Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Modern China isn't into military expansion. Negotiation is the way forward, like what happened during the HK handover and the Tajikistan deal.
Also, I like your signature.
Modern India is not Tajikistan.
I like it too.
The bold part is a logical fallacy, appeal to ignorance, the burden of proof is not on me.
Rest is your opinion.
No current permanent members support any new members with veto power. permanent membership, yes. Veto power, no.
What is your source?
Chinese are okay not okay
Chinese needle then again fall in line
Chinese this and Chinese that
Oh my god seems the world in PDF is revolving around these topics only these days.
Why ? We already have what is ours, except for Aksai Chin.
Come take the rest if you want to.
i agree with u CD but problem is i think china has till now succeffully negotiated all border disputes in its favour. in this case, i dont think a resolution is possible without each side ceeding some ground to other.
Look at who started this thread. You people want attention, now you have it.
Well, how incompetent can Indian education system be? Let us find out.
At first Faithfulguy argued none of the P5 support India to get a membership with veto.
The reason to say that is obvious, none of PS has openly stated that they are willing to include a new member with veto. I guess it does make sense to say something above. Because in most diplomatic cases, people tend to avoid bluntly rejecting other's appeal. I believe it is some kind of unwritten rule.
Well, but our Indian counterparts seemed to be unable to get it, therefore someone was asking for a proof.
What a question! You nailed it, we are unable to find any source that says any of P5 rebuffed India's appeal for veto.
I am done arguing with you people on this. If you wish, you can carry on taking their silence as a node to your appeal for membership in UNSC with a veto right.
Probably u didn't get my point well its ok no problem. I for one don't like attention for sure.
Well, why not express your point more explicitly so people can get it?
In your last post, you are complaining that too much Chinese element were involved in this thread. Come on, look at the title, if it said US support India's desire, blah, blah, I wouldn't care less.
You, as an exception may not want attention, but other of your fellows do. We, who commented on this thread, didn't make a mistake by posting on this thread. PDF, as an excellent forum, hasn't done anything wrong by allowing people to get attention.
So, what on earth is the point of your last post?
My esteem for CPC members going down day by day
but then again first rule of communism and religion is to devoid any sense of logical reasoning.
My esteem for CPC members going down day by day, but then again first rule of communism and religion is to devoid any sense of logical reasoning.
Don't attempt to make me feel sad by saying that. CCP doesn't need to win any respect from any Indian people, hence I, as a CCP member, is under no obligation to appease any Indian who already bears deep grudge toward China and CCP. As long as China is determined to recover the land looted by India, we Chinese, CCP or non-CCP, will be hated by Indians. I don't feel sorry for displeasing an enemy by acting like a real Chinese.
Instead of willfully claiming I am lack of sense of logic reasoning, why not refute all the points I raised in my posts, which I think is a better way to prove your brilliant sense of logical reasoning?
Meanwhile, my admiration of CPC members is increasing day by day.
You may think that they are illogical, but the results speak for themselves.
We are now the second largest economy in the world, the fastest growing major economy, and have lifted more people out of poverty than any other country on Earth.
Anyway, no offense, but "outside opinions" on internal Chinese matters, don't count for very much.