Chinese PM Visits Bangladesh

[indiapakistanfriendship]

Have you now catered for the third front? Nepal Maoists are democratically elected into the majority of the parliament. Hopefully you are aware of Prachanda’s comments.

Prachands comments never indicated on the opening of a third front , why would hw do that , again countries simply dont shoot their feet to fit into china and Pakistans strategic vision. Period

 

[gpit]

self deleted -repetition of previous post.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

What do you want to say?

Do you mean that there are no tourist spots in Burma?

I have no idea, but if you think there are tourist spots near the Bangladesh or Indian border, then you have another guess coming!!

What should I ask myself about Muhajirs? I am a Muhajir and more than happy in my country.

Of course you are.

And why must you still think you are one. Have you not been accepted?

What can I say to a person living in a state of denial but Bengalis are intelligent people they now understand the facts.

Being a Bengali myself, I wonder how I am in a state of denial!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Having influence on each other and meddling in the internal affairs of another state are not the same. What India does in this subcontinent the US does it all over the world, they take sides in the internal politics of other states. Not only that they do not hesitate to incite the army against democratically elected governments when those governments do not serve their purpose. If there is nothing wrong in it then they should come out in the open and say it unequivocally that the small states should not have sovereignty, it is only for the powerful and wealthy states.
The example that even the US has disputes with its neigbours is quite ridiculous for the US does not kill the citizens of Canada or Mexico on its borders as the Indian forces kill the Bangladeshis inside Bangladeshi territory almost everyday, nor do we see the US building dams over international rivers to deprive its neigbours from water of those rivers(of course the US has no international river flowing through it). So, the dispute between Mexico and the US or the US and Canada and the disputes between India and Bangladesh are of completely different nature, the comparison is simply false. Just because a small state happens to be next to a big state does not mean it has to be under the dictation of the big state, Cuba is a very good example of that.

Are you a Bengali or a Razaakar.

Let us know and I will answer you!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

This whole thing is mostly a crap, sorry to say that. This author knows nearly nothing about the conflict.

Sadly, you would love to deny it, right!

China was screwed and that too by such a small country!!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

You have no moral, nor action!

China was a victim of imperialism; therefore it is very concerned about sending troops over board. Unlike India, being a victim of imperialism, it self wanted/wants to be imperialist.

In 71, China’s primary goal was to prevent West Pakistan from being invaded by India. And the goal was achieved without sending troops. Sun Tzu said: besiege enemy’s psyche be deemed as the highest option, besiege enemy’s fortress be deemed as the lowest option. An optimal result achieved by the most skillful is to win a victory without resorting to fight.

That is exactly what happened in the field, and is the highest form of concrete actions!

As usual pious platitudes and homilies!!

Victim of imperialism!! Wow!!

And practising Imperialism itself!! Funny victim!

Let us hear from you how Tibet, the Uighur Mos..lem and Inner Mongolia came to be a part of China!

Don't teach me about Sun Tsu!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Gpit,

Chinese casualties Vietnam

To this day, both sides of the conflict describe themselves as the victor. The number of casualties is disputed, with some Western sources putting PLA losses at more than 60,000 casualties, including about 26,000 killed.

 

[salman nedian]

India is and will always be the sole of BD's economy, Bangladesh has to loose a lot in turning off India for farfetched Ideas of Burma china pak alliance. Tell me what will happen to your textile industry in case you open it to the chinese, where will your unemloyed migrate to find employment and send remittances, why would you simply loose a huge market like India with whom you share a huge border and a dissymetrical force level. Your government and people know this better so you and your disgruntled lot dont matter as you shall always remain in the fringes never to be part of the decision cycle.

Bangladesh’s trade deficit with India is already quite high and Pakistan is a big market for their tea, paper and jute industries so more trade with Pakistan means less trade deficit.I mean Pakistan will import more goods from them than India so their trade deficit will be reduced.

 

[kvLin]

Gpit,

Chinese casualties Vietnam

To this day, both sides of the conflict describe themselves as the victor. The number of casualties is disputed, with some Western sources putting PLA losses at more than 60,000 casualties, including about 26,000 killed.

funny

you're apparently super good at kidnapping one thread to another. but it's fine:

1. pls back up the Chinese casualties of 60000/26000 with facts.

2. with only one side casuality how you managed to measure the victory or defeat? for comparison better provide Vietnamese casualties as well.

3.popular views say there were only 85,000 Chinese troops,instead of 200,000 entered Vietnam territory. meanwhile 100,000 Vietnamese troops was announced in deployment by their government.

4. the war started at the border, and ended 100km north of Hanoi,capital of Vietnam by a pre-scheduled withdraw of PLA, coz unlike indians did in East Pakistan, China didn't go for Vietnamese land. the mission,though in name of counterattack against ceaseless Vietnamese raids at the border, was indeed for Cambodia.

during the PLA advance into Vietnam, cities including Cao Bang, Lao Cai and Lang Son were occupied. they remain Vietnamese cities so far but there were not any effective military recovery made by Vietnam forces throughout the war.

and in the aftermath, a 1999 bilateral pact resulted in land which China had claimed at the border belt being given back to China.

could those be achieved by a 30% loss or 70% casuality of Chinese troops?

use your brain.

 

[Vinod2070]

Are you a Bengali or a Razaakar.

Let us know and I will answer you!

I second that. If you are really from Bangladesh (and I would like your IP verification done for that), you are most likely a Razakar.

 

[salman nedian]

I second that. If you are really from Bangladesh (and I would like your IP verification done for that), you are most likely a Razakar.

It is not necessary we have seen Bangladeshi people like Azmax007, MBI Munshi, Ababeel etc on this forum who are Bengalis and still they believe on Islamic brotherhood and they have shown that the relationship between 2 parts of the country is till there on a common man’s level and this is the power of Islam wather you accept it or not.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Bangladesh’s trade deficit with India is already quite high and Pakistan is a big market for their tea, paper and jute industries so more trade with Pakistan means less trade deficit.I mean Pakistan will import more goods from them than India so their trade deficit will be reduced.

That is right there is a huge trade deficit and the Farakka problem.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

funny

you're apparently super good at kidnapping one thread to another. but it's fine:

1. pls back up the Chinese casualties of 60000/26000 with facts.

2. with only one side casuality how you managed to measure the victory or defeat? for comparison better provide Vietnamese casualties as well.

3.popular views say there were only 85,000 Chinese troops,instead of 200,000 entered Vietnam territory. meanwhile 100,000 Vietnamese troops was announced in deployment by their government.

4. the war started at the border, and ended 100km north of Hanoi,capital of Vietnam by a pre-scheduled withdraw of PLA, coz unlike indians did in East Pakistan, China didn't go for Vietnamese land. the mission,though in name of counterattack against ceaseless Vietnamese raids at the border, was indeed for Cambodia.

during the PLA advance into Vietnam, cities including Cao Bang, Lao Cai and Lang Son were occupied. they remain Vietnamese cities so far but there were not any effective military recovery made by Vietnam forces throughout the war.

and in the aftermath, a 1999 bilateral pact resulted in land which China had claimed at the border belt being given back to China.

could those be achieved by a 30% loss or 70% casuality of Chinese troops?

use your brain.

Not hijack really.

Just set records straight.

Read through the thread.

The extract is from what is taken generally as a credible source. Click the link. The figures are not mine!

Indeed counterattack, teach a lesson, all homilies to deflect pure and naked aggression! If they were 100km North of Hanoi, surely they were not there to find French perfume.

India left Bangladesh immediately once the Bangladeshis stabilised.

China had to quit Vietnam because they were stalled, their logistics were stretched and they were mauled.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Although communist China had backed North Vietnam in its struggle against South Vietnam and the United States, the Chinese and Vietnamese were traditional enemies; tensions between the two increased when Vietnam strengthened its ties with the Soviet Union, invaded Laos and Cambodia (Kampuchea) in late 1978, and expelled Chinese living in Vietnam. On February 17, 1979, some 120,000 well-equipped Chinese troops crossed the border into northern Vietnam in several places and seized control of several towns; they penetrated 25 miles into Vietnamese territory, encountering stiff resistance. Divisions from Vietnamese occupying forces in Cambodia arrived to reinforce the resistance, which was unable, however, to prevent the Chinese capture of Lang Son, a vital center in Vietnam's northern provinces, on March 3, 1979. About the same time, a separate Chinese force reached the coastal town of Quang Yen, some 100 miles from Hanoi, after several days of fierce fighting against Vietnamese units. Meanwhile, Vietnamese counteroffensives across the border into China's Yunnan province were repulsed. Declaring its punitive military operation against Vietnam a success, China began withdrawing its forces about March 6, 1979, and within two weeks they were all back on Chinese territory. Subsequently, there were many exchanges of fire along the Chinese-Vietnamese border and numerous talks to reach an accord, but no treaty or settlement was concluded.

China Vietnam War 1979

Also:

http://www.pon.harvard.edu/hnp/teaching/curricula/china-vietnam.pdf

Cookie Absent

 

[gpit]

Although communist China had backed North Vietnam in its struggle against South Vietnam and the United States, the Chinese and Vietnamese were traditional enemies; tensions between the two increased when Vietnam strengthened its ties with the Soviet Union, invaded Laos and Cambodia (Kampuchea) in late 1978, and expelled Chinese living in Vietnam. On February 17, 1979, some 120,000 well-equipped Chinese troops crossed the border into northern Vietnam in several places and seized control of several towns; they penetrated 25 miles into Vietnamese territory, encountering stiff resistance. Divisions from Vietnamese occupying forces in Cambodia arrived to reinforce the resistance, which was unable, however, to prevent the Chinese capture of Lang Son, a vital center in Vietnam's northern provinces, on March 3, 1979. About the same time, a separate Chinese force reached the coastal town of Quang Yen, some 100 miles from Hanoi, after several days of fierce fighting against Vietnamese units. Meanwhile, Vietnamese counteroffensives across the border into China's Yunnan province were repulsed. Declaring its punitive military operation against Vietnam a success, China began withdrawing its forces about March 6, 1979, and within two weeks they were all back on Chinese territory. Subsequently, there were many exchanges of fire along the Chinese-Vietnamese border and numerous talks to reach an accord, but no treaty or settlement was concluded.

China Vietnam War 1979

Also:

http://www.pon.harvard.edu/hnp/teaching/curricula/china-vietnam.pdf

Cookie Absent

Your ignorance (and that of some of your links) is so laughable to any person aware of two-side stories.

But, would you please refrain from venting your understandable vehement by posting irrelevant stuffs on this China and BD thread?

If you (or whoever) feel that the need is so urgent and the record has to be set straight, and that you are truly unable to withhold your torrid passion of trumpeting Vietnamese victory, you should open a new thread.

Before you post anything, however, please think 3 times or more (with your brain, not with your little toe, though), among other facts, why China did not use air and navy force in the conflict.