Chinese army asks for flag meeting with Indian Army

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Let k1ck some bu$$.... no withdrawal from our own territory

 

[Jlaw]

So the ching chong cockro wants peace

@Hu Songshan . racist remarks.

 

[dlclong]

There is no need to forget 1962, but by all means let us strive together for a better tomorrow.

And I agree that we need to get to know each other better and seek common progress. A good neighbour is invaluable and helps keep peace in your own house.



To seek common progress is victory. To seek common destruction is defeat. That much is common sense.

The only way to defeat your enemy is to make him your friend. That is the ONLY way a enemy can be defeated forever.

There is no need to forget 1962, but by all means let us strive together for a better tomorrow.

And I agree that we need to get to know each other better and seek common progress. A good neighbour is invaluable and helps keep peace in your own house.



To seek common progress is victory. To seek common destruction is defeat. That much is common sense.

The only way to defeat your enemy is to make him your friend. That is the ONLY way a enemy can be defeated forever.

It wasn’t China, but Nehru who declared 1962 war: Australian journalist Neville Maxwell
It wasn't China, but Nehru who declared 1962 war: Australian journalist Neville Maxwell - The Times of India
Two weeks ago, the Australian journalist Neville Maxwell finally made part of the Henderson Brooks report public, by putting it up on his blog. The report was an internal Indian Army enquiry into its rout in the 1962 war with China — Maxwell was the New Delhi correspondent for The Times, London, at the time — but in the 51 years since the report was written up by Lt Gen Henderson Brooks and Brig PS Bhagat, successive Indian governments have refused to make it public. Only two copies of the report were thought to be in existence, although there was never any doubt that Maxwell had had access to the report for his 1970 book India’s China War quoted extensively from it. In his first interview to the Indian media since he made the report public, the now 88-year-old Maxwell tells Parakram Rautela that he had been trying to make the report public for years but that nobody would publish it. He adds that he was only able to get hold of Volume I of the report, minus 45 pages, and that he never laid eyes on Volume II. And of course he still blames Nehru for the war, not the Chinese. Excerpts:
Q: You suggest India’s official account of the cause of the 1962 border war is false. What, in your view, is the truth?
NM: By September 1962 the Indian “forward policy” of trying to force the Chinese out of territory India claimed had built up great tension in the Western (Ladakh) sector of the border, with the Chinese army just blocking it. Then the Nehru government applied the forward policy to the McMahon Line eastern sector and when the Chinese blocked that too India in effect declared war with Nehru’s announcement on October 11 that the Army had been ordered to “free our territory”, which meant to attack the Chinese and drive them back. As General Niranjan Prasad, commander of 4 Division, wrote later: “We at the front knew that since Nehru had said he was going to attack, the Chinese were certainly not going to wait to be attacked” — and of course they didn’t. That’s how the war began. The Chinese attack was both reactive, in that General Kaul had begun the Indian assault on October 10, and pre-emptive because after that failure the Indian drive had been suspended to build up strength for a resumed attack.
Q: What in your opinion were the policies, on both sides, that brought about the basic quarrel over the border?
NM: As far as the McMahon Line was concerned India inherited the dispute with China, which the British had created in the mid-1930s by seizing the Tibetan territory they re-named NEFA. The PRC government was prepared to accept that border alignment but insisted that it be re-negotiated, that is put through the usual diplomatic process, to wipe out its imperialist origins. Nehru refused, using London’s false claim that the Simla Conference had already legitimised the McMahon Line to back up that refusal — that was his Himalayan blunder. Then in 1954 he compounded that mistake by laying cartographic claim to a swathe of territory in the north-west, the Aksai Chin, a claim which was beyond anything the British had ever claimed and on an area which Chinese governments had treated as their own for at least a hundred years. To make matters worse, he ruled that there should be no negotiation over that claim either! So Indian policy had created a border dispute and also ruled out the only way it could peacefully be settled, through diplomatic negotiation.
Q: Whatever the truth about the origins of the war, it’s the effect on India-China relations and the deadlock since then that is important now… And there was the worry that bringing up all the bitterness of that bloody conflict may only make matters worse?
NM: Certainly not, the opposite is true I think. If the Henderson Brooks Report is read closely in India (and it’s not easy reading!) people will see that political favouritism put the Army under incompetent leadership which blindly followed the Nehru government’s provocative policy. It shows that all the way, from formulation to implementation of the Forward Policy, that policy was resisted by the pucca soldiers because they saw it must end in a conflict India could only lose, but the orders came from the top and in the end had to be obeyed… the authors of the report ruefully quote the poem, “theirs not to reason why… but to do or die”.

 

[风之南国]

There is no need to forget 1962, but by all means let us strive together for a better tomorrow.

And I agree that we need to get to know each other better and seek common progress. A good neighbour is invaluable and helps keep peace in your own house.



To seek common progress is victory. To seek common destruction is defeat. That much is common sense.

The only way to defeat your enemy is to make him your friend. That is the ONLY way a enemy can be defeated forever.

Right, you are very wise

@Hu Songshan . racist remarks.

He thought himself so noble a.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

It wasn’t China, but Nehru who declared 1962 war: Australian journalist Neville Maxwell
It wasn't China, but Nehru who declared 1962 war: Australian journalist Neville Maxwell - The Times of India
Two weeks ago, the Australian journalist Neville Maxwell finally made part of the Henderson Brooks report public, by putting it up on his blog. The report was an internal Indian Army enquiry into its rout in the 1962 war with China — Maxwell was the New Delhi correspondent for The Times, London, at the time — but in the 51 years since the report was written up by Lt Gen Henderson Brooks and Brig PS Bhagat, successive Indian governments have refused to make it public. Only two copies of the report were thought to be in existence, although there was never any doubt that Maxwell had had access to the report for his 1970 book India’s China War quoted extensively from it. In his first interview to the Indian media since he made the report public, the now 88-year-old Maxwell tells Parakram Rautela that he had been trying to make the report public for years but that nobody would publish it. He adds that he was only able to get hold of Volume I of the report, minus 45 pages, and that he never laid eyes on Volume II. And of course he still blames Nehru for the war, not the Chinese. Excerpts:
Q: You suggest India’s official account of the cause of the 1962 border war is false. What, in your view, is the truth?
NM: By September 1962 the Indian “forward policy” of trying to force the Chinese out of territory India claimed had built up great tension in the Western (Ladakh) sector of the border, with the Chinese army just blocking it. Then the Nehru government applied the forward policy to the McMahon Line eastern sector and when the Chinese blocked that too India in effect declared war with Nehru’s announcement on October 11 that the Army had been ordered to “free our territory”, which meant to attack the Chinese and drive them back. As General Niranjan Prasad, commander of 4 Division, wrote later: “We at the front knew that since Nehru had said he was going to attack, the Chinese were certainly not going to wait to be attacked” — and of course they didn’t. That’s how the war began. The Chinese attack was both reactive, in that General Kaul had begun the Indian assault on October 10, and pre-emptive because after that failure the Indian drive had been suspended to build up strength for a resumed attack.
Q: What in your opinion were the policies, on both sides, that brought about the basic quarrel over the border?
NM: As far as the McMahon Line was concerned India inherited the dispute with China, which the British had created in the mid-1930s by seizing the Tibetan territory they re-named NEFA. The PRC government was prepared to accept that border alignment but insisted that it be re-negotiated, that is put through the usual diplomatic process, to wipe out its imperialist origins. Nehru refused, using London’s false claim that the Simla Conference had already legitimised the McMahon Line to back up that refusal — that was his Himalayan blunder. Then in 1954 he compounded that mistake by laying cartographic claim to a swathe of territory in the north-west, the Aksai Chin, a claim which was beyond anything the British had ever claimed and on an area which Chinese governments had treated as their own for at least a hundred years. To make matters worse, he ruled that there should be no negotiation over that claim either! So Indian policy had created a border dispute and also ruled out the only way it could peacefully be settled, through diplomatic negotiation.
Q: Whatever the truth about the origins of the war, it’s the effect on India-China relations and the deadlock since then that is important now… And there was the worry that bringing up all the bitterness of that bloody conflict may only make matters worse?
NM: Certainly not, the opposite is true I think. If the Henderson Brooks Report is read closely in India (and it’s not easy reading!) people will see that political favouritism put the Army under incompetent leadership which blindly followed the Nehru government’s provocative policy. It shows that all the way, from formulation to implementation of the Forward Policy, that policy was resisted by the pucca soldiers because they saw it must end in a conflict India could only lose, but the orders came from the top and in the end had to be obeyed… the authors of the report ruefully quote the poem, “theirs not to reason why… but to do or die”.

Nehru was a fool, no doubt. China was no saint either.

The truth lies in between and is now gray. For peace to prevail, India has to feel safe. India is unlikely to repeat the mistake Nehru made, China is unlikely to repeat 62, so a middle ground has to be found. One that brings balance.

Right, you are very wise

He thought himself so noble a.

.....beware of greeks bearing gifts

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

welcome back after a long time. and ehhhhh we know you guys cant afford to face China so NO naah atleast i dont expect you to respond there.

Same to you, seeing you online after a while

 

[posedion]

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find another third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

Remember the days tyrant mao turned a country to ruin in name of cultural revolution.....
china for sure does not want to go back to tyrant Mao's policies

 

[Beast]

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find another third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

Remember the days tyrant mao turned a country to ruin in name of cultural revolution.....
china for sure does not want to go back to tyrant Mao's policies

Really? Why US didn't outright declare war on China since we confronted japanese and Indian? Oh, I forget US needs China financial to survive and China is unconquerable with Nuclear weapon..

 

[posedion]

I am no big fan of nehru thanks to british and tyrant mao we could include large tracts of southern tibet into India
Doesnt china still have claim on these
china lost a friend in 62
Chinese people only gained this tyrant who went to kill god knows who many million chinese people.
1962 was tyrant Mao letoff

 

[posedion]

Really? Why US didn't outright declare war on China since we confronted japanese and Indian? Oh, I forget US needs China financial to survive and China is unconquerable with Nuclear weapon..

Joker, you have to earn dollar US just has to print it....

My *** US cares about you they just tell you what is acceptable and what is not

 

[Beast]

Joker, you have to earn dollar US just has to print it....

My *** US cares about you they just tell you what is acceptable and what is not

Who is the joker who don't even know basic economics? Then why US needs to curb its military budget since she can print as much as she wants? Tell me, I am interested to know.

US is so big that She cannot even stop our ADIZ. What is acceptable and what is not? Looks like you know nothing..

 

[Kloitra]

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

The game of poker china in palying in Asia it has everything to lose
All the billions will vanish , if china fires one shot anywhere in asia
US will tolerate only a peaceful china which keeps producing what it needs
US does not want its main land polluted
US will find another third world country similar like china if it behaves anywhere contrary to US interest

Remember the days tyrant mao turned a country to ruin in name of cultural revolution.....
china for sure does not want to go back to tyrant Mao's policies

So US would come to aide of any country in confrontation with China? Why not remove all the security India have on the northern border, as US is there to protect it.

 

[posedion]

Why China always intimidate India, why so weak?

We are never intimated by anyone we fought these communist in the past if necessary we will in future
some chinese on these forums claim so
Its like the nazis and britain

The sanner people dont want to fight over crap

but crap is what they want none is worried to give it

china could not take its so called disputed areas back in 60 70 80 even in 90s when India was it weakest economically (Soviet Collapse)

Now china knows very well what is cost of firing a single bullet

Lot is at stake

Who is the joker who don't even know basic economics? Then why US needs to curb its military budget since she can print as much as she wants? Tell me, I am interested to know.

14 naval nuclear battle groups with each having more budget than many advanced navies put together

nut dont teach me economics

they have enough shit, US defense has its own scam
Every time a new governments come
money sucking projects are stopped

tell me where all your dollar reserves are
if china thinks its a souper power why have dollar reserves why not yen reserves
have you heard countries have yen reserves

 

[Beast]

14 naval nuclear battle groups with each having the budget than many advanced navies put together

nut dont teach me economics

Indeed you know nothing about economic and act as if you know. Why stop at 14 and not 20 since US can print as much as she wants and the whole world owes them? Why stop F-22 raptor at 187 and not 500? You really think US can print as much as she wants? seriously? Get a life.

 

[posedion]

Economic genius tell me why do have dollar reserves

Why not that so called yen reserves