet to formally resolve longstanding disputes over vast stretches of territory along this line. Those disputes have resurfaced noticeably in recent years, with China making unprecedented noises, much to the alarm of New Delhi, over its historical claims to the entirety of the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh &#8212; what the Chinese deem "Southern Tibet." The Chinese even rebuked Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for having the audacity of visiting the Indian state during local elections in 2009.
Not surprisingly, it's in this remote corner of the world that many suspect a war could kick off, particularly around the historic Tibetan monastery town of Tawang. India has reinforced its position in Arunachal with more boots on the ground, new missile defenses and some of the Indian air force's best strike craft, new Russian-made Su-30 fighters. After decades of focusing its army west against perennial threat Pakistan, India is tacitly realigning its military east to face the long-term challenge of China.
The report speculates that China could make a targeted territorial grab, "for example, a bid to take Tawang." Further west along the LAC, another flashpoint lies in Kashmir. China controls a piece of largely uninhabited territory known as Aksai Chin that it captured during the 1962 war. Indian press frequently publish alarmist stories about Chinese incursions from Aksai Chin and elsewhere, playing up the scale of Chinese investment in strategic infrastructure on its side of the border in stark contrast to the seeming lethargy of Indian planners. Part of what fuels the anxiety in New Delhi, as the report notes, is the threat of coordinated action between China and Pakistan &#8212; an alliance built largely out of years of mutual antipathy toward India. In one mooted scenario, Pakistan, either with its own forces or terrorist, insurgent proxies, would "make diversionary moves" across the blood-stained Siachen glacier or Kargil, site of the last Indo-Pakistani war in 1999, while a Chinese offensive strikes further east along the border.
Of course, such table-top board game maneuvers have little purchase in present geo-politics. Direct, provocative action suits no player in the region, particularly when there's the specter of American power &#8212; a curious absence in the IDSA report &#8212; hovering on the sidelines. Intriguingly, the report seems to dismiss the notion that China and India would clash in what others would consider obvious hotspots for rivalry; it says the landlocked Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan would likely be treated as a neutral "Switzerland", while Nepal, a country of 40 million that entertains both Beijing and New Delhi's patronage, is more or less assured that neither of its big neighbors would risk violating its sovereignty in the event of war.
Moreover, the IDSA seems to rule out either side encouraging or deploying proxies in more clandestine struggles against the other. The restive border regions on both sides of the LAC are home to resentful minority populations and more than a few insurgent factions. India and China &#8212; unlike Pakistan &#8212; have little precedent in abetting militant groups and strategists on both sides would be wary of fanning flames of rebellion that no one can put out.
Yet what seems to stoke Sino-Indian military tensions &#8212; and grim prophecies of conflict &#8212; are precisely these feelings of vulnerability. The uncertainties posed by both countries' astonishing economic growth, the lack of clear communication and trust between Beijing and New Delhi and the strong nationalism underlying both Indian and Chinese public opinion could unsettle the uneasy status quo that now exists. Managing all this is a task for wooly-heads in New Delhi and Beijing. But don't be surprised if more reports like this one come out, drawing lines on the battlefield.


Read more: War-Gaming: Study Contemplates Conflict Between India and China - Global Spin - TIME.com


----------



## Joe Shearer

akinkhoo said:


> because BBC doesn't want their people to remember their reality, like how they are still trap in a war, how MI6 handover the opposition to torture, how their economy is broke, london was torched... etc.



Ah, so cunning, so typical of perfidious Albion! Immediately divert attention from "...how they are still trap in a war, how MI6 handover the opposition to torture, how their economy is broke, london was torched..." by describing the Chinese leadership's confrontation with a potato-farmer, his brush with the grand-daughter, extra-long chopsticks to avoid being burnt doing an unexpectedly day-to-day thing, addressing an adoring crowd...

No doubt about it, it will successfully divert attention from the war, the MI6 betrayal, the broken economy and London being torched. Very subtle, these British. Whoever would have guessed these underlying motives?

Where IS Cardsharp when we really need him?


----------



## Martian2

*Four important lessons from 1962 Sino-Indian border war*

1. When the People's Daily newspaper publishes an article warning you to back off, you better listen. It is a prelude to war. The Indians ignored the warning from the People's Daily in 1962 and they paid the price of defeat in the Sino-Indian border war.

This lesson is applicable today to Vietnam and the Philippines. After the People's Daily, Xinhua, and Global Times warned them of military action, Vietnamese and Filipino provocations in the South China Sea stopped.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"*On 22 September 1962, the People's Daily published an article which claimed that "the Chinese people were burning with 'great indignation' over the Indian actions on the border and that New Delhi could not 'now say that warning was not served in advance'.*"[37][38]
...
*On 14 October, an editorial on People's Daily issued China's final warning to India*: "So it seems that Mr. Nehru has made up his mind to attack the Chinese frontier guards on an even bigger scale....It is high time to shout to Mr. Nehru that the heroic Chinese troops, with the glorious tradition of resisting foreign aggression, can never be cleared by anyone from their own territory... If there are still some maniacs who are reckless enough to ignore our well-intentioned advice and insist on having another try, well, let them do so. History will pronounce its inexorable verdict... At this critical moment...we still want to appeal once more to Mr. Nehru: better rein in at the edge of the precipice and do not use the lives of Indian troops as stakes in your gamble." [38]"

----------

2. Chinese weaponry stationed across from Taiwan can be moved to the Indian sector. In 1962, China moved heavy artillery. In the current context, China can move 1,800 short-range ballistic missiles from the Taiwan sector for use against India.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Chinese attention was diverted for a time by the military activity of the Nationalists on Taiwan, but on 23 June the U.S. assured China that a Nationalist invasion would not be permitted.[30] *China's heavy artillery facing Taiwan could then be moved to Tibet.[31] It took China six to eight months to gather the resources needed for the war, according to Anil Athale, author of the official Indian history.[31]* The Chinese sent a large quantity of non-military supplies to Tibet through the Indian port of Calcutta.[31]"

----------

3. PLA's blitzkrieg will slice through the enemy's best troops.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"*Marshal Liu Bocheng headed a group to determine the strategy for the war. He concluded that the opposing Indian troops were among India's best, and to achieve victory would require deploying crack troops and relying on force concentration to achieve decisive victory.* On 16 October, this war plan was approved, and on the 18th, the final approval was given by the Politburo for a "self-defensive counter-attack", scheduled for 20 October.[2]
...
At 5:14 am, Chinese mortar fire began attacking the Indian positions. Simultaneously, the Chinese cut the Indian telephone lines, preventing the defenders from making contact with their headquarters. At about 6:30 am, the Chinese infantry launched a surprise attack from the rear and forced the Indians to leave their trenches.[36]

*The Chinese troops overwhelmed the Indians in a series of flanking manoeuvres south of the McMahon Line and prompted their withdrawal from Namka Chu.*[36] Fearful of continued losses, Indian troops escaped into Bhutan. Chinese forces respected the border and did not pursue.[7] Chinese forces now held all of the territory that was under dispute at the time of the Thag La confrontation, but they continued to advance into the rest of NEFA.[36]
...
Western theatre

On the Aksai Chin front, China already controlled most of the disputed territory. *Chinese forces quickly swept the region of any remaining Indian troops.*[42] Late on 19 October, Chinese troops launched a number of attacks throughout the western theatre.[8] By 22 October, all posts north of Chushul had been cleared.[8]"

----------

4. In 1962, the United States rejected India's plea for military jets. Today, China is a well-armed thermonuclear power. What are the chances that the United States would be willing to supply India with a single bullet in the next Sino-Indian border war?

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Involvement of other nations

*During the conflict, Nehru wrote two desperate letters to JFK, requesting 12 squadrons of fighter jets. These jets were necessary to beef up Indian air strength so that an air war could be initiated safely from the Indian perspective. This request was rejected.* According to former Indian diplomat G Parthasarathy, "only after we got nothing from the US did arms supplies from the Soviet Union to India commence." [57] In 1962, President of Pakistan Ayub Khan made clear to India that Indian troops could safely be transferred from the Pakistan frontier to the Himalayas.[58]"


----------



## Martian2

Let's compare the trust among Chinese citizens in the CCP (88% trust) and the foreigners living in democratic nations. Why would Chinese want to emulate the inferior and far-less-trustworthy democratic model in the United States (40% trust) or India (44% trust)?





2011 Edelman Trust Barometer (see page 7 at http://www.edelman.com/trust/2011/uploads/Edelman Trust Barometer Global Deck.pdf).

Edelman (e.g. company behind "Edelman Trust Barometer") is the "world's largest independent public relations firm with over 3,100 employees in 54 offices worldwide" (see Davos Diary - The United States and the Trust Barometer).

----------





China's growing prosperity is clear for all to see.

Countries are like people. They have personalities that reflect the character of a particular country, its culture, history, traditions, and people.

America is a country based on individualism and democracy works very well for Americans. In America, the basic unit of society is the individual and his/her ambitions.

However, looking at Chinese history, it is obvious China's Confucian culture is a collectivist society. Chinese people are most comfortable working in groups. For the past 30 years, the economic and technological advancements accomplished under the CCP have been astonishing.

Thirty years of breathtaking progress have shown that China has found a socioeconomic system that works best for Chinese people. China will continue to pursue "socialism with Chinese characteristics" for the betterment of all Chinese people (except for the tiny disgruntled democracy agitators working for the CIA).

It is unreasonable to call for democracy in China at this time. Democracy in China under Chiang Kai Shek and the Kuomintang did not work. China was impoverished and invaded by foreigners. Today, under the CCP, China possesses advanced thermonuclear weapons and stealth technology to defend the country.

The CCP is doing a great job and it is governing China with the consent of the people. Someone once said that the CCP is the best government that China has had in the last 5,000 years. 88% of Chinese agree. 

----------

Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government - People's Daily Online

"*Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government*
16:04, January 27, 2011

*On Jan. 26, the 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer, which ranks institutions by the amount of trust people have in them, was released by Edelman, one of the top five global public relations firms. The report shows that China ranked first in the world in terms of trust in government with 88 percent trust.*

The tradition in recent years is that Edelman releases the results of the annual Edelman Trust Barometer before start of the annual World Economic Forum meeting.

*Trust in government in China has increased by 14 percentage points, up from 74 percent to 88 percent.* In addition, the trust in government in Brazil has risen sharply, up from 39 percent in 2010 to 85 percent this year.

However, trust in government fell in the United States from 46 percent to 40 percent.

By People's Daily Online"


----------



## Joe Shearer

@Martian2

I have little to say about your second post. About your first, however, it is advisable that you gather rather more authentic and accurate information before taking a position. Your conclusions are based on very superficial and decidedly skewed and distorted reporting, and are not borne out by facts. It was interesting to learn that you believe that your views are not coloured by nationalism.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

Martian2 said:


> *Four important lessons from 1962 Sino-Indian border war*
> 
> 1. When the People's Daily newspaper publishes an article warning you to back off, you better listen. It is a prelude to war. The Indians ignored the warning from the People's Daily in 1962 and they paid the price of defeat in the Sino-Indian border war.
> 
> This lesson is applicable today to Vietnam and the Philippines. After the People's Daily, Xinhua, and Global Times warned them of military action, Vietnamese and Filipino provocations in the South China Sea stopped.
> 
> Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "*On 22 September 1962, the People's Daily published an article which claimed that "the Chinese people were burning with 'great indignation' over the Indian actions on the border and that New Delhi could not 'now say that warning was not served in advance'.*"[37][38]
> ...
> *On 14 October, an editorial on People's Daily issued China's final warning to India*: "So it seems that Mr. Nehru has made up his mind to attack the Chinese frontier guards on an even bigger scale....It is high time to shout to Mr. Nehru that the heroic Chinese troops, with the glorious tradition of resisting foreign aggression, can never be cleared by anyone from their own territory... If there are still some maniacs who are reckless enough to ignore our well-intentioned advice and insist on having another try, well, let them do so. History will pronounce its inexorable verdict... At this critical moment...we still want to appeal once more to Mr. Nehru: better rein in at the edge of the precipice and do not use the lives of Indian troops as stakes in your gamble." [38]"
> 
> ----------
> 
> 2. Chinese weaponry stationed across from Taiwan can be moved to the Indian sector. In 1962, China moved heavy artillery. In the current context, China can move 1,800 short-range ballistic missiles from the Taiwan sector for use against India.
> 
> Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Chinese attention was diverted for a time by the military activity of the Nationalists on Taiwan, but on 23 June the U.S. assured China that a Nationalist invasion would not be permitted.[30] *China's heavy artillery facing Taiwan could then be moved to Tibet.[31] It took China six to eight months to gather the resources needed for the war, according to Anil Athale, author of the official Indian history.[31]* The Chinese sent a large quantity of non-military supplies to Tibet through the Indian port of Calcutta.[31]"
> 
> ----------
> 
> 3. PLA's blitzkrieg will slice through the enemy's best troops.
> 
> Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "*Marshal Liu Bocheng headed a group to determine the strategy for the war. He concluded that the opposing Indian troops were among India's best, and to achieve victory would require deploying crack troops and relying on force concentration to achieve decisive victory.* On 16 October, this war plan was approved, and on the 18th, the final approval was given by the Politburo for a "self-defensive counter-attack", scheduled for 20 October.[2]
> ...
> At 5:14 am, Chinese mortar fire began attacking the Indian positions. Simultaneously, the Chinese cut the Indian telephone lines, preventing the defenders from making contact with their headquarters. At about 6:30 am, the Chinese infantry launched a surprise attack from the rear and forced the Indians to leave their trenches.[36]
> 
> *The Chinese troops overwhelmed the Indians in a series of flanking manoeuvres south of the McMahon Line and prompted their withdrawal from Namka Chu.*[36] Fearful of continued losses, Indian troops escaped into Bhutan. Chinese forces respected the border and did not pursue.[7] Chinese forces now held all of the territory that was under dispute at the time of the Thag La confrontation, but they continued to advance into the rest of NEFA.[36]
> ...
> Western theatre
> 
> On the Aksai Chin front, China already controlled most of the disputed territory. *Chinese forces quickly swept the region of any remaining Indian troops.*[42] Late on 19 October, Chinese troops launched a number of attacks throughout the western theatre.[8] By 22 October, all posts north of Chushul had been cleared.[8]"
> 
> ----------
> 
> 4. In 1962, the United States rejected India's plea for military jets. Today, China is a well-armed thermonuclear power. What are the chances that the United States would be willing to supply India with a single bullet in the next Sino-Indian border war?
> 
> Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> "Involvement of other nations
> 
> *During the conflict, Nehru wrote two desperate letters to JFK, requesting 12 squadrons of fighter jets. These jets were necessary to beef up Indian air strength so that an air war could be initiated safely from the Indian perspective. This request was rejected.* According to former Indian diplomat G Parthasarathy, "only after we got nothing from the US did arms supplies from the Soviet Union to India commence." [57] In 1962, President of Pakistan Ayub Khan made clear to India that Indian troops could safely be transferred from the Pakistan frontier to the Himalayas.[58]"



There are citations throughout this post. What's wrong with it? Or are you complaining about the other post? That has a citation too. My posts are based on facts. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't make my posts any less true.



Martian2 said:


> Let's compare the trust among Chinese citizens in the CCP (88% trust) and the foreigners living in democratic nations. Why would Chinese want to emulate the inferior and far-less-trustworthy democratic model in the United States (40% trust) or India (44% trust)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer (see page 7 at http://www.edelman.com/trust/2011/uploads/Edelman Trust Barometer Global Deck.pdf).
> 
> Edelman (e.g. company behind "Edelman Trust Barometer") is the "world's largest independent public relations firm with over 3,100 employees in 54 offices worldwide" (see Davos Diary - The United States and the Trust Barometer).
> 
> ----------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China's growing prosperity is clear for all to see.
> 
> Countries are like people. They have personalities that reflect the character of a particular country, its culture, history, traditions, and people.
> 
> America is a country based on individualism and democracy works very well for Americans. In America, the basic unit of society is the individual and his/her ambitions.
> 
> However, looking at Chinese history, it is obvious China's Confucian culture is a collectivist society. Chinese people are most comfortable working in groups. For the past 30 years, the economic and technological advancements accomplished under the CCP have been astonishing.
> 
> Thirty years of breathtaking progress have shown that China has found a socioeconomic system that works best for Chinese people. China will continue to pursue "socialism with Chinese characteristics" for the betterment of all Chinese people (except for the tiny disgruntled democracy agitators working for the CIA).
> 
> It is unreasonable to call for democracy in China at this time. Democracy in China under Chiang Kai Shek and the Kuomintang did not work. China was impoverished and invaded by foreigners. Today, under the CCP, China possesses advanced thermonuclear weapons and stealth technology to defend the country.
> 
> The CCP is doing a great job and it is governing China with the consent of the people. Someone once said that the CCP is the best government that China has had in the last 5,000 years. 88% of Chinese agree.
> 
> ----------
> 
> Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government - People's Daily Online
> 
> "*Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government*
> 16:04, January 27, 2011
> 
> *On Jan. 26, the 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer, which ranks institutions by the amount of trust people have in them, was released by Edelman, one of the top five global public relations firms. The report shows that China ranked first in the world in terms of trust in government with 88 percent trust.*
> 
> The tradition in recent years is that Edelman releases the results of the annual Edelman Trust Barometer before start of the annual World Economic Forum meeting.
> 
> *Trust in government in China has increased by 14 percentage points, up from 74 percent to 88 percent.* In addition, the trust in government in Brazil has risen sharply, up from 39 percent in 2010 to 85 percent this year.
> 
> However, trust in government fell in the United States from 46 percent to 40 percent.
> 
> By People's Daily Online"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

I just noticed this thread has no military pictures. I'll rectify that. An interesting question is what would a repeat of the 1962 Sino-Indian war look like today? I haven't followed Indian military exercises, but I can give you a glimpse of the PLA's current arsenal.

----------

*Preview of next Sino-Indian War*

The Chinese combined-arms exercises on the Tibetan plateau show that China will hammer India with air power (J-10, J-11B, Su-27, and Su-30), attack helicopters, armor columns, and mobile heavy artillery (e.g. MLRS and howitzers) in the next Sino-Indian war.

Though it is not shown in the photographs, the opening salvo in the next Sino-Indian war will most likely start with a massive attack by Chinese cruise missiles on Indian military installations.

The Indians better say their prayers. They're not going to last very long against that much Chinese firepower.

*Joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area_XINHUANET*
English.news.cn | 2011-10-22 08:37:23 | Editor: An





A photo taken in this Autumn shows the army aviation troop taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-10 fighter taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a self-propelled weapon system of missile and gun taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows tanks taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-10 fighter taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows the tanks during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter taking off during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter sending infrared decoy during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the post.]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area_XINHUANET*





A photo taken in this Autumn shows rocket guns taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Zhao Haibo)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a self-propelled howitzer taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an)





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter taking part during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows cannons taking part during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Zhao Haibo) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows infantry taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a soldier using a portable air-defence missile during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows infantry with machine gun taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua) 





A photo taken in this Autumn shows a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the post.]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

paritosh said:


> i never said that we dont have our privileges...tell me how many times have you cursed the system when the likes of raj thackeray or modi or sri ram sene...or vhp or simi are allowed to spread hate...?
> whether you like it or not...india is still a nation of village dwellers and they can be moved easily...to form the righteous opinion you have to be educated...and democracy works on the opinion of the largest homogeneous group...so that way..we all would be burning hay in the middle of the chowk to rid the area of mosquitos...or something like that.
> dude...democracy is obviously the best and most modern system...but nothing works the way it is intended to...to comfort you...i agree with your observations...but i have a point.


 you are a respected Indian according to your mature thinking. In china, we do not regard Indian as hell visitors. We know Indian have great history, ordinary Indian do not seem to conceive hatred against chinese. We watch lots Indian love movie in our childhood and we like the touching content demonstrated within it. I hope Indian goverment rethink the relationship between the countries, we should stop those crap and start to know about each other from now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Martian2 said:


> There are citations throughout this post. What's wrong with it? Or are you complaining about the other post? That has a citation too. My posts are based on facts. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't make my posts any less true.



Your posts are based on facts? I doubt it; they are based on "very superficial and decidedly skewed and distorted reporting". That quality of citation does not amount to anything more than expressions of nationalist fervour.

If you are looking for a neutral and objective view of military and geopolitical events, you might like to look up past threads where, for instance, 'Cardsharp' has been involved. In particular, the thread on the incidents relating to the Tawang front, where the posts were of a high order. That thread did not deal with incidents on the Aksai Chin fronts (neither of them) or with the other clashes in Arunachal Pradesh, which, taken into consideration as a whole, are rather more thought-provoking than the tabloid versions to which you seem to have access.

Every single conclusion that you have drawn, based on silly citations, is wrong. That includes your conclusions about the utility of the People's China Daily as a harbinger of military action to come; the transferability of heavy artillery from the Taiwan front to the two military districts responsible for management of the disputed borders with India; the concept of a Chinese blitzkrieg to "slice" through the enemy's (I thought you were free of the 'nationalist' virus?) troops (which happened only on one front, not on the others); most of all, your misunderstanding and consequent misinterpretation of the Indian request for additional arms as an insight into aerial weakness at the time.

The People's China Daily has been in threat mode, off and on, for some decades now. India does not occupy the centre of Chinese administrative attention, and the references have been few and far between. When they have occurred, they are usually negative. There have still been dozens of citations in the years since 1962; they did not result in military clashes. It is silly to connect the two.

The transfer of heavy artillery, of artillery resources in general, has always been possible. What is new about it? As your own post points out, it was done - partially - in 1962. Your post does NOT point out, however, that heavy artillery was not used uniformly on all fronts, and that the most dramatic results did NOT come with the maximal deployment of heavy artillery. Your original point was mysterious, re-stating a known fact, but building it into a foundation of success. Its conclusions in present circumstances are on weak foundations.

Your fanciful imagery of blitzkrieg attacks is misplaced. A thorough examination of the battles on different fronts would reveal the correct picture, and would indicate where these tactics were actually used, where they were successful and where they failed in effect.

Finally, the reference to Indian pleas for American aid was really bad. There was panic in the Indian ministry, and consequently panic calls for additional forces, including aeroplanes. This has nothing to do with either the real availability of Indian aircraft to fight in these theatres, or their effectiveness in high mountain warfare in case of their use. Those were - and continue to be - the real issues, not a gross number of aircraft available, or a disastrous shortage, or a supply against such a mythical shortage.

If you were within respectable distance of the facts, there might be a discussion. Confronted with such a collection of self-seeking, propaganda masterpieces, the only possible reaction is of distaste and avoidance of a food fight. Learn your subject first.

Subsequent posts confirm that we need not bother about expecting any serious analysis from you; the glossy propaganda pictures, and the accompanying comment about not having followed Indian military exercises, clearly indicate what objectivity you bring to the table.

Try not to waste any more bandwidth.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

Joe Shearer said:


> Your posts are based on facts? I doubt it; they are based on "very superficial and decidedly skewed and distorted reporting". That quality of citation does not amount to anything more than expressions of nationalist fervour.
> 
> If you are looking for a neutral and objective view of military and geopolitical events, you might like to look up past threads where, for instance, 'Cardsharp' has been involved. In particular, the thread on the incidents relating to the Tawang front, where the posts were of a high order. That thread did not deal with incidents on the Aksai Chin fronts (neither of them) or with the other clashes in Arunachal Pradesh, which, taken into consideration as a whole, are rather more thought-provoking than the tabloid versions to which you seem to have access.
> 
> Every single conclusion that you have drawn, based on silly citations, is wrong. That includes your conclusions about the utility of the People's China Daily as a harbinger of military action to come; the transferability of heavy artillery from the Taiwan front to the two military districts responsible for management of the disputed borders with India; the concept of a Chinese blitzkrieg to "slice" through the enemy's (I thought you were free of the 'nationalist' virus?) troops (which happened only on one front, not on the others); most of all, your misunderstanding and consequent misinterpretation of the Indian request for additional arms as an insight into aerial weakness at the time.
> 
> The People's China Daily has been in threat mode, off and on, for some decades now. India does not occupy the centre of Chinese administrative attention, and the references have been few and far between. When they have occurred, they are usually negative. There have still been dozens of citations in the years since 1962; they did not result in military clashes. It is silly to connect the two.
> 
> The transfer of heavy artillery, of artillery resources in general, has always been possible. What is new about it? As your own post points out, it was done - partially - in 1962. Your post does NOT point out, however, that heavy artillery was not used uniformly on all fronts, and that the most dramatic results did NOT come with the maximal deployment of heavy artillery. Your original point was mysterious, re-stating a known fact, but building it into a foundation of success. Its conclusions in present circumstances are on weak foundations.
> 
> Your fanciful imagery of blitzkrieg attacks is misplaced. A thorough examination of the battles on different fronts would reveal the correct picture, and would indicate where these tactics were actually used, where they were successful and where they failed in effect.
> 
> Finally, the reference to Indian pleas for American aid was really bad. There was panic in the Indian ministry, and consequently panic calls for additional forces, including aeroplanes. This has nothing to do with either the real availability of Indian aircraft to fight in these theatres, or their effectiveness in high mountain warfare in case of their use. Those were - and continue to be - the real issues, not a gross number of aircraft available, or a disastrous shortage, or a supply against such a mythical shortage.
> 
> If you were within respectable distance of the facts, there might be a discussion. Confronted with such a collection of self-seeking, propaganda masterpieces, the only possible reaction is of distaste and avoidance of a food fight. Learn your subject first.
> 
> Subsequent posts confirm that we need not bother about expecting any serious analysis from you; the glossy propaganda pictures, and the accompanying comment about not having followed Indian military exercises, clearly indicate what objectivity you bring to the table.
> 
> Try not to waste any more bandwidth.



I saw no citations. Therefore, I didn't bother to read your rhetoric. Remember, no reputable citations = "too long didn't read."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

New Delhi fears Beijing&#8217;s territorial claims to the north-eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and its growing naval power.The states of Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu sit uneasily in the union. Maoists hold sway across much of the central belt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Martian2 said:


> I saw no citations. Therefore, I didn't bother to read your rhetoric. Remember, no reputable citations = "too long didn't read."



Your heading was five words too long.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

November 1914, plot by the British government, British India authority hold meeting in simla north India. During the meeting, British government representative Henry McMahon created a MacMahon line with Tibetan local authority without permission of China government, since this 90 thousand square kilometers in the eastern border line territory historically belonging to China was illegal allotted to India. Peolple living in this region is bearing exactly the same religious, features and living habit with people living in Tibet. All previous China government never admit the MacMahon line, thus, it is unlawful and invalid. The British government have guilty conscience by not making the exchange of notes known to public until the India government label the MacMahon line on its official map in 1937. April 1960, premier Zhou en lai paid visit to New Dehli having a talk with premier Nehru to seek peaceful resolution of border dispute, but India refuse any reasonable proposal by China side. Year 1962, India military troops stir up conflict in the border, which finally was beaten back by PLA force as easy as blowing off dust. Year 1987, India officially set up a Pradesh on the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

The btitish goverment induced the loacal tibetan authority to cede China territory without thinking many years later, India will get inpendant. And india goverment ignored the historical truth and pretend not to know the history. The british empire is the principle criminal who buried seeds of hatred between to largest population in the world and India appropriated territory of china without any payback.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

According to a veteran description, PLA disarmed thousands of Indian soldiers and gave back the gun to them before removing rifle bolt. This make a joke at our leisure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

Panda Armed

I don't believe India has to worry about South Tibet for three decades. It's at least a generation away. China's priority list seems pretty clear. I would say the absolute deadline is 2049, the 100th anniversary of New China.

Return of Hong Kong (1997)
Return of Macau (1999)

Return of Taiwan (2020-2040?)
Return of Diaoyu Islands (2030-2040?)
Return of South Tibet (2040-2049?)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dron.ru

> Lavrov: Russia will not participate in schemes to contain China
> 
> «It must be very clear that Russia would not support the scheme that can initiate a new round of confrontation in international relations. We will not participate in structures designed to contain China, which is our good neighbor and strategic partner»



The announcement was made after meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton. The U.S. is trying to encircle China. We should work together in order to reduce the negative impact of the U.S. in Southeast Asia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HongWu

Dron.ru said:


> The announcement was made after meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton. The U.S. is trying to encircle China. We should work together in order to reduce the negative impact of the U.S. in Southeast Asia.


When Russia is ready to beat back the USA, you should sanction india and Vietnam, because they are both strongly in USA's camp. Look at how india voted to attack Syria your ally and naval base! They also want to be friends with Japan, who claims your Southern Kuril islands. Georgia's relations with india is getting better too.

Once Russia sanctions india and Vietnam, including arms sale sanctions, then China will attack these two countries and regime change them. China can give Russia a chunk of Vietnam and a chunk of india too as gratitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*China's next top leader: Xi Jinping (president-in-waiting)*





Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (center) is currently in the United States where he met U.S. President Barack Obama. (Source: CNN)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

China's Military Spending to Double by 2015 - Report - China Real Time Report - WSJ

"*Chinas Military Spending to Double by 2015  Report*
by Jeremy Page
February 14, 2012, 3:14 PM HKT






Chinese Air Force J-10 fighter jets take off during training in Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. (Associated Press)

*Chinas defense budget will double by 2015, making it more than the rest of the Asia Pacific regions combined, according to a report from IHS Janes, a global think tank specializing in security issues.*

Beijings military spending will reach $238.2 billion in 2015, compared with $232.5 billion for rest of the region, according to the report. That would also be almost four times the expected defense budget of Japan, the next biggest in the region, in 2015, the report said.

The new report was released as Chinas Vice President, Xi Jinping, arrived in Washington at the start of a four-day visit to the U.S. that is seen as a prelude to his expected promotion to Communist Party chief in a once-a-decade leadership change in the fall.

Mr Xi, who is also Vice Chairman of the Partys Central Military Commission, is due to visit the Pentagon on Tuesday after meeting his counterpart, Joe Biden, and Presdent Obama at the White House earlier in the day.

Ahead of the visit, he and other Chinese officials had expressed concern about the U.S. decision to refocus its military strategy on Asia last year, and complained of a trust deficit between Beijing and Washington.

China says that its military spending does not pose a threat to any other country, and has repeatedly pointed out that it still represents a tiny fraction of U.S. defense spending. But the new research highlights what U.S. officials are worried about: That China is rapidly increasing its military spending without being sufficiently transparent about its strategic intentions in the region.

Many of Chinas neighbors have been alarmed in the last year or two by what they see as Beijings more assertive stance on territorial issues, especially over the South China Sea.

China says its defense budget for 2011 increased by 12.7 percent to about $91.5 billion, but many defense experts believe its real military spending is much higher.

IHS Janes put the figure for 2011 at $119.8 billion, and predicted it would increase by an average of 18.75 percent annually until 2015.

Chinas investment will race ahead at an eye watering 18.75 percent, leaving Japan and India far behind, said Paul Burton, senior principal analyst of IHS Janes Defence Budgets.

He added that Taiwans defense spending was expected to have overtaken Singapores by 2015, while Vietnam and Indonesia were also forecast to increase military expenditure at a rate that exceeds GDP growth.

Rajiv Biswas, chief Asia Pacific economist for IHS Global Insight, was quoted saying: Beijing has been able to devote an increasingly large portion of its overall budget towards defence and has been steadily building up its military capabilities for more than two decades.

He continued: This will continue unless there is an economic catastrophe. Conversely Japan and India may have to hold back due to significant economic challenges.

Responding to the report, the Global Times, a nationalist tabloid published by the Communist Party mouthpiece Peoples Daily, did not dispute IHS Janes projections but warned against Western powers with an axe to grind using Chinas military budget to promote the idea of a China threat.

The aim of Chinas defense modernization is safeguard national unity and security, the paper said (in Chinese). Adhering to the policy of coordinated development of national defense and the economy, investment in national defense has always occurred on a moderate and reasonable scale.

AIRSHOW-Asia's biggest arms, aerospace event begins under China shadow | Reuters

"* China defence spending to hit $238 billion by 2015

* *Japan spending constrained by Fukushima disaster*
...
IHS Jane's said in a report that while all major Asian nations are forecast to increase spending on defence, China's military budget will soar to $238.20 billion by 2015 from $119.80 billion last year, growing about 18.75 percent per annum.

That number will exceed spending by all other nations in the region combined, but compares with a base U.S. defence budget of $525.40 billion for 2013.

In Asia, Japan and India follow China in defence spending, but both may be constrained in coming years while China is likely to steam ahead, underpinned by strong economic growth, analysts said.

"Japan's government debt and the investment needed after Fukushima will impact defence spend. We will increasingly see budget channeled towards key programmes and equipment," said Rajiv Biswas, chief economist in the Asia-Pacific for IHS Global Insight.

*"India's government debt and fiscal deficit is very high as a share of GDP, and the rupee depreciated significantly in 2011, all of which will limit India's defence ambitions."*

Nevertheless, Japan's defence budget is forecast to rise to $66.60 billion by 2015 from $60.30 billion last year. India's military expenditure is likely to be $44.90 billion in 2015 from $35.40 billion in 2011."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

US to help build Philippine maritime force but won&#8217;t take sides on South China Sea dispute

"*US to help build Philippine maritime force but won&#8217;t take sides on South China Sea dispute*
By Associated Press, Published: April 30

*WASHINGTON &#8212; The US says it will help build the Philippines' sea patrol capability but will not take sides in that nation's standoff with China at a disputed shoal in the South China Sea.*

The top diplomats and defense officials of the treaty allies held their first joint meeting Monday and discussed the three-week standoff at the Scarborough Shoal.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reaffirmed US commitment to its mutual defense treaty with the Philippines, and to freedom of navigation and regional security. She reiterated support for a diplomatic resolution to territorial disputes.

A joint statement said they would cooperate on building the Philippines' maritime security capabilities. The US will transfer a second ship to the poorly equipped Philippine navy this year."

----------

My observation: Common sense should dictate that the United States is not about to engage China in a major war (which may take decades) over a historical Chinese rock in the South China Sea. The Filipinos have been living in a fantasy world for believing otherwise.

Similarly, the Georgians thought the United States would fight a major war on their behalf against Russia over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Keep dreaming.

Secondary reference link: US won't take sides in Philippine-China sea dispute, Clinton says

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

It belongs to China

"*It belongs to China*
By Victor N. Arches II
Posted April 28th, 2012 by Manila Standard Today & filed under Opinion.

*The Scarborough Shoal does belong to China which discovered it and drew it in a map as early as 1279 during the Yuan Dynasty. Chinese fishermen, from both the Mainland and Taiwan, have since used it.* As a matter of fact, Guo Shoujing, (the Chinese astronomer, engineer and mathematician who worked under the Mongol ruler, Kublai Khan) performed surveying of the South China Sea, and the surveying point was the Scarborough Shoal which is considered part of the Zhongsha Islands (renamed Huangyan Island in 1983).

*By contrast, the old maps being relied upon by our Department of Foreign Affairs in its spurious claim on the same territory were drawn up only in 1820, or 541 years after Chinas.* I am surprised that Senator Edgardo Angarasupposedly a renowned lawyercan claim that a map drawn 5 centuries and 4 decades after, takes precedence over the much earlier map of China.

But I am all the more astonished that Fr. Joaquin Bernas, in his April 22 article in another newspaper, being one of the main framers of the 1987 Constitution, uses the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea as his basis to defend the Philippine claim. This, despite and after acknowledging the fact that, indeed, the Scarborough Shoal is OUTSIDE THE LIMITS set by the Treaty of Paris for Philippine territory. What kind of double-speak is that?

So, what exactly was the territory we declared independence from the US in 1946? Why is it that NONE of our constitutions, past and present, from 1899, 1935, 1943, 1973, 1986 and 1987, include either the Spratlys or the Scarborough Shoal within our declared national territory? Where, or from whom, did we, all of a sudden, acquire title to these? Out of thin air?

In the late 1970s, China organized many scientific expeditions in the Shoal and around that area. In fact, in 1980, a stone marker reading South China Sea Scientific Expedition was installed by China on the South Rock. This Chinese marker was removed, without authority, by the Philippines in 1997.

All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal from its territorial boundaries. Our own Republic Act No. 3046, passed by our Congress and approved in 1961, stopped us from our claim. Yet, we had the temerity to amend this law on March 10, 2009, after 48 long years, to unilaterally include the disputed territories.

But what takes the cake is the fact that *China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in questionnamely, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.

On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As far as I know, a mere convention cannot overturn or supersede a treaty or an agreement reached between colonial powers. And even if it were considered a law, it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.*

Whom are we fooling?"

[Note: Thank you to EastWind for the newslink.]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## White Lightning

*FIDAE 2012: FAdeA to push ahead with Chinese helicopter production*

Officials from Fabrica Argentina de Aviones (FAdeA) say they hope to fly their first locally assembled Z-11 light helicopter at the end of this year. 
The plans follow a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed with Chinese helicopter company Avicopter and its parent CATIC in October 2011 to assemble the Z-11 light helicopter for both the Argentine and the Latin American market.


----------



## Martian2

*Chinese dual-use 8-axle truck was most likely sold for civilian purposes
*
Experts: North Korea missile carrier likely from China - Washington Times

"Experts: North Korea missile carrier likely from China
By Peter Enav - Associated Press
Thursday, April 19, 2012




** FILE ** In this April 15, 2012, file photo, a North Korean vehicle carrying a missile passes by during a mass military parade in Pyongyangs Kim Il Sung Square to celebrate the centenary of the birth of the late North Korean founder Kim Il Sung. The enormous, 16-wheel truck used to carry the missile, likely came from China in a possible violation of U.N. sanctions meant to rein in Pyongyangs missile program, experts say. (AP Photo/David Guttenfelder, File)

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP)  The enormous, 16-wheel truck that North Korea used to carry a missile during a recent parade likely came from China in a possible violation of U.N. sanctions meant to rein in Pyongyangs missile program, experts say.

The carrier, also believed capable of launching missiles, caught the eye of experts during last Sundays military show in Pyongyang because it was the biggest carrier yet displayed by North Korea and gives the country truculently at odds with the U.S., Japan and South Korea  the ability to transport long-range missiles around its territory, making them harder to locate and destroy.

The large size of the vehicle represents a quantum leap forward for the North Koreans, said Wendell Minnick, a reporter on Asian military developments for Defense News, a Washington-based publication.

Unlikely to have been made by North Korea because of its technical sophistication, experts said the design of the vehicle shows that China is the probable source. Pinning a sanctions-busting charge on Beijing would be difficult, however, because *it would be hard to prove that Beijing provided the technology for military purposes or even that it sold the vehicle directly to North Korea, the experts said.

The vehicle also can be used in other fields, like oil exploration. At the same time North Korea might have gotten it from another country in a re-export deal.*

Its very possible there was no intended violation of sanctions by China on this piece of equipment, said arms transfer expert Pieter Wezeman of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

On Thursday,China denied any wrongdoing in connection with the vehicles appearance at the North Korean parade. Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin told a regular news conference that China is against the spread of weapons of mass destruction and carriers for such weapons. He said China follows international laws and has strict rules against the spread of such weapons.

Analyst Ted Parsons of IHS Jane's Defence Weekly first raised the possibility that the missile-carrying vehicle came from China, citing similarities to Chinese design patterns in the windscreen, the windscreen wiper configuration, the door and handle, the grill, the front bumper lighting configurations, and the cabin steps.

The 16-wheel TEL is apparently based on a design from the 9th Academy of the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation, he said.

China military analyst Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center in suburban Washington agreed, citing technological challenges as a major reason to believe that Pyongyang could not have developed the vehicle on its own.

This is definitely a CASIC vehicle that was probably produced specifically for export to North Korea, Fisher said. The North Koreans dont have the ability to make something like this themselves.

Fisher said that keeping the 16 wheels in alignment would present a particular challenge to North Korea, because of the requirement to develop a sophisticated on board computer system.

This kind of system, he said, was almost certainly beyond them.

CASIC designs vehicles of up to 21-meter-long (68 feet) trucks with maximum loading capacity of 122 tons for production at its Hubei Sanjiang Space Wanshan Special Vehicles Co., Ltd. in central China.

CASICs press office did not respond to request for comment. A company statement from October 2010 cited the export of the first 16-wheel vehicle without specifying the purchasing country. The sales department of Hubei Sanjiang confirmed that a vehicle or vehicles of the 16-wheel type had been sold abroad, but refused to disclose the buyer, saying it was a secret.

While agreeing that the vehicle in Sundays parade probably came from China, Wezeman cautioned that it would be difficult to prove that Beijing had violated United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718 of October 14, 2006 in providing it to North Korea. That measure bans countries from supplying Pyongyang with items related to ballistic missiles.

*The vehicle could have been re-exported to North Korea from a third country, such as Pakistan*, which is known to have used Chinese chassis for its medium range ballistic and other missiles, or North Korea could have used a front company to obscure that it was the buyer Wezeman said. *Also it is possible that it was supplied to North Korea for civilian purposes such as construction.*

CASIC descriptions of its 16-wheel vehicle make specific reference to its possible use in civilian activities including oil exploration.

While acknowledging the possibility that the vehicle seen in Sundays parade was re-exported from Pakistan, Fisher was adamant that it had almost certainly been built in China for North Korean customers.

I think that CASIC has put together as many as six or seven of these vehicles and that maybe half of them have been sold to Pyongyang, he said.

On Thursday Janes Defence Weekly reported that following the Pyongyang parade, a UN Security Council investigation into the possibility of a sanctions breach was under way.

China, North Koreas main political and economic ally, supported the passage of the Security Council resolution banning the provision of missile related items to North Korea. But it is also determined to ensure that Pyongyangs current rulers remain in power, and to that end provides the regime military and other assistance."

----------

U.S. Takes China At Word on N. Korea Sanctions | Defense News | defensenews.com

"*U.S. Takes China At Word on N. Korea Sanctions*
Apr. 19, 2012 - 07:45PM | By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE





A missile is transported on a vehicle during a military pararade April 15 commemorating the 100th birth anniversary of former North Korean President Kim Il Sung in Pyongyang. (KCNA via KNS via AFP)

*WASHINGTON  The United States said April 19 that it believed Chinas assurances that it is abiding by sanctions on North Korea after charges that Beijing supplied technology for a missile launcher.*

IHS Janes Defence Weekly said that U.N. officials are investigating allegations that China violated sanctions imposed by the Security Council after North Korea unveiled the 16-wheel launcher at a military parade.

*China has provided repeated assurances that its complying fully with both Resolution 1718 as well 1874. Were not presently aware of any U.N. probe into this matter, State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters.
*
I think we take them at their word, Toner said, adding that he was not aware of specific conversations between the United States and China about the launcher.

North Korea showed off the launcher, carrying an apparently new medium-range missile, as part of national celebrations on April 15 for the centennial of the birth of the regimes founder Kim Il-Sung.

Quoting an unidentified official, IHS Janes Defence Weekly said China could be in breach of the two resolutions approved after North Koreas 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests if it passed along the vehicle since then.

U.S. Rep. Mike Turner, who heads a panel of the House Armed Services Committee, asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and intelligence chief James Clapper to investigate whether China supplied the launchers technology.

In a letter, Turner quoted military specialist Richard Fisher as telling him that the launcher was very likely based on a Chinese design and that the technology transfer would have required a green light from Beijing.

I am sure you agree that the United States cannot permit a state such as the Peoples Republic of China to support  either intentionally or by a convenient lack of attention  the ambitions of a state like North Korea to threaten the security of the American people, the Ohio Republican wrote.

Indeed, the possibility of such cooperation undermines the administrations entire policy of investing China with the responsibility of getting tough on North Korea.

China, which holds a veto on the Security Council, is the main supporter of North Korea, although it voiced misgivings over Pyongyangs defiant rocket launch last week.

North Korea described the launch as an unsuccessful bid to put a satellite into orbit, but the United States said it was a disguised missile test.

Separately, Japans Yomiuri Shimbun reported April 18 that China has stopped sending back fleeing North Koreans in retaliation for its allys failure to consult Beijing over its rocket launch.

Chinas repatriations have triggered wide criticism overseas, with human rights groups saying that North Koreans face imprisonment, forced abortions and even sometimes execution if returned home.

We obviously hope that the media reports are true, Toner said.

But the spokesman said the United States could not confirm a change in Chinas policy.

We consistently urge China to adhere to its international obligations as part of the U.N. Convention on Refugees, he said."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Xi Jinping (China's president-in-waiting) received 19-gun salute from the United States*





Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (center) [visited the United States in February 2012] where he met U.S. President Barack Obama. (Source: CNN)

AFP: China's defense chief visits Pentagon amid diplomatic row

"China's defense chief visits Pentagon amid diplomatic row
(AFP) &#8211; 1 hour ago
...
*In February, China's heir apparent Vice President Xi Jinping was welcomed at the Pentagon during an official trip to the United States where he was honored with a 19-gun salute, a privilege rarely accorded to foreign dignitaries.*"


----------



## Martian2

Martian2 said:


> *Xi Jinping (China's president-in-waiting) received 19-gun salute from the United States*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (center) [visited the United States in February 2012] where he met U.S. President Barack Obama. (Source: CNN)
> 
> AFP: China's defense chief visits Pentagon amid diplomatic row
> 
> "China's defense chief visits Pentagon amid diplomatic row
> (AFP) &#8211; 1 hour ago
> ...
> *In February, China's heir apparent Vice President Xi Jinping was welcomed at the Pentagon during an official trip to the United States where he was honored with a 19-gun salute, a privilege rarely accorded to foreign dignitaries.*"





below_freezing (on another forum said:


> Why is this important?



1. Read the citation, it is rare.

2. Despite the anti-Chinese tone in most of the American media, the United States government has consistently shown proper respect to the Chinese government. Actions speak louder than rhetoric. U.S. action shows that it is treating the Chinese government as an equal by according it honors that it does not show others.

3. The consistent show of respect indicates a mature working relationship between the United States and China.

4. It is not enough to just examine the weapon systems of China and the United States. It is also important to examine the attitudes of the political leadership of both countries and their willingness to use their military tools.

Relations with China: Mr Wen's red carpet | The Economist

"*Mr Wen's red carpet*
Despite economic tensions, mutual trust between America and China has rarely been deeper. Can it last?
Dec 11th 2003 | WASHINGTON, DC

AMID bafflement, even outrage, from congressmen whose districts have been losing manufacturing jobs in droves to China, *George Bush this week laid on what one of his officials called &#8220;spectacular&#8221; treatment for China's prime minister, Wen Jiabao, on his first visit to America. It included a 19-gun salute on the White House's South Lawn, a welcome no head of government (as opposed to a head of state) has been granted by this administration.* Given the growing spats between America and China over trade and exchange rates, what is Mr Bush doing cosying up to China&#8212;especially with an election due?

The answer has to do with his changed view of the world since September 11th. In fighting Islamic terrorism, America has found China co-operative. China's leaders, after all, have their own Muslim problem: restive Uighurs in the western province of Xinjiang. America's once-loud criticism of China's harsh treatment of such &#8220;splittists&#8221; and other minorities, notably Tibetans, is now barely audible.

Then there is North Korea and its nuclear-weapons programme. China's attempts since last spring to use what economic and diplomatic leverage it has left with its old and infuriating Communist ally has earned Hu Jintao, the president, and Mr Wen the respect of the Bush administration, which wants to &#8220;internationalise&#8221; the issue. (article continues)"


----------



## Chinese guy

The U.S. government = cockroaches 
all over the world has its shadow


----------



## Chinese guy

The U.S. government = cockroaches 
all over the world has its shadow


----------



## Martian2

*U.S. allowed China to soar*

The U.S. attempt to "contain" China has been pretty tame compared to the squeeze on the Soviet Union.

1. There is no Asian NATO.

2. The U.S. blocked trade with the Soviet Union via the Jackson-Vanik trade sanction law. "Most Favored Nation" (MFN) status for the Soviet Union/Russia had been withheld for decades until Russia joined the WTO in December of last year.

In contrast, U.S. MFN was granted to China in the 1990s (see Most favoured nation).

In reality, the U.S. granted China free trade status after 1980. China could not have become an economic trade giant without active U.S. support.

Permanent normal trade relations

"For many years, People's Republic of China was the most important country in this group which required an annual waiver to maintain free trade status. *The waiver for the PRC had been in effect since 1980.* Every year between 1989 and 1999, legislation was introduced in Congress to disapprove the President's waiver. The legislation had sought to tie free trade with China to meeting certain human rights conditions that go beyond freedom of emigration. All such attempted legislation failed to pass."

3. The U.S. wouldn't let the Soviet Union/Russia into the WTO until last year. China joined the WTO ten years ago.

4. Not only did the United States open its market to Chinese goods for decades, the United States opened its universities to Taiwanese (i.e. ethnic Chinese) and mainland Chinese. Let's be honest, U.S. universities opened up our minds and now we're all super-smart. Hehe.

In conclusion, I (for one) am grateful to the United States. Let us hope that we can build an enduring Sino-American friendship. The Chinese standard of living continues to rise dramatically year-after-year and Chinese industries are starting to dominate in one sector after another. While it is true that Chinese work very hard, it is also due to decades of accommodation by the Big Guy (aka Hyperpower).


----------



## Martian2

*Telling the world about Chinese sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal*





The highest-rated comment on the Christian Science Monitor regarding China's Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal happens to be mine. (Click on comments at the following link: China blames the Philippines for South China Sea dispute - CSMonitor.com)





Oh look, here I am again on the Voice of America.





My comment shows up on United Press International (UPI)





I'm also on the political website "The Hill" as the lone comment.





I have the only comment on OilVoice.





Finally, I take it into the heart of the lion's den (i.e. the enemy camp) and post on the Philippine Online Chronicles.


----------



## Martian2

*Back on Voice of America Again!*

*It's another day and the voice of China Lee (my preferred pseudonym) is still going strong! Here I am again on the Voice of America!*





*My comment is the one labeled as "Top Commenter."*


----------



## Martian2

*China begins to drill for oil in the South China Sea*






http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-05/09/c_131576610.htm

"China begins deep-water drilling in South China Sea
English.news.cn 2012-05-09 09:54:47

BEIJING, May 9 (Xinhua) -- China's first deep-water drilling rig started operations in the South China Sea at 9:38 a.m. on Wednesday, marking "a substantial step" made by the country's deep-sea oil industry.

The sixth-generation semi-submersible CNOOC 981, owned by China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC), began drilling in a sea area 320 km southeast of Hong Kong at a water depth of 1,500 meters.

It is the first independent deep-water oil drilling to be conducted by a Chinese company, and China is the first country to explore deep-water oil and gas resources in the South China Sea.

"Large deep-water drilling rigs are our mobile national territory and strategic weapon for promoting the development of the country's offshore oil industry," said CNOOC Chairman Wang Yilin, adding that the drilling would contribute to ensuring the country's energy security and sovereign right over territorial waters.

Wednesday's drilling is the first step for oil and gas exploration in the 25-square-km deep-water region. The rig will complete drilling at a depth of 2,335 meters to reach an estimated 30 billion cubic meters of natural gas, said Shi Hesheng, a geological engineer with CNOOC's Shenzhen subsidiary.

"In a long-term vision, more than 700 million tonnes of oil resources and 1.2 trillion cubic meters of natural gas resources will be found in this area. There are a dozen such areas in the northern part of the South China Sea," Shi said.

Depths greater than 300 meters are internationally recognized as deep waters and those greater than 1,500 meters are ultra-deep waters. Globally, 30 to 40 percent of marine resources are buried in deep waters and about half of major exploration sites are developed offshore.

The South China Sea is estimated to have 23 billion tonnes to 30 billion tonnes of oil and 16 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, accounting for one-third of China's total oil and gas resources.

About 70 percent of oil and gas reserves in the resource-rich South China Sea is contained in 1.54 million square km of deep-water regions.

"The South China Sea has the potential to become the world's fourth-largest deep-water drilling region, after the so-called 'Golden Triangle' of the Gulf of Mexico, Brazil and West Africa," said Zhou Shouwei, a member of Chinese Academy of Engineering.

Subject to a lack of key technologies, most of China's current offshore oil exploration is conducted less than 300 meters below the surface.

The drilling at CNOOC 981 is a historic milestone in the country's deep-water oil and gas exploration efforts, said Lin Boqiang, director of the China Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University.

"It will reduce China's oil imports and boost the development of the country's deep-water exploration technologies and equipment," Lin said.

Oil and gas consumption has soared in China amid the country's rapid economic growth and industrialization process. The country relies on imports for more than 55 percent of crude oil and 20 percent of natural gas. Its appetite is expected to grow in the future.

To ease mounting pressure, China has invested huge human and material resources to move its oil drilling into deep waters.

It took 6 billion yuan (952 million U.S. dollars) and more than three years for China State Shipbuilding Corp. (CSSC), the contractor, to build the CNOOC 981 rig for CNOOC.

The platform is 114 meters long, 90 meters wide and 137.8 meters high, and weighs 31,000 tonnes. With a deck the size of a standard football field, the rig is capable of undertaking an offshore operation at a maximum water depth of 3,000 meters and drilling a depth of 12,000 meters, according to CSSC.

Equipped with third-generation dynamic and global positioning systems, the CNOOC 981 can withstand vibrations brought by "once-in-two-centuries storms." Its underwater blow-out prevention system can efficiently prevent accidents like the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, experts said."

[Note: Thank you to Gnak for the post.]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Explaining Chinese sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal on the Los Angeles Times*

Let me see...I have posted on the Christian Science Monitor, United Press International (UPI), Voice of America, The Hill, and now Los Angeles Times. Also, my comments are all over YouTube.

The longer that this Sino-Filipino dispute drags out, the more prevalent my comments will become in the mass media.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Let's debate Chinese historical sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal in the Mass Media*

Here is the latest conversation on the Christian Science Monitor in the comment section regarding Chinese sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

*Countering anti-China rhetoric in the Mass Media*

Chicago is America's third-largest city. Many people read the Chicago Tribune. I don't appreciate it when someone writes anti-China propaganda in the comment section of the Chicago Tribune. They're going to hear from me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

Martian2 said:


> *U.S. allowed China to soar*
> 
> The U.S. attempt to "contain" China has been pretty tame compared to the squeeze on the Soviet Union.
> 
> 1. There is no Asian NATO.
> 
> 2. The U.S. blocked trade with the Soviet Union via the Jackson-Vanik trade sanction law. "Most Favored Nation" (MFN) status for the Soviet Union/Russia had been withheld for decades until Russia joined the WTO in December of last year.
> 
> In contrast, U.S. MFN was granted to China in the 1990s (see Most favoured nation).
> 
> In reality, the U.S. granted China free trade status after 1980. China could not have become an economic trade giant without active U.S. support.
> 
> Permanent normal trade relations
> 
> "For many years, People's Republic of China was the most important country in this group which required an annual waiver to maintain free trade status. *The waiver for the PRC had been in effect since 1980.* Every year between 1989 and 1999, legislation was introduced in Congress to disapprove the President's waiver. The legislation had sought to tie free trade with China to meeting certain human rights conditions that go beyond freedom of emigration. All such attempted legislation failed to pass."
> 
> 3. The U.S. wouldn't let the Soviet Union/Russia into the WTO until last year. China joined the WTO ten years ago.
> 
> 4. Not only did the United States open its market to Chinese goods for decades, the United States opened its universities to Taiwanese (i.e. ethnic Chinese) and mainland Chinese. Let's be honest, U.S. universities opened up our minds and now we're all super-smart. Hehe.
> 
> In conclusion, I (for one) am grateful to the United States. Let us hope that we can build an enduring Sino-American friendship. The Chinese standard of living continues to rise dramatically year-after-year and Chinese industries are starting to dominate in one sector after another. While it is true that Chinese work very hard, it is also due to decades of accommodation by the Big Guy (aka Hyperpower).



In the 1980s, American did not realise by promoting free trade with China will create another super power. The China in 1980 is in pathetic state, nobody will imagine after 30 yrs, it will become the 2nd largest economy power and possible 2nd largest military power after USA..

Greed is the thing that killed USA... The greed to earn higher profit by cost cutting. China is smart that to make China favourable for invest ,so that they will outsource their manufacturing facilities to China.

Even today, China is still the favourable destination for investment or setup of manufacturing plant.

A hardworking workforce. Minimal labour law.. Highly effectial network to transport yr goods(road, bridge and first class port)


----------



## Martian2

*Demolishing weak Filipino arguments to encroach on Chinese sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal*

My post on at least 20 different popular YouTube videos (including Voice of America video on South China Sea):

"It is a historical fact that China was the first to discover Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal in 1279 A.D. and incorporate it into official Yuan Dynasty government maps. Chinese sovereignty has been continually exercised with the use of Huangyan Island by&#65279; countless generations of Chinese fishermen.

There are no provisions&#65279; in the 1982 UNCLOS that&#65279; permits the retroactive confiscation of pre-existing sovereign territory that dates from 1279 A.D. Also, the U.S. refuses to recognize UNCLOS."

----------





Filipino nationalists don't like it when I rip out the heart of their arguments to encroach on Chinese sovereignty over Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

*Sovereignty does not depend on inhabitation*

Here I am on the most popular Voice of America YouTube video (by views) on the South China Sea to refute the notion that sovereignty is dependent on inhabitation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*Working my way through the Filipino arguments*

I'm still commenting on the most popular Voice of America YouTube video regarding the South China Sea. This is where all of the China-haters like to congregate and I'm basically challenging them to a debate on the merits.

I have demolished the following Filipino nationalists' arguments:

1. Proximity - Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal is indeed closer to the Philippines than to China. So what? Who cares? Historical first discovery determines ownership, not proximity. The most prominent example is the Falkland Islands. It's British, because of first discovery.

2. Inhabitation is not a determinant of sovereignty - Look at the thousands of uninhabited Greek islands. No one disputes those islands are Greek. Hence, inhabitation is not important in determining sovereignty.

3. Exclusive Economic Zone under UNCLOS - The United States does not recognize UNCLOS. In other words, UNCLOS has no basis in international law. Also, UNCLOS has no provision to permit the retroactive seizure of sovereign territory that dates from 1279 A.D.

4. ITLOS - Since the United States does not recognize UNCLOS, ITLOS has no jurisdiction or validity.

I'll keep knocking down the baloney arguments put forth by the Filipino nationalists. Sooner or later, they'll finally admit that Huangyan Island/Scarborough Shoal has been Chinese after the first discovery by China's Yuan Dynasty in 1279 A.D.





Thank you to everyone that voted "thumbs up" on my comment pertaining to the Greek islands. It is currently a top comment on the Voice of America YouTube video.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shuttler

Beast said:


> In the 1980s, American did not realise by promoting free trade with China will create another super power. The China in 1980 is in pathetic state, nobody will imagine after 30 yrs, it will become the 2nd largest economy power and possible 2nd largest military power after USA..
> 
> Greed is the thing that killed USA... The greed to earn higher profit by cost cutting. China is smart that to make China favourable for invest ,so that they will outsource their manufacturing facilities to China.
> 
> Even today, China is still the favourable destination for investment or setup of manufacturing plant.
> 
> A hardworking workforce. Minimal labour law.. Highly effectial network to transport yr goods(road, bridge and first class port)



we help curb their inflation, maintain a robust stock market and wealth in their shareholders (whose companies have their operations in China) and prevent their environmental deterioration for 3 decades; and of course, their economy's liquidity!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

The Tide of Chinese History

Let's take a look at a few notable events in Chinese foreign affairs during the past decades and try to guess where China is headed.

In 1979, China took care of Vietnam by burning down the northern part of their country. In 1997, China sent the British packing. I'm guessing India is next on China's hit list around 2025 (when the J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter fleet will be ready).

----------

*China devastated Vietnam in 1979*

sino vietnamese war

"*Aftermath*

The legacy of the war is lasting, especially in Vietnam. The Chinese implemented an effective "scorched-earth policy" while retreating back to China. They caused extensive damage to the Vietnamese countryside and infrastructure, through destruction of Vietnamese villages, roads, and railroads."

----------

*By 2025, I expect China to repeat its British ultimatum to India*

China's anti-imperialism stance has been consistent. At some point, China's patience will run out and foreign countries will face the ultimatum of Chinese military power. Either voluntarily return Chinese South Tibetan territory (i.e. occupied Arunachal Pradesh) or beg on your knees at the feet of the PLA.

The choice will be yours: comply or be destroyed.

Hong Kong and Macau - Andrew Stone, Piera Chen, Chung Wah Chow - Google Books

"The peaceful agreement that eventually settled the status of Hong Kong was by no means a foregone conclusion in the decades leading up to it. The key negotiators have since revealed just how touchy China felt about Hong Kong and how close it came to retaking the territory by force.

*Margaret Thatcher, the British prime minister who negotiated the deal, said later that Deng Xiaoping, then China's leader, told her he 'could walk in and take the whole lot this afternoon'.*

She replied that China would lose everything if it did. *'There is nothing I could do to stop you,' she said*, 'but the eyes of the world would now know what China is like.'

*Lu Ping, the top Chinese negotiator, recently confirmed that this was no bluff on Deng's part.*"


----------



## Martian2

In many ways, the Vietnam War was an undeclared war between the United States and China. Arguably, it was a resounding Chinese victory.

----------

*General Westmoreland: "[Without China] there would have been little chance for a Vietnamese victory against the French, and later against the Americans and South Vietnamese."*

Vietnamese were slaves of the French in their own country. China's support freed the Vietnamese from French imperialists.

China provided critical support to enable Vietnam to unify their country. In return, the ungrateful Vietnamese are flirting with their former enemy, the United States, to stab China in the back.

----------

Military History Online - Chinese Support for North Vietnam during the Vietnam War: The Decisive Edge

"*Chinese Support for North Vietnam during the Vietnam War: The Decisive Edge
by Bob Seals*
...
China would continue; however, to provide substantial levels of military aid for North Vietnam to the tune of $106 million from 1955 to 1963, effectively giving the North the resources needed to begin the insurgency in the South. [43] Thus, the North Vietnamese would form the National Liberation Front, NLF, in December of 1960 and the People&#8217;s Liberation Armed Forces, PLAF, the following year in 1961. Both the NLF and PLAF would be more commonly referred to as the Viet Cong, or Vietnamese Communists. [44]
...
*Support requested and provided*

The most immediate need was for anti-aircraft artillery, units to counter the overwhelming American air power over North Vietnam. Ho would request Chinese AAA units during a meeting with Mao in May of 1965 and PLA forces would begin flowing into North Vietnam in July of 1965 to help defend the capital of Hanoi and the transportation network to include railroad lines and bridges.[50] This movement of troops from China was not lost on the U.S. as reported in a Top Secret CIA Special Report which identified seven major PLA units in North Vietnam to include the 67th AAA Division, and an estimated 25,000 to 45,000 Chinese combat troops total. [51] Recent Chinese sources indicate that this PLA AAA Division did indeed operate in the western area of North Vietnam. [52] In addition to AAA forces the PLA also provided missiles, artillery and logistics, railroad, engineer and mine sweeping forces. These forces would not only man AAA sites but would also build and repair Vietnamese infrastructure damaged or destroyed by U.S. airstrikes. [53] Such units would have quite a bit of repair work to do given that there would be more than a million tons of bombs dropped by U.S. aircraft upon North Vietnam from 1965 to 1972. [54] The Second Vietnam War would drag on for years as a sort of operational stalemate existed in the skies over North Vietnam. The U.S. could and did bomb the North at will, but the sheer numbers of Chinese forces, to include a total of 16 AAA divisions serving with a peak strength of 170,000 troops attained in 1967, would ensure that a high price would be paid by U.S. pilots with targets often rapidly rebuilt after destruction. [55] Chinese engineering and logistics units would perform impressive feats of construction throughout their stay in North Vietnam effectively keeping the transportation network functioning.
...
*Analysis of support*

&#8220;So the more troops they send to Vietnam, the happier we will be, for we feel that we will have them in our power, we can have their blood&#8230;They will be close to China&#8230;in our grasp. They&#8230;will be our hostages.&#8221; [59]
- - Chou En-lai speaking to Nasser, 1965

So how does one analyze the considerable military support provided by the PRC for the DRV during the 25 year period from 1950-1975, encompassing both the First and Second Vietnam Wars? Was the military aid provided, to include equipment, advisors and planning assistance, decisive in both conflicts or would the North Vietnamese have prevailed without this Chinese military support? In retrospect it seems clear that the Chinese military support for the DRV would be crucial. This Chinese support would be, in many respects, timely, appropriate and helpful without doing the job that the North Vietnamese needed to do themselves; that is, fight and win on the ground in South Vietnam. The PRC would not conduct an intervention on the scale that it conducted in Korea, avoiding the international perception of acting in the traditional China/tributary state relationship with Vietnam, all the while providing the tools and assistance required to &#8220;tip the scales&#8221; in both conflicts against the West. The People&#8217;s Republic would be, in effect, the world&#8217;s largest unsinkable aircraft carrier and army base, a strategic advantage that Western nations thousands of miles removed from the fighting could not hope to match.

*As a biographer of Chairman Mao would remark &#8220;It was having China as a secure rear and supply depot that made it possible for the Vietnamese to fight for 25 years and beat first the French and then the Americans.*&#8221; [60]

The numbers would be impressive enough, of the military equipment and supplies provided by China. According to Qiang Zhai, during the period 1950-54, the PRC would provide enough weapons, 116,000 small arms and 4630 artillery pieces, to equip some 5 infantry divisions, one heavy engineering and artillery division, one direct fire anti-aircraft artillery regiment and one guards regiment. [61] This infusion of equipment for almost seven divisions worth of troops could not, and would not, be matched by the French. As one U.S. military officer would comment years later &#8220;The French politicians continued their irresolute, incoherent, and penny-pinching support of military operations in Indochina, while demanding &#8216;decisive solutions.&#8217;&#8221; [62] The numbers would be even more impressive in the Second Vietnam War. Chinese support provided would increase by a factor of ten with arms and equipment from uniforms to tanks to small arms on a yearly basis greater than the entire military aid provided in the early 1950&#8217;s against the French. [63] Additionally the Chinese anti-aircraft artillery troops, peaking at a total of 17 divisions and 150,000 men in 1967, would claim credit for downing 1,707 U.S. aircraft over North Vietnam. [64] These Chinese combat troops who were not to be used south of the 21st parallel in North Vietnam; however, the presence of these units secured the North&#8217;s rear, turning the nation into the most heavily defended area in the world, and allowing the DRV to use resources in South Vietnam and elsewhere that would have been devoted to homeland defense. [65] In effect the U.S. would not be able to open a second front over the skies of North Vietnam, as it had been able to so successfully over Germany in the Second World War, due to these Chinese divisions.

But the mere presence of China to the north would also be a constant &#8220;sword of Damocles&#8221; hanging over the heads of Western and South Vietnamese nations. This nearness would also ensure that the ever present possibility of massive, full scale Chinese intervention would always be a factor that had to be considered by Western political and military leaders. Any plans for taking the fight to the North Vietnamese enemy on his home field by going north could not be seriously considered given the clear warnings by the PRC that it would intervene with massive force. The Chinese took great pains to communicate this willingness to fight on behalf of North Vietnam, if seriously threatened, to the United States, communicating warnings via various channels to include ambassadorial talks in Poland, third-party leaders such as the Pakistani and Tanzania Presidents and the British ambassador in Beijing. [66] In some respects this pledge of assistance was just as valuable as the tanks, trucks and guns provided by the PRC.

*Conclusion*

&#8220;Why have the Americans not made a fuss about the fact that more than 100,000 Chinese troops help you building the railways, roads and airports although they knew about it?&#8221; [67]
- - Chairman Mao to Vietnamese Premier Dong, 1970

In conclusion, as we can see from the considerable historical material outlined above, the military support provided by the People&#8217;s Republic of China, to include advisors, equipment and combat troops, was the decisive factor for the Communist Democratic Republic of Vietnam prevailing during 1949-1975 in both the First and Second Vietnam Wars. The small arms, mortars, ammunition, uniforms, tanks, artillery, radars, anti-aircraft guns, jet aircraft, trucks, and naval vessels were critical in the North Vietnamese struggle. However, what was even more critical and normally not acknowledged in the laundry list of war material is the psychological and strategic advantage provided by Communist China&#8217;s pledge to intervene in the advent of a United States invasion of North Vietnam, and communicating that pledge to the U.S. This strategic advantage in effect cannot be overstated.

*As General Westmoreland&#8217;s former G-2, or Intelligence Officer would write after the Vietnam Wars &#8220;With a friendly China located adjacent to North Vietnam, there would have been little chance for a Vietnamese victory against the French, and later against the Americans and South Vietnamese.&#8221;* [68] It is rather ironic that most professional historians tend to downplay or ignore China&#8217;s decisive role in North Vietnam&#8217;s victory while the military and intelligence communities, U.S. at least, are much more willing to acknowledge this fact. Perhaps this is understandable since if one acknowledges the role played by China it calls into question such Vietnam myths as the &#8220;poorly armed guerrilla&#8221; and the &#8220;military genius&#8221; of Giap, among other issues. Historians such as Xiaoming Zhang and Qiang Zhai are challenging the paradigm of accepted Vietnam history and in doing so are performing a great service.

&#8220;Thus the highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy plans;&#8221; according to the learned military theorist Sun-Tzu in the Art of War. [69] In respects this is exactly what the North Vietnamese, and Chinese did in both Vietnam Wars: they successfully attacked the Western powers war plans. The considerable support for the DRV by the PRC, to include a promise to intervene with massive numbers of troops in the event of an invasion of North Vietnam, effectively eliminated this course of action, and perhaps others, as potential war winning options for the West. Thus, with the support of China, on a strategic level of war the DRV was able to remain upon the offensive throughout the war, maintaining the initiative and finally achieving victory as Saigon fell in April of 1975."

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

*U.S. self-interests override any consideration for Filipino or Vietnamese interests*

The United States is currently the world's leading economic and military power. China is expected to become the world's largest economy in the next ten years. I saw a study where China is projected to have the world's-largest military budget by 2035 (see citation below).

It is in the long-term interest of the United States to maintain a cooperative and positive relationship with China. Only fools believe the U.S. will engage in a shooting war with China over 1,000-year-old Chinese islands from the Han Dynasty.

All you have to do is look at North Korea. Why did George Bush attack Afghanistan and Iraq, but leave North Korea alone after it detonated an atomic bomb to implicitly threaten South Korea? The obvious answer is deference to China.

----------

The year 2035 is only two decades away. We all know China has a long term memory. In my judgment, the United States will no do anything rash to risk its good relations with China. You can kiss the Filipinos and Vietnamese goodbye.

China

"*The dragon&#8217;s new teeth*
*A rare look inside the world&#8217;s biggest military expansion*
Apr 7th 2012 | BEIJING






AT A meeting of South-East Asian nations in 2010, China&#8217;s foreign minister Yang Jiechi, facing a barrage of complaints about his country&#8217;s behaviour in the region, blurted out the sort of thing polite leaders usually prefer to leave unsaid. &#8220;China is a big country,&#8221; he pointed out, &#8220;and other countries are small countries and that is just a fact.&#8221; Indeed it is, and China is big not merely in terms of territory and population, but also military might. Its Communist Party is presiding over the world&#8217;s largest military build-up. And that is just a fact, too&#8212;one which the rest of the world is having to come to terms with.

That China is rapidly modernising its armed forces is not in doubt, though there is disagreement about what the true spending figure is. China&#8217;s defence budget has almost certainly experienced double digit growth for two decades. According to SIPRI, a research institute, annual defence spending rose from over $30 billion in 2000 to almost $120 billion in 2010. SIPRI usually adds about 50% to the official figure that China gives for its defence spending, because even basic military items such as research and development are kept off budget. Including those items would imply total military spending in 2012, based on the latest announcement from Beijing, will be around $160 billion. America still spends four-and-a-half times as much on defence, but on present trends China&#8217;s defence spending could overtake America&#8217;s after 2035 (see chart).






All that money is changing what the People&#8217;s Liberation Army (PLA) can do. Twenty years ago, China&#8217;s military might lay primarily in the enormous numbers of people under arms; their main task was to fight an enemy face-to-face or occupy territory. The PLA is still the largest army in the world, with an active force of 2.3m. But China&#8217;s real military strength increasingly lies elsewhere. The Pentagon&#8217;s planners think China is intent on acquiring what is called in the jargon A2/AD, or &#8220;anti-access/area denial&#8221; capabilities. The idea is to use pinpoint ground attack and anti-ship missiles, a growing fleet of modern submarines and cyber and anti-satellite weapons to destroy or disable another nation&#8217;s military assets from afar.

In the western Pacific, that would mean targeting or putting in jeopardy America&#8217;s aircraft-carrier groups and its air-force bases in Okinawa, South Korea and even Guam. The aim would be to render American power projection in Asia riskier and more costly, so that America&#8217;s allies would no longer be able to rely on it to deter aggression or to combat subtler forms of coercion. It would also enable China to carry out its repeated threat to take over Taiwan if the island were ever to declare formal independence.

China&#8217;s military build-up is ringing alarm bells in Asia and has already caused a pivot in America&#8217;s defence policy. The new &#8220;strategic guidance&#8221; issued in January by Barack Obama and his defence secretary, Leon Panetta, confirmed what everyone in Washington already knew: that a switch in priorities towards Asia was overdue and under way. The document says that &#8220;While the US military will continue to contribute to security globally, we will of necessity rebalance towards the Asia-Pacific region.&#8221; America is planning roughly $500 billion of cuts in planned defence spending over the next ten years. But, says the document, &#8220;to credibly deter potential adversaries and to prevent them from achieving their objectives, the United States must maintain its ability to project power in areas in which our access and freedom to operate are challenged.&#8221;

It is pretty obvious what that means. Distracted by campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, America has neglected the most economically dynamic region of the world. In particular, it has responded inadequately to China&#8217;s growing military power and political assertiveness. According to senior American diplomats, China has the ambition&#8212;and increasingly the power&#8212;to become a regional hegemon; it is engaged in a determined effort to lock America out of a region that has been declared a vital security interest by every administration since Teddy Roosevelt&#8217;s; and it is pulling countries in South-East Asia into its orbit of influence &#8220;by default&#8221;. America has to respond. As an early sign of that response, Mr Obama announced in November 2011 that 2,500 US Marines would soon be stationed in Australia. Talks about an increased American military presence in the Philippines began in February this year.
*
The uncertainty principle*

China worries the rest of the world not only because of the scale of its military build-up, but also because of the lack of information about how it might use its new forces and even who is really in charge of them. The American strategic-guidance document spells out the concern. &#8220;The growth of China&#8217;s military power&#8221;, it says, &#8220;must be accompanied by greater clarity of its strategic intentions in order to avoid causing friction in the region.&#8221;

Officially, China is committed to what it called, in the words of an old slogan, a &#8220;peaceful rise&#8221;. Its foreign-policy experts stress their commitment to a rules-based multipolar world. They shake their heads in disbelief at suggestions that China sees itself as a &#8220;near peer&#8221; military competitor with America.






In the South and East China Seas, though, things look different. In the past 18 months, there have been clashes between Chinese vessels and ships from Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and the Philippines over territorial rights in the resource-rich waters. A pugnacious editorial in the state-run Global Times last October gave warning: &#8220;If these countries don&#8217;t want to change their ways with China, they will need to prepare for the sounds of cannons. We need to be ready for that, as it may be the only way for the disputes in the sea to be resolved.&#8221; This was not a government pronouncement, but it seems the censors permit plenty of press freedom when it comes to blowing off nationalistic steam.

Smooth-talking foreign-ministry officials may cringe with embarrassment at Global Times&#8212;China&#8217;s equivalent of Fox News&#8212;but its views are not so far removed from the gung-ho leadership of the rapidly expanding navy. Moreover, in a statement of doctrine published in 2005, the PLA&#8217;s Science of Military Strategy did not mince its words. Although &#8220;active defence is the essential feature of China&#8217;s military strategy,&#8221; it said, if &#8220;an enemy offends our national interests it means that the enemy has already fired the first shot,&#8221; in which case the PLA&#8217;s mission is &#8220;to do all we can to dominate the enemy by striking first&#8221;.

Making things more alarming is a lack of transparency over who really controls the guns and ships. China is unique among great powers in that the PLA is not formally part of the state. It is responsible to the Communist Party, and is run by the party&#8217;s Central Military Commission, not the ministry of defence. Although party and government are obviously very close in China, the party is even more opaque, which complicates outsiders&#8217; understanding of where the PLA&#8217;s loyalties and priorities lie. A better military-to-military relationship between America and China would cast some light into this dark corner. But the PLA often suspends &#8220;mil-mil&#8221; relations as a &#8220;punishment&#8221; whenever tension rises with America over Taiwan. The PLA is also paranoid about what America might gain if the relationship between the two countries&#8217; armed forces went deeper.

The upshot of these various uncertainties is that even if outsiders believe that China&#8217;s intentions are largely benign&#8212;and it is clear that some of them do not&#8212;they can hardly make plans based on that assumption alone. As the influential American think-tank, the Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) points out, the intentions of an authoritarian regime can change very quickly. The nature and size of the capabilities that China has built up also count.
*
History boys*

The build-up has gone in fits and starts. It began in the early 1950s when the Soviet Union was China&#8217;s most important ally and arms supplier, but abruptly ceased when Mao Zedong launched his decade-long Cultural Revolution in the mid-1960s. The two countries came close to war over their disputed border and China carried out its first nuclear test. The second phase of modernisation began in the 1980s, under Deng Xiaoping. Deng was seeking to reform the whole country and the army was no exception. But he told the PLA that his priority was the economy; the generals must be patient and live within a budget of less than 1.5% of GDP.

A third phase began in the early 1990s. Shaken by the destructive impact of the West&#8217;s high-tech weaponry on the Iraqi army, the PLA realised that its huge ground forces were militarily obsolete. PLA scholars at the Academy of Military Science in Beijing began learning all they could from American think-tanks about the so-called &#8220;revolution in military affairs&#8221; (RMA), a change in strategy and weaponry made possible by exponentially greater computer-processing power. In a meeting with The Economist at the Academy, General Chen Zhou, the main author of the four most recent defence white papers, said: &#8220;We studied RMA exhaustively. Our great hero was Andy Marshall in the Pentagon [the powerful head of the Office of Net Assessment who was known as the Pentagon&#8217;s futurist-in-chief]. We translated every word he wrote.&#8221;





China&#8217;s soldiers come in from the cold

In 1993 the general-secretary of the Communist Party, Jiang Zemin, put RMA at the heart of China&#8217;s military strategy. Now, the PLA had to turn itself into a force capable of winning what the strategy called &#8220;local wars under high-tech conditions&#8221;. Campaigns would be short, decisive and limited in geographic scope and political goals. The big investments would henceforth go to the air force, the navy and the Second Artillery Force, which operates China&#8217;s nuclear and conventionally armed missiles.

Further shifts came in 2002 and 2004. High-tech weapons on their own were not enough; what mattered was the ability to knit everything together on the battlefield through what the Chinese called &#8220;informatisation&#8221; and what is known in the West as &#8220;unified C4ISR&#8221;. (The four Cs are command, control, communications, and computers; ISR stands for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; the Pentagon loves its abbreviations).





Just another corner of the network

General Chen describes the period up to 2010 as &#8220;laying the foundations of modernised forces&#8221;. The next decade should see the roll-out of what is called mechanisation (the deployment of advanced military platforms) and informatisation (bringing them together as a network). The two processes should be completed in terms of equipment, integration and training by 2020. But General Chen reckons China will not achieve full informatisation until well after that. &#8220;A major difficulty&#8221;, he says, &#8220;is that we are still only partially mechanised. We do not always know how to make our investments when technology is both overlapping and leapfrogging.&#8221; Whereas the West was able to accomplish its military transformation by taking the two processes in sequence, China is trying to do both together. Still, that has not slowed down big investments which are designed to defeat even technologically advanced foes by making &#8220;the best use of our strong points to attack the enemy&#8217;s weak points&#8221;. In 2010 the CSBA identified the essential military components that China, on current trends, will be able to deploy within ten years. Among them: satellites and reconnaissance drones; thousands of surface-to-surface and anti-ship missiles; more than 60 stealthy conventional submarines and at least six nuclear attack submarines; stealthy manned and unmanned combat aircraft; and space and cyber warfare capabilities. In addition, the navy has to decide whether to make the (extremely expensive) transition to a force dominated by aircraft-carriers, like America. Aircraft-carriers would be an unmistakable declaration of an ambition eventually to project power far from home. Deploying them would also match the expected actions of Japan and India in the near future. China may well have three small carriers within five to ten years, though military analysts think it would take much longer for the Chinese to learn how to use them well.

*A new gunboat diplomacy*

This promises to be a formidable array of assets. They are, for the most part, &#8220;asymmetric&#8221;, that is, designed not to match American military power in the western Pacific directly but rather to exploit its vulnerabilities. So, how might they be used?

Taiwan is the main spur for China&#8217;s military modernisation. In 1996 America reacted to Chinese ballistic-missile tests carried out near Taiwanese ports by sending two aircraft-carrier groups into the Taiwan Strait. Since 2002 China&#8217;s strategy has been largely built around the possibility of a cross-Strait armed conflict in which China&#8217;s forces would not only have to overcome opposition from Taiwan but also to deter, delay or defeat an American attempt to intervene. According to recent reports by CSBA and RAND, another American think-tank, China is well on its way to having the means, by 2020, to deter American aircraft-carriers and aircraft from operating within what is known as the &#8220;first island chain&#8221;&#8212;a perimeter running from the Aleutians in the north to Taiwan, the Philippines and Borneo (see map).






In 2005 China passed the Taiwan Anti-Secession Law, which commits it to a military response should Taiwan ever declare independence or even if the government in Beijing thinks all possibility of peaceful unification has been lost. Jia Xiudong of the China Institute of International Studies (the foreign ministry&#8217;s main think-tank) says: &#8220;The first priority is Taiwan. The mainland is patient, but independence is not the future for Taiwan. China&#8217;s military forces should be ready to repel any force of intervention. The US likes to maintain what it calls &#8216;strategic ambiguity&#8217; over what it would do in the event of a conflict arising from secession. We don&#8217;t have any ambiguity. We will use whatever means we have to prevent it happening.&#8221;

If Taiwan policy has been the immediate focus of China&#8217;s military planning, the sheer breadth of capabilities the country is acquiring gives it other options&#8212;and temptations. In 2004 Hu Jintao, China&#8217;s president, said the PLA should be able to undertake &#8220;new historic missions&#8221;. Some of these involve UN peacekeeping. In recent years China has been the biggest contributor of peacekeeping troops among the permanent five members of the Security Council. But the responsibility for most of these new missions has fallen on the navy. In addition to its primary job of denying China&#8217;s enemies access to sea lanes, it is increasingly being asked to project power in the neighbourhood and farther afield.

The navy appears to see itself as the guardian of China&#8217;s ever-expanding economic interests. These range from supporting the country&#8217;s sovereignty claims (for example, its insistence on seeing most of the South China Sea as an exclusive economic zone) to protecting the huge weight of Chinese shipping, preserving the country&#8217;s access to energy and raw materials supplies, and safeguarding the soaring numbers of Chinese citizens who work abroad (about 5m today, but expected to rise to 100m by 2020). The navy&#8217;s growing fleet of powerful destroyers, stealthy frigates and guided-missile-carrying catamarans enables it to carry out extended &#8220;green water&#8221; operations (ie, regional, not just coastal tasks). It is also developing longer-range &#8220;blue water&#8221; capabilities. In early 2009 the navy began anti-piracy patrols off the Gulf of Aden with three ships. Last year, one of those vessels was sent to the Mediterranean to assist in evacuating 35,000 Chinese workers from Libya&#8212;an impressive logistical exercise carried out with the Chinese air force.





Just practising
*
Power grows out of the barrel of a gun*

It is hardly surprising that China&#8217;s neighbours and the West in general should worry about these developments. The range of forces marshalled against Taiwan plus China&#8217;s &#8220;A2/AD&#8221; potential to push the forces of other countries over the horizon have already eroded the confidence of America&#8217;s Asian allies that the guarantor of their security will always be there for them. Mr Obama&#8217;s rebalancing towards Asia may go some way towards easing those doubts. America&#8217;s allies are also going to have to do more for themselves, including developing their own A2/AD capabilities. But the longer-term trends in defence spending are in China&#8217;s favour. China can focus entirely on Asia, whereas America will continue to have global responsibilities. Asian concerns about the dragon will not disappear.






That said, the threat from China should not be exaggerated. There are three limiting factors. First, unlike the former Soviet Union, China has a vital national interest in the stability of the global economic system. Its military leaders constantly stress that the development of what is still only a middle-income country with a lot of very poor people takes precedence over military ambition. The increase in military spending reflects the growth of the economy, rather than an expanding share of national income. For many years China has spent the same proportion of GDP on defence (a bit over 2%, whereas America spends about 4.7%). The real test of China&#8217;s willingness to keep military spending constant will come when China&#8217;s headlong economic growth starts to slow further. But on past form, China&#8217;s leaders will continue to worry more about internal threats to their control than external ones. Last year spending on internal security outstripped military spending for the first time. With a rapidly ageing population, it is also a good bet that meeting the demand for better health care will become a higher priority than maintaining military spending. Like all the other great powers, China faces a choice of guns or walking sticks.

Second, as some pragmatic American policymakers concede, it is not a matter for surprise or shock that a country of China&#8217;s importance and history should have a sense of its place in the world and want armed forces which reflect that. Indeed, the West is occasionally contradictory about Chinese power, both fretting about it and asking China to accept greater responsibility for global order. As General Yao Yunzhu of the Academy of Military Science says: &#8220;We are criticised if we do more and criticised if we do less. The West should decide what it wants. The international military order is US-led&#8212;NATO and Asian bilateral alliances&#8212;there is nothing like the WTO for China to get into.&#8221;

Third, the PLA may not be quite as formidable as it seems on paper. China&#8217;s military technology has suffered from the Western arms embargo imposed after the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. It struggles to produce high-performance jet engines, for example. Western defence firms believe that is why they are often on the receiving end of cyber-attacks that appear to come from China. China&#8217;s defence industry may be improving but it remains scattered, inefficient and over-dependent on high-tech imports from Russia, which is happy to sell the same stuff to China&#8217;s local rivals, India and Vietnam. The PLA also has little recent combat experience. The last time it fought a real enemy was in the war against Vietnam in 1979, when it got a bloody nose. In contrast, a decade of conflict has honed American forces to a new pitch of professionalism. There must be some doubt that the PLA could put into practice the complex joint operations it is being increasingly called upon to perform.

General Yao says the gap between American and Chinese forces is &#8220;at least 30, maybe 50, years&#8221;. &#8220;China&#8221;, she says, &#8220;has no need to be a military peer of the US. But perhaps by the time we do become a peer competitor the leadership of both countries will have the wisdom to deal with the problem.&#8221; The global security of the next few decades will depend on her hope being realised.


Correction: The following definitions have been changed in the main table of this article: "Main battle tanks" to "Modern main battle tanks&#8221;; "Armoured infantry vehicles" to &#8220;Armoured infantry fighting vehicles&#8221;; "Intercontinental ballistic missiles" to "Intercontinental ballistic missile launchers"; &#8220;Transport helicopters&#8221; to "Heavy/medium transport helicopters"; &#8220;Transport aircraft&#8221; to "Heavy/medium transport aircraft"; &#8220;Tanker and multi-role aircraft&#8221; to &#8220;Tanker aircraft&#8221;. Additionally, the data are from 2011 not 2010 as originally reported. These changes were made on 6th April 2012."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*China: 2,285,000 active troops. U.S. pivot to Asia - only 2,500 additional troops. What pivot?*

China has a relentlessly modernizing military of 2,285,000 active troops. The U.S. pivot to Asia has currently added only 250 troops (see citation below) and the total will be 2,500 marines over the coming years. This is a meaningless "pivot."

----------

Commentary: Obama's Asia 'Bluff' | The National Interest

"*Obama's Asia 'Bluff'*
Amitai Etzioni | June 14, 2012






When a leading expert on military affairs recently told a Brookings Institution meeting that President Obamas much-touted pivot to Asia was a bluff, I considered the statement way off the mark. But since then, I have concluded that there is indeed less to Obamas grand change in strategy than meets the eye. In fact, the pivot makes little sense. This suggests that one ought to look for domestic explanations.

The media points to the drawdown of American troops in the Middle East (particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan) and their increase in the Far East as exhibit one of the realignment of American military forces called for by the pivot. Actually, the new commitment to Asia is minuscule. The press refers to new deployment of 2,500 Marines in the region, but only 250 troops have actually arrived to date. The remainder are not expected to arrive for years. Furthermore, even when in full forcesome say ten years from nowthe Marines will add little to the 55,442 troops already stationed in the Asia-Pacific region at the end of last year, mostly in Japan (36,708), Guam (4,272) and afloat (13,618).

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced in early June that there also will be a shift in U.S. naval forces. While until now the United States has divided its warships roughly equally between the Atlantic and the Pacific, the Pacific will now host 60 percent of the fleet, albeit of a smaller fleet.

However, Panetta stressed that it will take years for these concepts, and many of the investments we are making, to be fully realized. There also will be more frequent visits by the American warships in Asian ports, and some ships will be berthed in Singapore, which is sure to delight the sailors and some local professionals but otherwise not matter much.

More significant is the question of what role these forces will play in the region. *Obviously, our troopseven as augmented with a few Marinesare not meant to engage in any forthcoming military confrontation with China, with its constantly expanding and increasingly modernized army consisting of 2,285,000 active troops.*

Nor is there any sign that China seeks a military confrontation with the United States. Although Chinas military capacity is expanding, even the most hawkish American observers do not think China could stage such a confrontation for at least a decade. Moreover, that the Marines will be located 2,600 miles away from China reveals they are not meant to serve as a tripwire, which would entail placing them on the beaches of Taiwan or at the island chains contested in the South China Sea.

Military analysts will argue that these moves are not meant to provide a substantial realignment of military assets but rather to send a message. But as moviemaker Samuel Goldwyn famously quipped, If you want to send a message, use Western Union. Using troops does send a messagebut is it one we wish to send?

Both Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski strongly favored heightened U.S. attempts to engage China as a partner in maintaining global order and urged co-evolution with China rather than attempts to contain it. There remains plenty of time to turn to military moves if China refuses to become a responsible stakeholder in the international order. True, China has made several rather assertive claims in the South China Sea, but these have almost uniformly involved laying claims as a starting point for negotiations. The United States may feel that it ought to support countries close to China, such as Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines, so that they will not risk being bullied by the rising global power. However, this can be accomplished through treaties, trade and aid without resorting to the present U.S. strategy of militarizing the conflict.

Why then the military pivot to Asia? It does make sense as one part of an election-year campaign, designed to deprive the GOP of one of its favorite and winning claims: that Democrats are weak on foreign policy. The more American voters concentrate on the Far Eastin which no war looms and we can act as tough as we want without facing short-term consequences or exorbitant expendituresthe more they might be distracted from the shambles in Afghanistan and the resurgence of Al Qaeda in Yemen and Somalia. Hence, the better the world looks.

Mitt Romneys hawkish statements about China and Russia suggest the Democrats are not the only ones seeking to play this card. Both sides should note, though, that the message is being received. China is likely to respond in kind by further accelerating its military buildup and repositioning some of its own forces. Indeed, it may well deepen its already considerable military ties with Pakistan. The notion that the United States could bankrupt China by involving it in an arms race, as Reagan did to speed the disintegration of the Soviet Union, is fanciful given that the United States is in more dire economic straits than is China and that China can invest in next-generation cyber weapons, space arms and antiship missiles without straining its economy.

It might be too much to hope that the Chinese authorities will understand the role domestic politics plays in our foreign policy. But one can rest assured that events in the Middle Eastin Iran, Pakistan, Syria and Afghanistanwill remind us soon where the true front lines are.

_Amitai Etzioni served as a senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard and The University of California at Berkeley; and is a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University._"


----------



## idune

There has been raft of trade and investment agreements signed between China and south American countries. These deals will go long way promoting economic and political realtion of China. These agreements are specially important because US has been screaming about Asian pivot without much economic underpinning. China on the other hand quietly doing its own pivot in US backyard with quantifiable economic measure. Would our Chinese friends be interested in capturing some of the informaton here and perhaps some official Chinese view on relation with South America and how that fits into China's global strategy.

Argentina/China sign a raft of agreements to boost trade and investment
Argentina/China sign a raft of agreements to boost trade and investment &mdash; MercoPress

China, Argentina agree to further strategic ties
China, Argentina agree to further strategic ties - People's Daily Online

China and Brazil in $30bn currency swap agreement
BBC News - China and Brazil in $30bn currency swap agreement

China, Chile to establish strategic partnership, boost trade
China, Chile to establish strategic partnership, boost trade - Xinhua | English.news.cn

China's Wen offers $10 billion Latin America credit line
UPDATE 3-China's Wen offers $10 billion Latin America credit line | Reuters

China, Chile aim to double trade by 2015: Premier Wen
China, Chile aim to double trade by 2015: Premier Wen | Reuters

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

idune said:


> China and Brazil in $30bn currency swap agreement
> BBC News - China and Brazil in $30bn currency swap agreement



*Chinese multibillion-dollar currency swaps pressure U.S. Fed to stop printing money.

China and the swap country (Brazil) also save 1 to 1.5% in transaction costs.*

The Chinese currency swap agreements with other countries are extremely important. They serve two purposes.

1. China intends to eventually replace the U.S. as the world's major reserve currency. This became a strategic goal when the U.S. Federal Reserve started printing money on a massive scale, which is essentially a tax on everyone that holds U.S. dollars.

The U.S. is feeling the pressure from China. If the U.S. Fed keeps printing money recklessly (e.g. more Quantitative Easing), more countries will seek currency swap agreements with China. The U.S. wants to hold on to its position as the world's reserve currency for as long as possible. Hence, the Fed is restraining itself from another round of massive money printing.

2. By removing U.S. dollars from Sino-Brazilian trade, the $30 billion China-Brazil swap agreement will save Chinese and Brazilian companies a lot of money in transaction costs. Currently, U.S. financial institutions charge about 1 to 1.5% to process business transactions based in U.S. dollars.

For a $30 billion total trade amount, the profit margin for U.S. banks is $300 to $450 million to move a few numbers from one bank account into another. However, by transferring the currency transactions to Chinese and Brazilian banks, China and Brazil each stand to gain $150 to $225 million in transaction cost savings.

----------

I can't find my original citation for the 1 to 1.5% transaction cost, but I do have a substitute citation.

https://www.fttglobal.com/currencies-exchange.jsp

"*Bank to Bank Currencies Exchange* &#8211; When you electronically wire your funds from one Bank to another it will be converted between currencies if required. Banks typically charge between 1.5% and 5% when you perform this type of transfer. This is a very profitable business for the Banks"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*China always has Mongolia*

Let's say the U.S. and China are at war and the U.S. Navy cuts off Middle Eastern oil. What is China's next move?

Well, there's a really big country next door called Mongolia. Mongolia is 1,564,115.75 square kilometers (or half the size of the Indian subcontinent) with only 2.7 million people.

Mongolia is full of coal and valuable minerals.






In conclusion, if the U.S. Navy blocks China's energy sources in the Middle East then China would just annex Mongolia. There's plenty of energy and mineral resources to sustain China indefinitely. This will provide China with ample time to build a massive navy for a counterstrike.

----------

References:

Coal-mining region - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"*Mongolia*

Mongolia has proven reserves of 12.2 billion tons of coal including 2 billion tons of coking coal and 10.1 billion tons of thermal coal.[6] *Mongolia is estimated to have potential coal reserves of some 100 billion metric tonnes.*[7][8] While Mongolia's output is approximately only 5 million tonnes of coal per year, it will grow significantly given its proximity to China.[9]"

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2111.html

"*Mongolia* oil, coal, copper, molybdenum, tungsten, phosphates, tin, nickel, zinc, fluorspar, gold, silver, iron"

Mongolia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Natural resources


----------



## Martian2

*Three compelling reasons for China to annex Mongolia*

1. Mongolia has an estimated 100 billion tonnes of coal. This is energy independence for China.

2. Mongolia is located much closer to the North Pole. China can move its megaton-tipped thermonuclear warheads closer to the U.S. and install larger megaton-warheads or more MIRVs/MARVs.

3. Mongolia has 1,564,115 square kilometers of land, which can support an enormous number of Hans. The Mongolian population currently numbers only 2.7 million. This is due to a lack of water. 

However, China has the technology and industrial capability to build a pipe carrying desalinated water from the Bohai Bay to Mongolia. Another possibility is to dam the Brahmaputra and divert the water northward to Mongolia. Indians will be unaffected, because they have the monsoon and can install rain catchment barrels.

In other words, China has the scientific, industrial, and economic power to make Mongolia bloom. Let's examine how many Hans Mongolia can support.

Mongolian land mass: 1,564,115 km2

Germany: 357,021 km2 (population: 81,799,600)
France: 674,843 km2 (population: 65,350,000)
Britain: 243,610 km2 (population: 62,262,000)
Italy: 301,338 km2 (population: 60,813,326)
--------------------------------------------------------
European total: 1,576,812 km2 (population: 270,224,926)

In conclusion, by annexing Mongolia and transporting in massive amounts of water, China can support another 270 million Hans. We can take our population from 1.34 billion to 1.61 billion!

----------

*China follows standard military strategy*

My prediction of China annexing Mongolia in response to a blockade of Middle Eastern oil supply makes the most sense for the following reasons.

1. China will do everything possible to avoid a head-on military clash with the United States. This is standard military strategy. You do not fight your enemy in a frontal assault. You should always try to outflank them.

Also, powerful thermonuclear countries want to avoid a direct military confrontation in the fear that an escalation may eventually lead to an all-out nuclear war, which no one wants. For fifty years during the Cold War, the Soviet Union and the U.S. never fought each other directly. We can expect this common sense behavior to continue between the U.S. and China.

2. We saw China employ a flanking maneuver to defeat the Japanese. The Japanese government held a Chinese fishing boat captain hostage. China demanded his release. The Japanese government refused and kept the Chinese captain imprisoned.

China applied a little pressure by shutting off rare earth metal exports and the Japanese government caved. Those Japanese hadn't even seen China's economic power yet and they released the Chinese captain immediately.

China would have eventually declared all Japanese exports to China as unsanitary/unsafe and excluded all Japanese exports on health grounds, infringement of Chinese patents, or unsafe (e.g. alleged unintended acceleration of Toyota vehicles waged by the U.S. NHTSA, which was later dropped on lack of proof; this taught former Japanese Prime Minister Hatoyama not to try and push the U.S. out of Futenma base). China has lots of big economic sticks and the Japanese caved after barely getting whacked.

-----

In a recent example, we saw China apply pressure to the Philippines.

a. China declared the Philippines unsafe and canceled all group tours.

b. China declared Filipino bananas unsanitary and quarantined them.

I think at this point, the Filipinos starting caving in. That was too bad. I was waiting for China to go down the list and declare every single Filipino import as unsanitary.

-----

A year ago, in another flanking maneuver, China blocked all Norwegian salmon for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese criminal. Taking its place, Scottish salmon replaced all Norwegian salmon imports. China didn't notice the difference, but Norwegian salmon exporters lost access to the world's second-largest market and they're still upset.

3. Like the Japanese, the American Neo-cons will make a mistake and provoke China. They will detain or stop a ship carrying Iranian oil to China. In response, China will not bleed itself by engaging the U.S. military. China will conduct a flanking movement and declare it is reluctantly annexing Mongolia to "keep the lights on" in China.

Just like the Russian annexation of Georgian territory, the world will grumble and eventually accept Chinese reunification with Mongolia as evidenced by the Qing Dynasty map.

In conclusion, my prediction of a Chinese annexation of Mongolia in response to an U.S. Neo-con provocation is a very reasonable outcome. The Neo-con hope is to humiliate China or draw the PLA Navy into Middle Eastern waters and defeat them there. That is not how China fights. We know China will respond with a flanking movement, such as annexing Mongolia.


----------



## Martian2

*Indian military history and redrawing maps to steal Chinese land*





From The Hindu Archives, we see "the official [Indian] map as on August 15, 1947." This official 1947 Indian map does not include China's Aksai Chin.





From The Hindu Archives, we see "the [new Indian] map in 1950, with the colour wash. The maps were published under the authority of India's Surveyor General, Brigadier G.F. Heaney." This official 1950 Indian map magically claims China's Aksai Chin.

From 1947 to 1950, India decided it would unilaterally redraw the Sino-Indian boundary map and claim Aksai Chin. I like this Indian trick. I think China should redraw its maps Indian-style and claim whatever we want of Indian territory.

The Indians are doing it and we should copy them. If the Indians are shameless, we should become just as shameless. The only way to deal with an aggressive and expansionist neighbor is to use their own dirty trick of redrawing maps (without any relation to history) against them.

----------

Reference: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=20120713291304400.htm&date=fl2913/&prd=fline&

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*Indian perfidy causing problems along Sino-Indian border*

I intentionally picked the official Indian government maps from 1947 and 1950 in The Hindu Archives.

You Indians refuse to acknowledge the official maps from your own government. This is ridiculous.

Your government has been hiding the truth from the Indian people and that's why you Indian nationalists are all brainwashed.

1. After 50 years, the Indian government refuses to release the archives on the events of 1962. It will show that you Indians are the aggressors.

2. The official Indian government maps from 1947 and 1950 clearly show that India decided to REDRAW them to include China's Aksai Chin between August 15, 1947 and 1950.

3. You Indians also REDREW the map for South Tibet/Arunachal Pradesh to swallow Chinese territory into India. On pre-Independence maps, the Indian border clearly excluded South Tibet (see Global Security map below from 1916-1937 of self-delimited Indian border).

It is Indian perfidy that has been causing problems along the Sino-Indian border.

In the future, there will be a Sino-Indian war when China reclaims the territory that has been stolen by India. I want all of you Indians to know your country is at fault.

----------

*Global Security: Arunachal Pradesh "claim is not reflected on pre-Independence maps"*






"Arunachal Pradesh...claim is not reflected on pre-Independence maps." Prior to the land-grab of Chinese territory after Indian independence in 1947, Indian maps clearly excluded China's South Tibet/Arunachal Pradesh.

Reference: India-China Border

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Martian2

BBC News - Asean talks: US and China pledge to co-operate on Asia

"Asean talks: US and China pledge to co-operate on Asia
12 July 2012 Last updated at 04:25 ET

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi have said their countries will co-operate on Asia issues.





*Mrs Clinton says the US will not ''take sides'' in regional disputes in Asia*
...
*The US has no territorial claims in the region and will not ''take sides'' in disputes, she stressed.*"


----------



## Martian2

*U.S. did nothing to help its ally South Vietnam as China took control of Paracel Islands in 1974*

Since the U.S. didn't lift a finger to help the democratic South Vietnamese in 1974 as China took control of the Paracel Islands, why would the U.S. lift a finger to help communist Vietnam in the South China Sea?

----------

China's Military Moment - By Jim Holmes | Foreign Policy

"China's Military Moment
A window of opportunity is closing in the South China Sea. Will Beijing strike?
BY JIM HOLMES | JULY 26, 2012





...
Chinese vessels carrying amphibious troops and operating under fighter cover from nearby Hainan Island engaged a South Vietnamese flotilla bereft of air support. One Vietnamese destroyer escort lay at the bottom of the South China Sea following the daylong battle. China's flag fluttered over the islands.

The skirmish was real -- and the date was Jan. 17, 1974. (article continues)"


----------



## Martian2

*Law: China is first possessor and true owner of South China Sea islands and water territories*

China is asserting its sovereignty over its first discovery of the South China Sea from 2,000 years ago and afterwards.

Finders keepers. Stay out of Chinese waters and islands.

Law (see citation below):

1. China is the first discoverer of South China Sea islands and territorial waters. China is the "first possessor" and "true owner."

2. "If the true owner never intends to give up his claim of ownership, it remains his."

Emanuel Law Outlines: Property Keyed to Dukeminier, Krier, Alexander ... - Massey - Google Books

"Massey - 2010 - Law - 464 pages
*The first possessor becomes the next True Owner. But if True Owner... never intends to give up his claim of ownership, it remains his.* ... Trespassing finders of abandoned property are denied title unless the trespass is &#8220;trivial or merely technical."

----------

The Chinese government, Han Dynasty, claimed sovereignty (see definition below) over the South China Sea and islands in its official government records 2,000 years ago.

*The Chinese Han Dynasty government is the first possessor, claimed sovereign rights as evidenced by imperial records, and true owner of the South China Sea islands and water territories.

As written in the law books (see Massey 464 pages), "But if True Owner [China]... never intends to give up his claim of ownership [over the South China Sea islands], it remains his."*

----------

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sovereignty

"*sov·er·eign·ty*
&#8194; &#8194;[sov-rin-tee, suhv-] Show IPA
noun, plural sov·er·eign·ties.

1. the quality or state of being sovereign.

2. the status, dominion, power, or authority of a sovereign; royalty.

*3. supreme and independent power or authority in government as possessed or claimed by a state or community.*

4. rightful status, independence, or prerogative.

5. a sovereign state, community, or political unit."

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*Spratly Islands have belonged to China since ancient times*

Ocean-faring Chinese explorers had claimed the Spratly Islands a thousand years ago.

[Source: Wikipedia article on Spratly Islands with primary sources listed in footnotes]

"Ancient Chinese maps record the "Thousand Li Stretch of Sands"; Qianli Changsha (&#21315;&#37324;&#38263;&#27801 and the "Ten-Thousand Li of Stone Pools"; Wanli Shitang (&#33836;&#37324;&#30707;&#22616,[7] which China today claims refers to the Spratly Islands. The Wanli Shitang have been explored by the Chinese since the Yuan Dynasty and may have been considered by them to have been within their national boundaries. [8][9] They are also referenced in the 13th century,[10] followed by the Ming Dynasty.[11] When the Ming Dynasty collapsed, the Qing Dynasty continued to include the territory in maps compiled in 1724,[12] 1755,[13] 1767,[14] 1810,[15] and 1817.[16] A Vietnamese map from 1834 also includes the Spratly Islands clumped in with the Paracels (a common occurrence on maps of that time) labeled as "Wanli Changsha".[17]"





By the twelfth century, names for the South China Sea islands began to appear. The Paracels and the Spratlys were referred to more consistently as Changsha and Shitang. By the mid-fourteenth century, Shitang could be accurately identified as the Spratlys. There is also evidence of Chinese naval control over some areas of the South China Sea, which resulted in complete Chinese dominion of the South China Sea in the late thirteenth century. Finally, in the fifteenth century, Zheng He's seven voyages placed the South China Sea islands on the official navigational charts. In this map, the Xisha Islands are called Shitang, and the Nansha Islands are referred to as Wansheng Shitang Yu.





The Map of South and East Ocean Sea Routes was drawn in between 1712-1721 by Qing (Ching) Dynasty Fujian (Fuchien) Province Navy Commander Shi Shibiao, the son of a famous Qing Dynasty imperial officer. This map clearly shows the sea routes, time, and descriptions from Chinese coastal ports to Japan, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia, Brunei, Cambodia and the Philippines. On this map, the locations and names of the Southern Sea Islands (Nanhai Zhudao) are very accurate. The map shows Chinese sovereignty over the South China&#12288;Sea islands (including Nansha Islands, Xisha Islands, Zhongsha Islands and Dongsha Islands).





1834 Vietnamese map showed the islands as Chinese "Wanli Changsha."

[Note: Thank you to HuziHaidao12 for the first two pictures and captions.]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Martian2

Below, I have provided a citation of Chinese relics from the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368) found near Hsisha Islands in the South China Sea. Can any Vietnamese or Filipino provide a reputable citation of Vietnamese or Filipino relics in the South China Sea that predates 1368? If you can't, you have just admitted to Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea islands.

----------

Chinese Archeology,chinese civilization

"*32 cultural relics discovered in South China Sea*






Archaeological teams have discovered Yuan dynasty blue and white porcelain for the first time in the South China Sea along with 32 newly-discovered ancient sites near Hsisha Islands, the 2010 South China Sea underwater archaeological team announced on June 1.

After 35 days of underwater archaeological work, South China Sea underwater archaeology team discovered 32 underwater cultural relics and found blue and white porcelain of Yuan Dynasty in South China Sea for the first time.

Source&#65306;Xinhua News"

[Note: China's Yuan Dynasty was from 1271-1368 (see China Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368), Mongolian, Kublai Khan, Emperors)]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*French oil company Elf discovered 15th century Chinese galleon in South China Sea*

BBC News | Asia-Pacific | Undersea treasure chest stirs up tensions

"Undersea treasure chest stirs up tensions
Thursday, April 29, 1999 Published at 20:40 GMT 21:40 UK
By David Willis in the South China Sea





The discovery has drawn huge crowds to Brunei's national museum

Shipwrecked treasure, recently recovered from the bottom of the South China Sea, is threatening to inflame a diplomatic row over an area believed to be rich in oil.

Divers working for the French oil company Elf, stumbled across the wreck of a 15th Century Chinese galleon containing a hoard of priceless porcelain and ceramic pieces.





Divers working for an oil company stumbled across the wreck

The ship went down off the coast of Brunei and is thought to contain one of the largest hauls of buried treasure ever uncovered.

Using the same two-seater submarine as those used to survey the Titanic, archaeologists uncovered an Aladdin's Cave of intricately painted ancient pottery.

For more than two months, a daily haul of hundreds of artefacts were hauled to the surface. Back on land, a vast hanger was built to clean and catalogue the discoveries, thought to be worth millions of dollars.
*
Timeless beauty*





The treasure haul is thought to be worth millions

"It's a fascinating project," says John Perry, Managing Director of Elf Petroleum Asia.

"The artefacts themselves, in their day may have been ordinary things in the street but today they have a timeless beauty, which is so hard to define but so real to touch."

For Brunei, a nation keen to lessen its dependence on oil revenue, the discovery has become a source of new national pride.

The artefacts provide the tiny sultanate with something money alone cannot buy - symbols of a cultural identity which, officials hope, will boost tourism.
*
Historical claims*





Hundreds of items each day have been recovered

*But the discovery of a series of such wrecks has been seized upon by China as evidence reinforcing its historical claims on the South China Sea.

Beijing says the discoveries prove Chinese vessels have been sailing the area since ancient times.
*
Five other countries in the region also lay claim to all or part of area's maritime territory - in particular to the Spratly Islands, which are reputed to hold the key to a much needed new source of oil. (article continues)"

----------

*Chinese shipwreck from 15th century validates Chinese imperial records*

These historical Chinese shipwrecks and artifacts validate Chinese imperial records. Chinese imperial records do not discuss only trade routes and trade outposts that extend to Brunei. Chinese imperial records also describe the first discovery and claim of sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and maritime territories.

These historical wrecks provide additional support to authenticate Chinese imperial records.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*Red Flag over Sansha City -- Beijing Review*






China's Jurisdiction over the South China Sea

"*China's Jurisdiction over the South China Sea*
UPDATED: July-3-2012 NO. 27 JULY 5, 2012

- China first discovered and named the reefs, islets and the surrounding waters of the Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha islands, and has exercised sovereignty control continuously over the area.

- In A.D.110, the government of the Han Dynasty (202 B.C.- A.D.220) set up a government agency on Hainan Island, which marks the beginning of central governance over Hainan Island and the islands in the South China Sea. At that time, Chinese people often navigated on the South China Sea and lived and fished around the Xisha Islands and the Nansha Islands.

- In A.D.971, the navy of the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127) cruised the Xisha Islands. This was the earliest record of China's naval patrol in the area.

- In the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1369), Emperor Kubla Khan sent astronomer Guo Shoujing to conduct astronomical observations in the Zhongsha Islands, which evidenced the government's sovereignty over the area.

- In 1911, the Guangdong Provincial Government of the Republic of China proclaimed that the Xisha Islands were put under the jurisdiction of Hainan's Yaxian County (currently known as Sanya City).

- After the end of the World War II, according to the Postdam Declaration issued in July 1945 and the Cairo Declaration issued in 1947, the Republic of China sent high commissioners to the Xisha Islands from 1946 to 1948 to take over the archipelago. A takeover ceremony was held on the islands, and a monument was put up to assert China's sovereignty. The government also stationed army and set up a service station for fishermen on Taiping Island, the largest of its kind in the Nansha Islands.

- In March 1959, the Central Government of the People's Republic of China set up the administrative office for the Xisha, Nansha and Zhongsha islands, which was governed by Guangdong Province.

- In October 1984, Hainan Administrative Region was set up, which took over the administrative office.

- In April 1988, Hainan Province was set up and the administrative office was put under the province.

- In June 2012, the State Council approved the establishment of Sansha City, which governs the Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha islands and their surrounding waters. Meanwhile the administrative office for the area was abolished."

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the newslinks.]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*Could NATO ever go to war with China? No. See CNN citation.*

The answer is "no." The U.S.-led NATO has always said it is a defensive shield. The leaked reports by the Obama administration indicated NATO would not support Turkey if it attacked Syria (see citation below from CNN).

Also, the idea of attacking China is pure idiocy. China has plenty of thermonuclear weapons (in the hundreds of megatons) to fry all of the NATO countries to a crisp.

----------

Can Turkey force U.S. and other NATO countries to attack Syria?

"*Can Turkey force U.S. and other NATO countries to attack Syria?*
By Adam Levine, CNN
June 25th, 2012
...
If NATO was looking for a fight, this would be a good opportunity to invoke Article 5, but there is no appetite for a military conflict with Syria at the moment, several NATO diplomats told CNN's Elise Labott on Sunday.

There are many factors that weigh against a military response. First and foremost, the North Atlantic Council has to agree to it. Also, even if agreed, each member can contribute as they see fit.

"This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in these particular circumstances," according to a description of the charter posted on the NATO website.

The United States and many other countries have been vocally opposed to military intervention and will not be quick to encourage Turkey to press the issue. After Syrian troops shelled refugees on the Turkish side of the border earlier this year, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta made clear that the bar was high for Turkey to claim the need for a collective self-defense.

Panetta was asked about invoking Article 5 at a House Armed Services Committee hearing in April.

"I think it's clear that the only way that the United States would get involved militarily is if there's a consensus in the international community to try to do something along those lines. And then obviously ensure that the international community is able to get the - the authorities required in order to make that happen," *Panetta said. "They would have to make clear that what is happening there really does truly represent a direct threat to Turkey. And I think at this point, that's probably a stretch."*

In her statement Sunday, Clinton said the U.S. would keep in contact with Turkey as the country determines its response. The U.S. will "work with Turkey and other partners to hold the Assad regime accountable," Clinton said.

NATO members agreeing to respond to this incident is "inconceivable," wrote James Joyner on the Atlantic Council blog. Joyner, who said he opposes military intervention in Syria, felt the incident does not rise to the level of such a response.

"The operative word that almost certainly disqualifies this incident from an Article 5 response is 'attack.' Turkey was engaged in aggressive action along its border with Syria during a particularly tense situation and flew into Syrian airspace," Joyner wrote on Friday, "While shooting down the plane was almost certainly an overreaction - the Assad government has said as much - it's hardly an 'attack.'"

Additionally, Joyner said, the article demands response "to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

"Given that the incident is already contained - that is, not likely to be followed by any sort of follow-on action by Syria absent further provocation - said security already exists. Indeed, a NATO or Turkish response would make the area more, not less, secure," Joyner maintained."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Official 1876 Japanese map proves Diaoyu Islands belong to China*

134-year-old map says Diaoyu Islands belong to China- China.org.cn

"134-year-old map says Diaoyu Islands belong to China
August 22, 2012

An official Japanese map published 134 years ago doesn't include the Diaoyu Islands, indicating that the islands were not part of Japan's territory.





Zheng Hailin, a Chinese scholar who has studied in Japan, shows a map he got there which doesn't include the Diaoyu Islands. [Photo / Guangming Daily]

Zheng Hailin, a Chinese scholar, went to Japan to study history and international law in the 1990s and bought a Japanese Map there. The map was published in 1876 by Japan's Army Staff Bureau and doesn't have the Diaoyu Islands on it.

According to international law, a country's official map has legal effect over its territorial claims, and Zheng's map clearly denies all claims that the Diaoyu Islands are Japan's territory.

Zheng says that according to his studies, a Chinese book from 1403 is one of the first books to have documented the Diaoyu Islands. The islands were included as part of southeast China's Fujian province in 1562.

Evidence suggests that the Diaoyu Islands have been China's territory since ancient times, and China holds territorial sovereignty over them for discovering, naming and annexing these islands."

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Viet

@Martian2

Can you answer me a question:
How many mad Chinese like you run around in the world?

As I stated in a thread here in the forum before, in order to become a truely Super Power, China should make friends, not enemies!
You should listen to me. China´s foreign policy is the worst in the world. Look around you, nearly all of your neighbors are hostile and anxiously, even North Korea fears overwhelming Chinese dominance.

Last but not least I do not want to further comment on your repeatly aggressive postings on Vietnam, they are just annoying. Shut up!


----------



## SinoChallenger

Viet said:


> @Martian2
> 
> Can you answer me a question:
> How many mad Chinese like you run around in the world?
> 
> As I stated in a thread here in the forum before, in order to become a truely Super Power, China should make friends, not enemies!
> You should listen to me. China´s foreign policy is the worst in the world. Look around you, nearly all of your neighbors are hostile and anxiously, even North Korea fears overwhelming Chinese dominance.
> 
> Last but not least I do not want to further comment on your repeatly aggressive postings on Vietnam, they are just annoying. Shut up!


When PLA tanks roll into Hanoi and Saigon, South East Asia will enjoy at peace at last.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rechoice

Martian2 said:


> *Spratly Islands have belonged to China since ancient times*
> 
> Ocean-faring Chinese explorers had claimed the Spratly Islands a thousand years ago.
> 
> [Source: Wikipedia article on Spratly Islands with primary sources listed in footnotes]
> 
> "Ancient Chinese maps record the "Thousand Li Stretch of Sands"; Qianli Changsha (&#21315;&#37324;&#38263;&#27801 and the "Ten-Thousand Li of Stone Pools"; Wanli Shitang (&#33836;&#37324;&#30707;&#22616,[7] which China today claims refers to the Spratly Islands. The Wanli Shitang have been explored by the Chinese since the Yuan Dynasty and may have been considered by them to have been within their national boundaries. [8][9] They are also referenced in the 13th century,[10] followed by the Ming Dynasty.[11] When the Ming Dynasty collapsed, the Qing Dynasty continued to include the territory in maps compiled in 1724,[12] 1755,[13] 1767,[14] 1810,[15] and 1817.[16] A Vietnamese map from 1834 also includes the Spratly Islands clumped in with the Paracels (a common occurrence on maps of that time) labeled as "Wanli Changsha".[17]"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the twelfth century, names for the South China Sea islands began to appear. The Paracels and the Spratlys were referred to more consistently as Changsha and Shitang. By the mid-fourteenth century, Shitang could be accurately identified as the Spratlys. There is also evidence of Chinese naval control over some areas of the South China Sea, which resulted in complete Chinese dominion of the South China Sea in the late thirteenth century. Finally, in the fifteenth century, Zheng He's seven voyages placed the South China Sea islands on the official navigational charts. In this map, the Xisha Islands are called Shitang, and the Nansha Islands are referred to as Wansheng Shitang Yu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Map of South and East Ocean Sea Routes was drawn in between 1712-1721 by Qing (Ching) Dynasty Fujian (Fuchien) Province Navy Commander Shi Shibiao, the son of a famous Qing Dynasty imperial officer. This map clearly shows the sea routes, time, and descriptions from Chinese coastal ports to Japan, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia, Brunei, Cambodia and the Philippines. On this map, the locations and names of the Southern Sea Islands (Nanhai Zhudao) are very accurate. The map shows Chinese sovereignty over the South China&#12288;Sea islands (including Nansha Islands, Xisha Islands, Zhongsha Islands and Dongsha Islands).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1834 Vietnamese map showed the islands as Chinese "Wanli Changsha."
> 
> [Note: Thank you to HuziHaidao12 for the first two pictures and captions.]



Stop lying about Islands of Vietnam. In old books of China is very vague, chinese have been written about Over Sea (&#28023;&#22806 Islands, no words were stating that such Islands belong to China.
*The old map of China, it is stated that the Sea is named: "Jiao Zhi" Sea, the Sea of Jiao Zhi people, today Vietnamese.*






*The map printed in China in time of Man Quing Dynasty didn't drawn up Islands becourse Chinese in the past time, they accepted that Islands belong to Vietnam.*






And map 1834 here is " Full Map of Vietnam" stating Island are part of Vietnam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EastSea

Last update 19/10/2012 13:30:00 (GMT+7)
Historic maps support VN's island sovereignty

VietNamNet Bridge  As many as 80 old maps published between 1826 and 1980, of which 10 indicated Hoang Sa (Paracel) Islands and the Truong Sa (Spratly) Islands belong to Viet Nam, will be handed over to Da Nang's Institute for Socio-Economic Development next month. 

The maps are part of a collection belonging to the president of the Institute for Vietnamese Culture and Education (IVCE), Tran Thang, an American with Vietnamese origin. The institute is a non-profit organisation founded in New York in 2000.

Thang said by email earlier this week the ancient maps were published in England, America, France, Germany and Scotland.

He said he bought them from antique shops in the US, England and Poland.

"As Vietnamese, we all have an obligation to preserve our country and to take part in shaping the future of Vietnamese society," Thang said in the email.

"In the map collection, 70 maps indicate that the frontier of Southern China is Hainan island and 10 maps indicate that the Paracels belongs to Viet Nam," he said.

"During my collecting of antique maps, I found two Postal Atlas Map of China books which were published by the Directorate General of Posts, Ministry of Transportation of the Republic of China in 1919 (consisting of 49 maps) and in 1933 (29 maps) and one Atlas of the Chinese Empire, published by the China Inland Mission in 1909 (23 maps). 

None of the three books list the Paracels and Spratlys in the maps and index pages."

Thang said he was going to donate all the maps to the Da Nang-based Institute for Socio-Economic Development (ISED) which had been studying Paracels and Spratlys issues.

ISED vice director Tran Duc Anh Son said the collection of old maps was significant evidence that the two archipelagoes belonged to Viet Nam.

"We can classify that the collection comprises of three kinds of maps: 68 old maps of China showing that China did not have the Paracel and Spratly islands; six maps that indicate those islands belonged to Viet Nam; five maps of the Southeast Asian region that show Paracel and Spratly archipelagoes are under Viet Nam sovereignty," Son said.

"We would display the map collection at the city's Hoang Sa Islands District museum. We plan to show off the collection in the Sea and Islands Week' to be held in Khanh Hoa Province next April," he said.

He said Thang had bought the maps with his own money and some from his friends.

Son, who has been doing a social science study on "Viet Nam's sovereignty over the Hoang Sa Islands" for primary schools, said he would include information from the collection in his study.

Ly Son Island, 30km offshore from Quang Ngai Province, still preserve Am Linh Pagoda, which was a worshipping place for seamen who had been dispatched to the Paracel Islands in the Nguyen dynasty, since the 17th century.

A museum of the two archipelagoes displays over 200 ancient documents and 100 objects which prove that Paracel and Spratly islands belong to Viet Nam.







Historical evidence: An old map of Viet Nam, 
which was printed by Prevost Bellin in Germany, 
also shows that the southern extent of China as being Hainan Island.


Historic maps support VN's island sovereignty - News VietNamNet






Navigating the past: An old map of China dating back to 1933 that was published by the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of China. 
The map shows the southern extent of China as being Hainan Island.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SinoChallenger

How crash cover-up altered Chinas succession

BEIJING: "Thank you. I'm well. Don't worry," read the post on a Chinese social networking site. The brief comment, published in June, appeared to come from Ling Gu, the 23-year-old son of a high-powered aide to China's president, and it helped quash reports that he had been killed in a Ferrari crash after a night of partying. 

It only later emerged that the message was a sham, posted by someone under Ling's alias  almost three months after his death. 

The ploy was one of many in a tangled effort to suppress news of the crash that killed Ling and critically injured two young female passengers, one of whom later died. The outlines of the affair surfaced months ago, but it is now becoming clearer that the crash and the botched cover-up had more momentous consequences, altering the course of the Chinese Communist Party's once-in-a-decade leadership succession last month. 

China's departing president, Hu Jintao, entered the summer in an apparently strong position after the disgrace of Bo Xilai, previously a rising member of a rival political network who was brought down when his wife was accused of murdering a British businessman. But Hu suffered a debilitating reversal of his own when party elders  led by his predecessor, Jiang Zemin  confronted him with allegations that Ling Jihua, his closest protege and political fixer, had engineered the cover-up of his son's death. 

According to current and former officials, party elites, and others, the exposure helped tip the balance of difficult negotiations, hastening Hu's decline; spurring the ascent of China's new leader, Xi Jinping; and playing into the hands of Jiang, whose associates dominate the new seven-man leadership at the expense of candidates from Hu's clique. 

The case also shows how the profligate lifestyles of leaders' relatives and friends can weigh heavily in backstage power tussles, especially as party skulduggery plays out under the intensifying glare of media. 

Numerous party insiders provided information regarding the episode, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from the authorities. Officials have investigated the aftermath of the car wreck, they say, including looking into accusations that a state oil company paid hush money to the families of the two women. 

Under Hu, Ling had directed the leadership's administrative center, the General Office, but was relegated to a less influential post in September, ahead of schedule. Last month, he failed to advance to the 25-person Politburo and lost his seat on the influential party secretariat. 

Hu, who stepped down as party chief, immediately yielded his post as chairman of the military, meaning he will not retain power as Jiang did. "Hu was weakened even before leaving office," said a midranking official in the organization department, the party's personnel office. 

Ling's future remains unsettled, with party insiders saying that his case presents an early test of whether Xi intends to follow through on public promises to fight high-level corruption. 

"He can decide whether to go after Ling Jihua or not," said Wu Guoguang, a former top-level party speechwriter, now a political scientist at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. "Either way, this is a big card in Xi Jinping's hand." 

Ling, 56, built his career in the Communist Youth League. At an early age, he secured the patronage of Hu, who led the Youth League in the early 1980s and brought Ling to the General Office in 1995. "Hu didn't come with a lot of friends, but Ling was someone he knew he could trust," said the organization department official. "Officials said that if Ling called, it was like Hu calling." 

Ling played a central role in moving Youth League veterans into high offices and undermining Hu's adversaries. Ling also wielded leverage over internet censorship of leaders' affairs, and sought to use it to benefit his patron. 

"Negative publicity, including untruths, about Xi Jinping were not suppressed the way publicity about Hu Jintao was," said one associate of party leaders. 

As his influence grew, Ling tried to keep a low profile. About a decade ago, his wife closed a software company she owned and formed a nonprofit foundation that incubates young entrepreneurs. The couple sent their son, Ling Gu, to an elite Beijing high school under an alias, Wang Ziyun. "Ling Jihua told his family not to damage his career," a former Youth League colleague said. "But it seems it can't be stopped." 

Still living under an alias, Ling Gu graduated from Peking University last year with an international relations degree and began graduate studies in education. One of his instructors said his performance plunged later in his undergraduate years. "I think there were too many lures, too much seduction," he said. 

Before dawn on March 18, a black Ferrari Spider speeding along Fourth Ring Road in Beijing ricocheted off a wall, struck a railing and cracked in two. Ling was killed instantly, and the two young Tibetan women with him were hospitalized with severe injuries. One died months later, and the other is recovering, party insiders said. 

Under normal circumstances, party insiders said, suppressing such news to protect the image of the party would be a routine matter. But Ling Jihua went further, they said, maneuvering to hide his son's death even from the leadership. 

The Beijing Evening News published an article and a photograph, but the topic was immediately scoured from the internet. Later, the families of the two women in the car received payments from China's largest state oil company, according to a top executive with a major foreign multinational. He said large sums had been paid "to make sure they shut up." A publicity executive for the company, China National Petroleum Corporation, declined to answer questions about the matter. 

When overseas Chinese-language media reported in June that the Ferrari driver had been Ling's son, the Hong Kong-based magazine Yazhou Zhoukan published a story debunking the reports, citing the message on the social networking site. "The source for this was Ling Jihua's office in the General Office," said a journalist close to the situation. 

But the attempted cover-up spun out of Ling's control. 

Party insiders said that the police recorded the surname of the victim as Jia, which sounds like the word for "fake," a notation police officers sometimes use when the truth is being obscured. The move set off rumors connecting the dead driver to a recently retired party leader, Jia Qinglin, who was infuriated and took his grievance to Jiang, the former president. 

The Central Guard Bureau, which manages leaders' security, also was mobilized to assist in the cover-up, the insiders said. That riled the bureau's former chief, an ally of Jiang, and the current chief, Cao Qing, who already had qualms about Ling. 

"They say that Ling was always calling up Cao Qing and telling him to do this and do that," said one woman from an official family. "Ling was excessive and disrespectful." 

The issue came to a head in July as the leadership debated Bo's fate and hashed out plans for the leadership transition. "Just as they were discussing the arrangements, the old comrades raised this," said an official from a central government media organization. "They said that leaders have to obey party discipline, so this person was not qualified to be promoted to the Politburo." 

In one exchange with Hu, Jiang also questioned Ling's "humanity" over accusations that he maintained his busy schedule and did not properly observe his son's death, several people said. 

Hu felt compelled to sacrifice his ally, partly because the party was also pursuing the case against Bo on disciplinary grounds. "Hu didn't want to give the others something they could use," said a relative of a former leader. 

In a pivotal shake-up, Ling's designated replacement, an old colleague of Xi's, arrived in July, six weeks before the reshuffle was publicized. 

By September, party insiders said, Hu was so strained by the Ling affair and the leadership negotiations that he seemed resigned to yielding power. As Hu's influence faded, Xi began taking charge of military affairs, including a group coordinating China's response to the escalating row with Japan over disputed islands.


----------



## xuxu1457

PLAN visit Ho Chi Minh City&#65292; Vietnam

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rechoice

The visite was in silent of public media.


----------



## xuxu1457

?????????????????14.4??? - ????-???

Defense Ministry spokesman said in 28th, Chinese Defense Ministry website and &#65315;&#65328;&#65324;&#65313; net were attacked at average 144000times per month in 2012, in which 62% come from America&#12288;

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xuxu1457

Chinese president Xi leaves for four-nation tour
Chinese president Xi leaves for four-nation tour - Xinhua | English.news.cn
BEIJING, March 22 (Xinhua) -- Chinese President Xi Jinping left Beijing Friday morning for state visits to Russia, Tanzania, South Africa and the Republic of Congo.

Xi is making the visit at the invitation of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Tanzanian President Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, South African President Jacob Zuma and President of the Republic of Congo Denis Sassou Nguesso.

Xi will also attend the fifth leaders' summit of BRICS countries, to be held from March 26 to 27 in Durban, South Africa.

BRICS is an economic bloc representing five of the world's leading emerging economies, including China, Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*North Korea is stirring the pot*

Let's be clear about who is primarily responsible for the tension. It is North Korea.

South Korea, the U.S., and China don't want war. South Korea doesn't want Seoul damaged. The U.S. has budget problems and the sequester constrains U.S. spending. China cares about economic growth and much less about military conflicts.

Stalinist North Korea is different from South Korea (that follows American dictates), because North Korea does not obey China. We have a "wild card" player.

A serious conflict on the Korean peninsula has unforeseeable consequences. The losers will be North and South Koreans. However, China will most likely benefit and extend its physical control into North Korea.

If South Korea is sufficiently weakened, China may decide to annex South Korea too. For example, if North Korea successfully detonates an atomic bomb over Seoul then the South Korean government/country will no longer exist. That's China's green light to assert control over the entire Korean peninsula. If Koreans cannot responsibly manage the vital land east of Beijing then China should exert sovereignty.

While this may result in short-term disruptions, China should gain from a military standpoint in the long term.

Also, with the destruction of Samsung, Chinese and Chinese-Taipei companies should fill the economic vacuum. This will provide plenty of breathing space for Lenovo, Huawei, and ZTE smartphones in worldwide markets. Chinese-Taipei AU Optronics should benefit from the eradication of South Korean LCD competitors (e.g. no more Samsung and LG chaebols to worry about).

In conclusion, a serious war between North and South Korea may result in a net benefit militarily and economically for China and Chinese-Taipei. Since China cannot stop a Korean War, perhaps we should start planning to benefit from a post-war scenario.


----------



## gambit

Martian2 said:


> If South Korea is sufficiently weakened, China may decide to annex South Korea too. For example, if North Korea successfully detonates an atomic bomb over Seoul then the South Korean government/country will no longer exist. That's China's green light to assert control over the entire Korean peninsula. If Koreans cannot responsibly manage the vital land east of Beijing then China should exert sovereignty.


And the US and the Japanese governments will stand by and do nothing. Got it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*China is the undisputed continental power in Asia*



gambit said:


> And the US and the Japanese governments will stand by and do nothing. Got it...



China is the supreme land power in Asia.

The U.S. is a maritime power.

If we're discussing annexing the Philippines then I would have to acknowledge it is currently not possible due to the strength of the U.S. Navy.

However, since we're discussing Korea, it is appropriate to ignore an offshore power like the United States.

If China chooses, it can also re-annex Mongolia. There's nothing the U.S. can do about it.


----------



## gambit

Martian2 said:


> *China is the undisputed continental power in Asia*
> 
> 
> 
> China is the supreme land power in Asia.
> 
> The U.S. is a maritime power.
> 
> If we're discussing annexing the Philippines then I would have to acknowledge it is currently not possible due to the strength of the U.S. Navy.
> 
> However, since we're discussing Korea, it is appropriate to ignore an offshore power like the United States.
> 
> If China chooses, it can also re-annex Mongolia. There's nothing the U.S. can do about it.


Iraq tried to 'annex' Kuwait. Looked what happened. No one will stand for annexation of another country. Do you even know what the word implies -- politically? Do you even understand from history on how dangerous that is? Apparently not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*China is not Iraq*



gambit said:


> Iraq tried to 'annex' Kuwait. Looked what happened. No one will stand for annexation of another country. Do you even know what the word implies -- politically? Do you even understand from history on how dangerous that is? Apparently not.



What's wrong with you? You make stupid analogies.

Did Iraq have at least 294 megatons of thermonuclear warheads like China?

Did Russia not annex 20% of Georgia in the year 2008?

You write mindless posts that waste my time. Try saying something intelligent.

China is a status quo power. It prefers not to rock the boat. However, if the Korean peninsula is already in flames then China should actively reshape the new geopolitical map.


----------



## gambit

Martian2 said:


> *China is not Iraq*
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with you? You make stupid analogies.
> 
> Did Iraq have at least 294 megatons of thermonuclear warheads like China?
> 
> Did Russia not annex 20% of Georgia in the year 2008?
> 
> You write mindless posts that waste my time. Try saying something intelligent.
> 
> China is a status quo power. It prefers not to rock the boat. However, if the Korean peninsula is already in flames then China should actively reshape the new geopolitical map.


Annexation is about the taking of a territory that has sovereignty and making it your own. Effectively, the victim country no longer exist. Georgia is under Russian control but is still very much exist and recognized as Georgia.

Will China go nuclear against the US over Korea? You are dreaming. So it is *YOU* who are wasting our time with this fantasy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Martian2

*Why do you think China builds DF-41 10-MIRV ICBMs?*



gambit said:


> Annexation is about the taking of a territory that has sovereignty and making it your own. Effectively, the victim country no longer exist. Georgia is under Russian control but is still very much exist and recognized as Georgia.
> 
> Will China go nuclear against the US over Korea? You are dreaming. So it is *YOU* who are wasting our time with this fantasy.



What do you think Chinese thermonuclear weapons are for? They deter the U.S. and allows China to pursue an independent foreign policy (see pictures below).

It is Chinese law that if Taiwan declares independence, China will annex Taiwan. In my opinion, it is easier for China to annex Korea then to cross 90 miles of ocean and annex Taiwan.

----------

*New Chinese DF-41 10-MIRV ICBM picture!*





Latest Chinese DF-41 10-MIRV ICBM picture. The truck tail-lights and wheel configuration are identical to a known DF-41 picture (see below). Also, the truck cabin has the exact same profile.





Known DF-41 ICBM picture due to double rings on canister. Wheels on a DF-41 TEL are all grouped together.

The only difference between the two pictures is the extra panels in the top picture. Otherwise, the wheel configuration (e.g. separation distance), four vertical yellow/red brake lights (including a bottom-most rectangular fifth white light in both pictures), and cabin shape are all identical. The protrusion of the DF-41 ICBM beyond the back of the truck is also about the same.





Wheel pattern/separation is very different on a DF-31A TEL (transporter erector launcher) compared to a DF-41 TEL.

[Note: Thank you to ChineseTiger1986 for the new top DF-41 ICBM picture. I flipped the picture horizontally to enable a direct comparison with the known DF-41 ICBM picture. Since I can't remember the source of the middle picture, I'll use the most likely probability and thank Greyboy2 for the known DF-41 ICBM picture.]


----------



## gambit

Martian2 said:


> *Why do you think China builds DF-41 10-MIRV ICBMs?*
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think Chinese thermonuclear weapons are for? They deter the U.S. and allows China to pursue an independent foreign policy (see pictures below).
> 
> It is Chinese law that if Taiwan declares independence, China will annex Taiwan. In my opinion, it is easier for China to annex Korea then to cross 90 miles of ocean and annex Taiwan.


Georgia, Mongolia, and Tibet are nowhere as geopolitically important as Kuwait, South Korea, Japan, or Viet Nam. Try to annex Viet Nam and see what happens.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Martian2

*The Chinese military capability to annex Korea and Vietnam is there*



gambit said:


> Georgia, Mongolia, and Tibet are nowhere as geopolitically important as Kuwait, South Korea, Japan, or Viet Nam. Try to annex Viet Nam and see what happens.



Let's wait and see. You do not seem to understand that if China wants to annex Vietnam, there is nothing the U.S. can do except complain. The Chinese military capability is there, but it is not currently part of China's strategic focus on economic development.

By the way, a single megaton EMP detonation would neutralize all American military assets in Japan or Guam. Therefore, China merely has to detonate two EMP megaton warheads to reduce American military capability in Asia down to zero.

----------

*China should come out swinging*



GuangdongYan (on another forum) said:


> No war wouldn't benefit China, but neither is China afraid of going to war. This isn't WW2. It isn't likely to turn into a full scale war, with any country being occupied. If anything it will be a small conflict like we have seen in the last decade. This is korea after all, this isn't anything new. All of you are just over hyping the situation.



1. If it's just a skirmish, it's not worth discussing.

2. If it's serious then China can annex North Korea and remove the irritant. If South Korea is mortally wounded, we might as well remove the Sino-American tension on the Korean peninsula and annex South Korea too.

The U.S. strategic objective is to move the U.S. Army to the Yalu River. China's strategic objective is to keep the U.S. military away from the Chinese border. If North Korea puts the Korean peninsula into play, China might as well get its hands dirty and come out swinging.

China is the supreme continental power in Asia. The U.S. is a maritime power. Rolling the PLA into a devastated Korean peninsula to gain control should take only one to two weeks.


----------



## gambit

Martian2 said:


> *The Chinese military capability to annex Korea and Vietnam is there*
> 
> 
> 
> Let's wait and see. You do not seem to understand that if China wants to annex Vietnam, there is nothing the U.S. can do except complain. The Chinese military capability is there, but it is not currently part of China's strategic focus on economic development.
> 
> By the way, a single megaton EMP detonation would neutralize all American military assets in Japan or Guam. Therefore, China merely has to detonate two EMP megaton warheads to reduce American military capability in Asia down to zero.


Yeah...Sure...And the US will do nothing...

Apparently, you came from the stock of the PLA's leadership who predicted that the US would suffer 'massive' casualties in Desert Storm.


----------



## Martian2

*Korean War part II*



gambit said:


> Yeah...Sure...And the US will do nothing...
> 
> Apparently, you came from the stock of the PLA's leadership who predicted that the US would suffer 'massive' casualties in Desert Storm.



China and the United States have already fought a war on the Korean peninsula from 1950-1953. China's mistake was in not annexing North Korea the first time around. Today, I'm suggesting that China rectify that error.

Also, back in 1953, China did not have thermonuclear weapons. China did not develop a 3.3-megaton thermonuclear warhead until 1967 and the DF-5 ICBM delivery vehicle was not ready until 1971.

Due to President Truman's nuclear threats, China could not push the U.S. Army into the sea. This time, China will not extend such a courtesy to the U.S. military. Intervene at the risk of your own self-destruction.


----------



## j20blackdragon

I agree with Martian2.

China will have no problem annexing the Korean peninsula, Mongolia, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia if it wanted to.

The reason is very simple.

China doesn't have to sail to any of these places. 

China can drive.

List of countries by motor vehicle production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia












How exactly do you stop the entire PLA from driving into your country? 

The answer: you can't. 



gambit said:


> Iraq tried to 'annex' Kuwait. Looked what happened.



Let me know when Iraq can build this many cars. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_motor_vehicle_production

Let me know when Iraq is the largest manufacturing power on earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_aluminium_production

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2232rank.html

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2254rank.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

j20blackdragon said:


> I agree with Martian2.
> 
> China will have no problem annexing the Korean peninsula, Mongolia, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia if it wanted to.
> 
> The reason is very simple.
> 
> China doesn't have to sail to any of these places.
> 
> China can drive.
> 
> List of countries by motor vehicle production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How exactly do you stop the entire PLA from driving into your country?
> 
> The answer: you can't.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know when Iraq can build this many cars.
> 
> List of countries by motor vehicle production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Let me know when Iraq is the largest manufacturing power on earth.
> 
> List of countries by steel production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> List of countries by aluminium production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2232rank.html
> 
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2254rank.html


Hey...More stuff to blow up.


----------



## j20blackdragon

gambit said:


> Hey...More stuff to blow up.



Yes there will be plenty of stuff to blow up for China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

j20blackdragon said:


> Yes there will be plenty of stuff to blow up for China.


We hit Iraq in complete surprise even when the world knew an attack was coming. The Iraqis saw the build up, they called in Soviet and Chinese advisers. But they still got caught with their pants down. I wonder if the Chinese advisers who advised Saddam Hussein are still on the PLA planning staff. I hope so.


----------



## feilong

gambit said:


> Yeah...Sure...And the US will do nothing...
> 
> Apparently, you came from the stock of the PLA's leadership who predicted that the US would suffer 'massive' casualties in Desert Storm.



yeah sure boy what can US will do? if NK nukes the SK and Japan right in front of theirs eyes, will the US care to fight a nukes war for these 2 idiot SK and Japan. Think before you spit out idiot, this nuclear is stronger then the US did to the hiroshima atomic bomb ok get that idiot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

feilong said:


> yeah sure boy what can US will do? *if NK nukes the SK and Japan right in front of theirs eyes, will the US care to fight a nukes war for these 2 idiot SK and Japan.* Think before you spit out idiot, this nuclear is stronger then the US did to the hiroshima atomic bomb ok get that idiot.


Yes. Such would make North Korea the aggressor and would justify an alliance against North Korea. Further, South Korea and Japan are vital *GLOBAL* assets while North Korea is barely above nothing of a country. Would China enter a nuclear war against the US over a nobody?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## feilong

gambit said:


> We hit Iraq in complete surprise even when the world knew an attack was coming. The Iraqis saw the build up, they called in Soviet and Chinese advisers. But they still got caught with their pants down. I wonder if the Chinese advisers who advised Saddam Hussein are still on the PLA planning staff. I hope so.



This is your nonsense logics, does chinese care for Saddam? The answer is NO, china would not want to stick it nose to other too much. When US invades Saddam Hussein they armies is no defense, and besides US has 16-20 Nato country back them up. So sad to see the powerful US need Nato to rapes a country with less to nothing defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

feilong said:


> This is your nonsense logics, does chinese care for Saddam? The answer is NO, china would not want to stick it nose to other too much. *When US invades Saddam Hussein they armies is no defense*, and besides US has 16-20 Nato country back them up. So sad to see the powerful US need Nato to rapes a country with less to nothing defense.


The PLA at that time could not have handled the Iraqi military.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## feilong

gambit said:


> Yes. Such would make North Korea the aggressor and would justify an alliance against North Korea. Further, South Korea and Japan are vital *GLOBAL* assets while North Korea is barely above nothing of a country. Would China enter a nuclear war against the US over a nobody?



As I said china dont want to stick it noise to anyone, but maybe for NK is China interest. If go nuclear will your US survives? let see your THAADS can bring down MIRV missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

feilong said:


> As I said china dont want to stick it noise to anyone, but maybe for NK is China interest.


Right...So if NKR attack SKR and Japan with nuclear weapons, an alliance rises up and respond in kind which would leave NKR a nuclear wasteland. Then China will attack the US with nuclear weapons over a nuclear wasteland next door to China that China have nothing to do with in the first place.

What 'wisdom' you have...



feilong said:


> If go nuclear will your US survives? let see your THAADS can bring down MIRV missile.


Sure...Just like how US weapons made Chinese weapons in Iraq looked pathetic.


----------



## j20blackdragon

Just ignore gambit's trolling everybody.

As I said before, the China that currently exists in 2013 can drive the entire army into the Korean peninsula. 

The war is over right then and there. 

List of countries by motor vehicle production - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## feilong

gambit said:


> Right...So if NKR attack SKR and Japan with nuclear weapons, an alliance rises up and respond in kind which would leave NKR a nuclear wasteland. Then China will attack the US with nuclear weapons over a nuclear wasteland next door to China that China have nothing to do with in the first place.
> 
> What 'wisdom' you have...
> 
> 
> Sure...Just like how US weapons made Chinese weapons in Iraq looked pathetic.



Listen you moron, the NK nuclear facility is the right nextdoor to china border. Radioactive spill to china, you think china just sit there and see the US nukes the NK without China get no harm? Besides china will never let US to sit right next to it border. 

Tell me what major chinese weapons in Iraq? you mean the outdated AK47 and old tanks?


----------



## gambit

feilong said:


> Listen you moron, the NK nuclear facility is the right nextdoor to china border. Radioactive spill to china, *you think china just sit there and see the US nukes the NK without China get no harm?* Besides china will never let US to sit right next to it border.
> 
> Tell me what major chinese weapons in Iraq? you mean the outdated AK47 and old tanks?


Right...So that means we should expect nuclear surprise attacks from NKR and China at the same time.

How delusional are you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## feilong

gambit said:


> Right...So that means we should expect nuclear surprise attacks from NKR and China at the same time.
> 
> How delusional are you?



Again have the war between the two Koreas started yet? lol it will never happen only talk from the NK that all you get it? US have been worries and think too much about NK, look at China still keep calm and look how worries the US.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> Yes. Such would make North Korea the aggressor and would justify an alliance against North Korea. Further, South Korea and Japan are vital *GLOBAL* assets while North Korea is barely above nothing of a country. Would China enter a nuclear war against the US over a nobody?



first of all i wanna say to everyone here,

china is not going to annex anything or anyone it does not claim(ie taiwan excluded), it will NOT be driving into Vietnam, or Mongolia. to suggest otherwise is just trolling.

that said, if the NK suddenly find its self at war with the south and the North is seen as the aggressor, the PLA can still roll into the north claiming that its doing its part of the international security duty, it will be a rush to see who can occupy more territory in the north, the US or China, i doubt those two forces will be shooting at each other(though there could be incidents but it will probably be downplayed) for the precise reason mentioned here, risk or escalation to a conflict between US/China.


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> first of all i wanna say to everyone here,
> 
> china is not going to annex anything or anyone it does not claim(ie taiwan excluded), it will NOT be driving into Vietnam, or Mongolia. to suggest otherwise is just trolling.


Do not say that to everyone. Say it to Chinese members who encouraged it.



applesauce said:


> that said, if the NK suddenly find its self at war with the south and the North is seen as the aggressor, *the PLA can still roll into the north claiming that its doing its part of the international security duty,* it will be a rush to see who can occupy more territory in the north, the US or China, i doubt those two forces will be shooting at each other(though there could be incidents but it will probably be downplayed) for the precise reason mentioned here, risk or escalation to a conflict between US/China.


In this scenario, China have two very unpalatable choices:

*- Virtually annex North Korea, something you said China should not do.*

Under this guise of performing her responsibility as a regional power that China would step in and militarily discourage NKR from war, China would have no choice but to install a new government more amenable to Chinese wishes. China would have to economically support NKR to an even greater degree than today and that includes sending reformers to restructure the NKR-ean economic *SYSTEM*, not just merely relaxing/abandoning a few rules here and there. Even China would not know how long this support will be in spite of going thru the same travails herself.

*- Let North Korea go.*

The abandonment of NKR will morally force the SKR-eans to %100 shoulder the burden of saving Korea. Not just North or South, but of the entire country as how the world know Korea prior to partition. This would not mean an immediate placement of US military forces on the Korea-China border as some falsely impressed. Just like how China would not know how long it will take to economically salvage that half of Korea, neither would the SKR-ean government, which would now be the Korean government. So there is no reason for the US military to move into northern Korea. Probably not for another decade at the best case for US. Further...The (new) Korean government will not be so friendly to the idea of even partially supporting a US military garrison when so much will be needed to keep the entire Korean economic system from collapsing.

While this second option is still unpalatable to China because it would remove a buffer state between China and the US, the possibility of a less hostile relationship between China and the US over time as the Korean peninsula economically and politically recovers make this second option less unpalatable overall.

*Bottom line...*

Neither South Korea nor Japan is the 'puppet' state to the US as many would scurrilously like to believe and propagate. Oddly enough, both of these so called 'puppets' have major economic interests in mainland China, so why would they jeopardize these relationships to antagonize China by enhancing US military presence after the (hypothetical) abandonment of NKR by China? Is it possible that by letting NKR go, all three major Asian countries would have even stronger relationships, economically and politically, thereby gradually removing the US from the Pacific, at least militarily anyway?

North Korea have been a political and an economic millstone around China's neck and no matter what South Korea does or does not, NKR will continue to be such a millstone around China's neck. The same cannot be said for South Korea to the US. This is an unspoken embarrassment for China.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> Do not say that to everyone. Say it to Chinese members who encouraged it.



no, to everyone, including you, who responds to those bait posts



gambit said:


> In this scenario, China have two very unpalatable choices:
> 
> *- Virtually annex North Korea, something you said China should not do.*
> 
> Under this guise of performing her responsibility as a regional power that China would step in and militarily discourage NKR from war, China would have no choice but to install a new government more amenable to Chinese wishes. China would have to economically support NKR to an even greater degree than today and that includes sending reformers to restructure the NKR-ean economic *SYSTEM*, not just merely relaxing/abandoning a few rules here and there. Even China would not know how long this support will be in spite of going thru the same travails herself.
> 
> *- Let North Korea go.*
> 
> The abandonment of NKR will morally force the SKR-eans to %100 shoulder the burden of saving Korea. Not just North or South, but of the entire country as how the world know Korea prior to partition. This would not mean an immediate placement of US military forces on the Korea-China border as some falsely impressed. Just like how China would not know how long it will take to economically salvage that half of Korea, neither would the SKR-ean government, which would now be the Korean government. So there is no reason for the US military to move into northern Korea. Probably not for another decade at the best case for US. Further...The (new) Korean government will not be so friendly to the idea of even partially supporting a US military garrison when so much will be needed to keep the entire Korean economic system from collapsing.
> 
> While this second option is still unpalatable to China because it would remove a buffer state between China and the US, the possibility of a less hostile relationship between China and the US over time as the Korean peninsula economically and politically recovers make this second option less unpalatable overall.
> 
> *Bottom line...*
> 
> Neither South Korea nor Japan is the 'puppet' state to the US as many would scurrilously like to believe and propagate. Oddly enough, both of these so called 'puppets' have major economic interests in mainland China, so why would they jeopardize these relationships to antagonize China by enhancing US military presence after the (hypothetical) abandonment of NKR by China? Is it possible that by letting NKR go, all three major Asian countries would have even stronger relationships, economically and politically, thereby gradually removing the US from the Pacific, at least militarily anyway?
> 
> North Korea have been a political and an economic millstone around China's neck and no matter what South Korea does or does not, NKR will continue to be such a millstone around China's neck. The same cannot be said for South Korea to the US. This is an unspoken embarrassment for China.



like you said, it does not have good choices IF the war break out, that why the chinese government doesnt want war, it wants status quo. but if its stuck between the bad choices it must choose the least bad one. between virtually annexing NK and simply letting korea go without demands(ie: potential us forces sitting at the border), it would rather prop up a new government in NK and spend the necessary funds rather than the alternative. that said, the ideal situation is to work out a quick deal with SK and the U.S after the war(which hopefully wont have too many casualties)

and the bottom line for such a deal is, a guaranteed removal of US forces from korea, its contribution to reconstruction is welcomed however. perhaps they can get a deal where both us and china will withdraw at the same time leaving SK in control.

now you might say the US would leave if nk problem is solved anyways. that however is not a guaranteed, leaving room for the US to change its mind at any time. a treaty or public promise is much more binding and believable.


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> no, to everyone, including you, who responds to those bait posts


The annexation sentiment is not 'bait'. It is heartfelt desire.



applesauce said:


> like you said, it does not have good choices IF the war break out, that why the chinese government doesnt want war, it wants status quo. but if its stuck between the bad choices it must choose the least bad one. between virtually annexing NK and simply letting korea go without demands(ie: potential us forces sitting at the border), it would rather prop up a new government in NK and spend the necessary funds rather than the alternative. that said, *the ideal situation is to work out a quick deal with SK and the U.S after the war(which hopefully wont have too many casualties)
> 
> and the bottom line for such a deal is, a guaranteed removal of US forces from korea,* its contribution to reconstruction is welcomed however. perhaps they can get a deal where both us and china will withdraw at the same time leaving SK in control.


If there is a second Korean War and partition remains, the US will not leave at the end of such war.



applesauce said:


> now you might say *the US would leave if nk problem is solved anyways. that however is not a guaranteed*, leaving room for the US to change its mind at any time. a treaty or public promise is much more binding and believable.


Nothing is guaranteed. But if Korea is whole again under Seoul's leadership, there would be no credible reasons for the US to remain.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> The annexation sentiment is not 'bait'. It is heartfelt desire.



still doesnt mean his sentiment is shared by any significant amount of ppl nor does it mean u must respond, itll only degrade the quality of threads



gambit said:


> If there is a second Korean War and partition remains, the US will not leave at the end of such war.



then neither will china, simple as that. if the US wants the partition gone, then it must leave, i suppose we are at an impasse. and as u say if SK is not a puppet, this need not even directly involve the US, if the SK want half the country back and financial assistance in rebuilding, perhaps it can be persuaded to demand the US leave. if not well then like i said, a new regime is going to be installed in the north.




gambit said:


> Nothing is guaranteed. But if Korea is whole again under Seoul's leadership, there would be no credible reasons for the US to remain.



and you would be right but again like i said, that's not a guaranteed thus not good enough to risk it. not to mention there are other examples in the world. Germany also faces direct threat yet the US run bases there, based on that example alone, "no credible reason" is not good enough


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> still doesnt mean his sentiment is shared by any significant amount of ppl nor does it mean u must respond, itll only degrade the quality of threads


In no way does that opinion degrades the quality of the discussion. It does not insult anyone. That sentiment simply is one option for China worthy of debate.



applesauce said:


> then neither will china, simple as that. *if the US wants the partition gone, then it must leave,* i suppose we are at an impasse. and as u say if SK is not a puppet, this need not even directly involve the US, if the SK want half the country back and financial assistance in rebuilding, perhaps it can be persuaded to demand the US leave. if not well then like i said, a new regime is going to be installed in the north.


Partition under North Korea? Not going to happen.



applesauce said:


> and you would be right but again like i said, that's not a guaranteed thus not good enough to risk it. not to mention there are other examples in the world. Germany also faces direct threat yet the US run bases there, based on that example alone, "no credible reason" is not good enough


No one is saying the withdrawal will occur immediately. Since the end of the Cold War, the US have been steadily withdrawing our military presence there.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> In no way does that opinion degrades the quality of the discussion. It does not insult anyone. That sentiment simply is one option for China worthy of debate.



if you cant see why you shouldnt respond to those kinds of posts, i have nothing more to say about it. we shall drops this here then.



gambit said:


> Partition under North Korea? Not going to happen.



the south will still be the south, the north will get a new Chinese control regime, not a damn thing the US can do about it. that is if they don't agree to a simultaneous withdraw of forces leaving control of both koreas to SK




gambit said:


> No one is saying the withdrawal will occur immediately. Since the end of the Cold War, the US have been steadily withdrawing our military presence there.



so what? the US is still there, and thats the whole point, they have NOT left.
if the US takes 30 years after the war to leave korea, then it will take 30 years for china to leave as well, simple as that.


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> the south will still be the south, the north will get a new Chinese control regime, *not a damn thing the US can do about it.* that is if they don't agree to a simultaneous withdraw of forces leaving control of both koreas to SK


Both the US and SKR are happy to have NKR continue to be the economic and political millstone around China's neck, if that is what you want for China. So in essence, the US does not have to do anything.



applesauce said:


> so what? the US is still there, and thats the whole point, they have NOT left.
> if the US takes 30 years after the war to leave korea, then it will take 30 years for china to leave as well, simple as that.


Withdrawal is dependent upon perception of threat. The bottom line here is still economics. Russia is not supporting anyone while China continues to support NKR, a true 'failed state'. This is a 30 yr investment with no returns.


----------



## shuttler

*French president starts China visit
*

English.news.cn | 2013-04-25 11:04:34 | Editor: Zhu Ningzhu














French President Francois Hollande (L) is greeted by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi upon his arrival in Beijing, capital of China, April 25, 2013, for a state visit to China. (Xinhua/Zhang Duo)

BEIJING, April 25 (Xinhua) -- French President Francois Hollande arrived in Beijing on Thursday, starting his state visit to China.

During his trip, President Xi Jinping will hold talks with Hollande. Premier Li Keqiang and Zhang Dejiang, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, will also meet with him.

At Xi's invitation, Hollande will visit China from April 25 to 26.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> Both the US and SKR are happy to have NKR continue to be the economic and political millstone around China's neck, if that is what you want for China. So in essence, the US does not have to do anything.



what makes you think NK(new) will somehow be a economic millstone around china's neck? its perfectly acceptable for china to ship a few billion dollars to (new)nk and in return it gets a million man army as a buffer, thats down right cheap, heck it can even have nk undergo slow economic reforms. and a Nk under the indirect control of china is anything but a political dead weight, its very useful in fact(unlike currently were Nk doesn't listen to anyone). and you act like SK enjoys having a divided country, threatened with nuclear annihilation, being provoked all the time and having limited options to respond. like i said making the US leave can be done through SK, there is almost no down side to for SK to demand everyone leave korea.



gambit said:


> Withdrawal is dependent upon perception of threat. The bottom line here is still economics. Russia is not supporting anyone while China continues to support NKR, a true 'failed state'. This is a 30 yr investment with no returns.



and whether that threat will remain is determined by whether or not the US withdraws, like i said we are at an impasse where you think the government wouldn't accept the very fair deal of simultaneous withdrawal, and again i say that US withdrawal does even have to involve direct negotiations with the US, Assuming SK isnt a puppet of course. 

looking at this from a SK POV, 
it can:

call for withdrawal of both powers
>>removes the only real threat to them(nk)
>>full independence (no foreign forces on their lands, no dependence on external power for basic national security)
>>finally uniting their country/peoples
>> possibly reconstruction fund from both powers

us refuses to leave, SK allows this
>>still a threatening regime to the north
>>continued dependence on external powers
>>country remains divided 
>>country now devastated for next to no changes in situation


----------



## xuxu1457

China and Bangladesh peacekeepers hold joint exercises in Sudan


----------



## Viet

nice propaganda pictures. Can you also post how you try to intimidate other nations in SE Asia, such as right now the Philippines?


----------



## Fsjal

^show us your mighty army then^


----------



## xuxu1457

China-ASEAN exercises in Brunei&#65292; total 2000 troops

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xuxu1457

????????????_????_???
920 type Ocean Medivac No.866 Peace Ark left Zhoushan port in 10th June, start "Harmony Mission -2013".
The mission, the hospital ship will visit Brunei and participate in the "10 +8" ASEAN humanitarian aid relief joint field exercises;
Go Gulf of Aden sea area to carry out medical itinerant services;
Visit*Brunei, Maldives, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Indonesia, Cambodia*, and provide the provision of medical services;
Go Indonesia to participate in multinational joint rounds and maritime parade.

"Peace Ark" hospital ship 866, enter service in 2008, 14300tons

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xuxu1457

Ocean Medivac No.866 Peace Ark at Brunei, start "Harmony Mission -2013".
The mission, the hospital ship will participate in the "10 +8" ASEAN humanitarian aid relief joint field exercises
open to the public at Brunei 16th June

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sankranthi

Boat looks well built and well maintained.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hk299792458

11th batch of chinese UN troops to South Sudan set out






Chang Wanquan Meets Singapore Navy commandant






Henri K.


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

@ChineseTiger1986 

Why do you think that the PRC has to review its relations with Iran? Is that some sort of a preference to KSA mainly? Or do you think that China is troubled with Iran more than the West itself ?


----------



## Beast

Yzd Khalifa said:


> @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> Why do you think that the PRC has to review its relations with Iran? Is that some sort of a preference to KSA mainly? Or do you think that China is troubled with Iran more than the West itself ?


Saudi very close relation with US is the reason why China has not abandon Iran. But China relationship with Iran is merely from a commercial point of view. China continue wants a diversify source of raw oil supply while Iran acts as another venue for Chinese goods.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Beast said:


> Saudi very close relation with US is the reason why China has not abandon Iran. But China relationship with Iran is merely from a commercial point of view. China continue wants a diversify source of raw oil supply while Iran acts as another venue for Chinese goods.



Point take  
But our relations with the PRC is ten times fold compared with Iran.  

But, our trade volume is beyond Saudi oil import to China :/ .. We have been investing aggressively in China's markets among many other things.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Yzd Khalifa said:


> @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> Why do you think that the PRC has to review its relations with Iran? Is that some sort of a preference to KSA mainly? Or do you think that China is troubled with Iran more than the West itself ?



If Iran is being overtaken by the pro-West liberal faction, then China must rethink about it.

Saudi is only politically maintaining a good relationship with USA, it is a smart way to manage your country, but being ideologically pro-USA is a different matter.

Even with Taiwan, they are ideologically pro-USA, they are still dogmatically hostile towards us no matter how much we are financially subsidizing them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> If Iran is being overtaken by the pro-West liberal faction, then China must rethink about it.
> 
> Saudi is only politically maintaining a good relationship with USA, it is smart way to manage your country, but being ideologically pro-USA is a different matter.
> 
> Even with Taiwan, they are ideologically pro-USA, they are still dogmatically hostile towards us no matter how much we are financially subsidizing them.



But Saudi is helping US spread is ideology in the Middle East not just good relationship that simple. From helping fighting a front Iran to Syria. While its anti Israel stance is merely on the surface only to please its citizen. It's still help US support of Israel. I am not against Israel state but mere pointing out the support Saudi is wiling to lend in helping US. Shall China cut off raw fuel supply from Iran and only gets supply from Saudi. China will be putting herself in danger of controlling by US. I will have no doubt Saudi will act on command of US to cut off oil supply to China if neccessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

@Beast




> But Saudi is helping US spread is ideology in the Middle East not just good relationship that simple.



KSA's ideology is poles apart from the US's  



> From helping fighting a front Iran to Syria



It isn't KSA's problem that Iran supports Assad, with all the due respect. 



> While its anti Israel stance is merely on the surface only to please its citizen.



Anti-Israel stance ? I never heard such thing over my humble years of service to my country. We do have an issue with the way their Government behaves though. 



> I am not against Israel state



Nobody said you are. 



> Shall China cut off raw fuel supply from Iran



Actually, you already did.



> only gets supply from Saudi. China will be putting herself in danger of controlling by US. I will have no doubt Saudi will act on command of US to cut off oil supply to China if neccessary.



 Why would KSA pose an embargo on China? Under who's commands? A foreign state? Perhaps you know nothing about us then.

==============================================================


You mean more like of reformists Iranians? 



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> If Iran is being overtaken by the pro-West liberal faction, then China must rethink about it.
> 
> Even with Taiwan, they are ideologically pro-USA, they are still dogmatically hostile towards us no matter how much we are financially subsidizing them.



I'm sorry to hear about Taiwan, but that's life my friend  .. 



> Saudi is only politically maintaining a good relationship with USA, it is smart way to manage your country, but being ideologically pro-USA is a different matter.



Thanks  I take your testimony as a badge of honor

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> But Saudi is helping US spread is ideology in the Middle East not just good relationship that simple. From helping fighting a front Iran to Syria. While its anti Israel stance is merely on the surface only to please its citizen. It's still help US support of Israel. I am not against Israel state but mere pointing out the support Saudi is wiling to lend in helping US. Shall China cut off raw fuel supply from Iran and only gets supply from Saudi. China will be putting herself in danger of controlling by US. I will have no doubt Saudi will act on command of US to cut off oil supply to China if neccessary.



That's why we have only signed the deal with Iran, but also with Russia.

But for now, USA cannot afford to cut off the oïl supply of China, it will risk to start a trade war or possibly the WWIII.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Yzd Khalifa said:


> @Beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KSA's ideology is poles apart from the US's
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't KSA's problem that Iran supports Assad, with all the due respect.
> 
> 
> 
> Anti-Israel stance ? I never heard such thing over my humble years of service to my country. We do have an issue with the way their Government behaves though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, you already did.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would KSA pose an embargo on China? Under who's commands? A foreign state? Perhaps you know nothing about us then.
> 
> :



China has reduces oil import but does not mean it will totally cut off. In fact, Saudi king offer to replace all Iran oil export to China but China reject it.
As for Saudi stands against Israel for a state who did not even recognise. I think I do not need to say more.
As for Saudi royal and US close relationship, I can bet its only second to Britain and Canada.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

Beast said:


> China has reduces oil import but does not mean it will totally cut off. In fact, Saudi king offer to replace all Iran oil export to China but China reject it.
> *As for Saudi stands against Israel for a state who did not even recognise. I think I do not need to say more.*
> As for Saudi royal and US close relationship, I can bet its only second to Britain and Canada.



The issue with Israel is political to us more than being fanatically-motivated by an ideology my friend. 

Peace 



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> That's why we have only signed the deal with Iran, but also with Russia.
> 
> But for now, USA cannot afford to cut off the oïl supply of China, it will risk to start a trade war or possibly the WWIII.



No one can, we signed treaties and contracts with the PRC, and we take pride of being men in our word friend

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yzd Khalifa

@HongWu

What's your thoughts over this topic ^


----------



## AsianLion

Official website.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

