What's new

Dalai Lama: ‘I Am a Son of India’

CardSharp said:
Sorry I don't remember deltacamelately and I'm sure it wasn't a deliberate snub.

Also if there was a consensus already who am I to argue?

One of the participants of the discussion was Officer of Engineers (the same guy at World Affairs Board), he's actually met Zhou Enlai, you might want to check on that discussion (posting links to other forums is not allowed but google should bring it up)


As for the post by deltacamelately on your thread

deltacamelately said:
Food for thought -

1. One wonders, if the PRC had NOT annexed Tibet, would there be territorial disputes between India and the PRC?

2. When the PRC DID annex Tibet and if India refused to accept Chinese claims over Tibet, would the PRC still dispute McMahon's line or try to muster Indian support for recognition?

3. Was the "Forward Policy" militarily realistic?

4. While the Indian Army was definitely outgunned and out manouvered, did they really fail to offer battle?

5. Considering that the IAF had relatively better resources at its disposal in the war-zone than its counterpart, with more airstips than the PLAF could muster, would the IAF's employment and subsequent attacks on the PLA's logistics decide a different outcome of the debacle?

6. Does ANYBODY till date know, which PLA regiments were involved?

7. Does ANYBODY has any realistic data on the PLA's casualities?

8. Do people understand that the PLA had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC?

9. Do people know that while the PLA had collapsed its LOC, two completely fresh, IA Divisions were rushing north?

.......
 
"Can you find that post? "

Food for thought -

1. One wonders, if the PRC had NOT annexed Tibet, would there be territorial disputes between India and the PRC?

2. When the PRC DID annex Tibet and if India refused to accept Chinese claims over Tibet, would the PRC still dispute McMahon's line or try to muster Indian support for recognition?

3. Was the "Forward Policy" militarily realistic?

4. While the Indian Army was definitely outgunned and out manouvered, did they really fail to offer battle?

5. Considering that the IAF had relatively better resources at its disposal in the war-zone than its counterpart, with more airstips than the PLAF could muster, would the IAF's employment and subsequent attacks on the PLA's logistics decide a different outcome of the debacle?

6. Does ANYBODY till date know, which PLA regiments were involved?

7. Does ANYBODY has any realistic data on the PLA's casualities?

8. Do people understand that the PLA had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC?

9. Do people know that while the PLA had collapsed its LOC, two completely fresh, IA Divisions were rushing north?

10. Would it be better to call the 1962 war, a propaganda victory rather than a military victory?

11. Which military rushes with its tail between the legs to its pre-war positions, after making substantial territorial gains?
 
Are you being sarcastic?

No PLA were a bunch of nice tooth fairies who just wanted India to be more realistic so they annexed Arunachal and when they saw India learned her lesson they granted them a wish. But silly Indians couldn't come up with a wish on consensus(you know incompetent leaders and hell lotta diversity). So PLA just smiled and handed over Arunachal (and a candy with that) to India.

And they happily lived ever after.
 
Wow, Indians now trying so hard to deny "history" yeah, may be Indians really won the 1962 war, your GOI was so kind, not to disclose the "Henderson report" even after half a decade as a friendly guesture not to embarrass China eh?:lol:

ic-1.gif


Forty years ago, the Indian nation was convulsed by fear and eventual humiliation as its army was vanquished by the Chinese People's Liberation Army in a bitter and cold battle in the Northeast.

Forty years later, India has repaired its relationship with the Chinese to some extent, but those wounds have not been forgotten.

Excuses have been thrown up for the military debacle. India was ill prepared; it believed in non-violence; it trusted the Chinese and in 'Hindi-Chini bhai bhai'. Fingers have been pointed, most famously at then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, defence minister Krishna Menon, and Lieutenant General B N Kaul, who was in charge of the army on India's eastern frontier.

Forty years later, few know the real story of what happened, what went wrong. Successive governments have refused to release the Henderson-Brooks report that investigated the lapses of 1962. :tup:
rediff.com: The India-China War, 40 Years On

Hopefully some sane Indians will question why GOI still refused to disclose the "Henderson-Brooks" report 48 yrs after the war. :azn:
 
You know what, I think I probably did actually ignore deltacomelately. Some of the questions he asked are readily available in current scholarship about that war (or found easily enough in my university library) and as for his other questions....well....


6. Does ANYBODY till date know, which PLA regiments were involved?

7. Does ANYBODY has any realistic data on the PLA's casualities?

These can be found in both western, indian and renewly release Chinese sources (PLA officer memoirs) and they agree. Also number 7 is the age old "imply they are lying" trick.


and these following questions are leading questions implying statements.

Examples of leadings questions. Leading Questions

9. Do people know that while the PLA had collapsed its LOC, two completely fresh, IA Divisions were rushing north?

Implies two division coming to the east. I have yet to hear even mention of two fresh divisions in any of the sources I've flipped through(if you have sources, I'd be interested in seeing them). As far as I know military resistance ceased on the whole of the eastern sector.

8. Do people understand that the PLA had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC?

Implies or basically shouts at you that the PLA was done anyways and I really have no idea what he considers to be "had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC". I really think the PLA planned and conducted a short campaign. It didn't lay more logistics than it needed and it definitely wasn't planning protracted offensive or an occupation.


11. Which military rushes with its tail between the legs to its pre-war positions, after making substantial territorial gains?

Military professional, petty shot taking, but we all have our bias I guess and the human mind does what it does to compensate for a loss of pride.

10. Would it be better to call the 1962 war, a propaganda victory rather than a military victory?

The Officer of Engineer argument. Right? Look just because he is ethnically Chinese doesn't mean that he isn't eager to put a sympathetic spin on things (as an officer of Chinese descent, there is the propensity to be more catholic than the pope) No military historian will look back on this as anything but a tactical victory. We can talk about its geo-strategic implications but what happened afterwards can hardly be called a political win for China.


4. While the Indian Army was definitely outgunned and out manouvered, did they really fail to offer battle?

Another leading question, and also outgunned? absolutely not. The order of battle (military historical term for laying out the units involved in a battle) that I found in a couple of the histories from the Indian side, all indicate about a 20% numerical superiority for the PLA but compensated by Indian heavy weapons companies, artillery and a light tank battalion.


5. Considering that the IAF had relatively better resources at its disposal in the war-zone than its counterpart, with more airstips than the PLAF could muster, would the IAF's employment and subsequent attacks on the PLA's logistics decide a different outcome of the debacle?

Another one of those questions that already begs an answer. He's saying if we used all of our forces we would have kicked yourass.


and lastly these question.
1. One wonders, if the PRC had NOT annexed Tibet, would there be territorial disputes between India and the PRC?2. When the PRC DID annex Tibet and if India refused to accept Chinese claims over Tibet, would the PRC still dispute McMahon's line or try to muster Indian support for recognition?

3. Was the "Forward Policy" militarily realistic?

interesting and worthy of debate, but those questions were "would have been's and could have been's" even as the 62 war kicked off.


The question he asked here weren't open ended questions that could have a diversity of answer (thus sparking debate). What he did here was shout his opinion at us using questions. If he had ask them in spirit of impartial discourse I would have reciprocated, but as such I bit my tongue and moved on for the sake of debate, which was the right choice, considering the input I got from Mr. Joe Shearer and Popeye and various others.
 
Wow, Indians now trying so hard to deny "history" yeah, may be Indians really won the 1962 war, your GOI was so kind, not to disclose the "Henderson report" even after half a decade as a friendly guesture not to embarrass China eh?:lol:

ic-1.gif


Forty years ago, the Indian nation was convulsed by fear and eventual humiliation as its army was vanquished by the Chinese People's Liberation Army in a bitter and cold battle in the Northeast.

Forty years later, India has repaired its relationship with the Chinese to some extent, but those wounds have not been forgotten.

Excuses have been thrown up for the military debacle. India was ill prepared; it believed in non-violence; it trusted the Chinese and in 'Hindi-Chini bhai bhai'. Fingers have been pointed, most famously at then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, defence minister Krishna Menon, and Lieutenant General B N Kaul, who was in charge of the army on India's eastern frontier.

Forty years later, few know the real story of what happened, what went wrong. Successive governments have refused to release the Henderson-Brooks report that investigated the lapses of 1962. :tup:
rediff.com: The India-China War, 40 Years On

Hopefully some sane Indians will question why GOI still refused to disclose the "Henderson-Brooks" report 48 yrs after the war. :azn:

Are you PMSing? Nobody doubts that the PLA won the war, and the reasons have been analyzed to death.
 
No PLA were a bunch of nice tooth fairies who just wanted India to be more realistic so they annexed Arunachal and when they saw India learned her lesson they granted them a wish. But silly Indians couldn't come up with a wish on consensus(you know incompetent leaders and hell lotta diversity). So PLA just smiled and handed over Arunachal (and a candy with that) to India.

And they happily lived ever after.

I don't expect everyone to share my version, but most non-Indian accounts (western) paint a very different picture than the one you probably believe.
 
Implies or basically shouts at you that the PLA was done anyways and I really have no idea what he considers to be "had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC". I really think the PLA planned and conducted a short campaign. It didn't lay more logistics than it needed and it definitely wasn't planning protracted offensive or an occupation.

So here you're basically contradicting your previous statement.

If you think that PLA wasn't planning for any prolonged conflict and occupation, then they have just acted out of their doctrine. There's no benevolence or good will gesture, but just plain, cold directives given to them by their higher authority, which according to you was already on paper long before the war came to it's end.
 
INDIANS ARE REAL HYPOCRATES..............................dalai lama is nothing more than indian puppet in india and india can,t get any thing more than wordly fun from him. Actually india is getting really jealous from China,s growing influence in the region so in order to counter it she plays such cards but of no use ....:china::china::china:
 
@CardSharp

I had highlighted points 8 & 9, the rest were his personal opinions (no point debating that if he's not present)

8. Do people understand that the PLA had COMPLETELY collapsed its own LOC?

9. Do people know that while the PLA had collapsed its LOC, two completely fresh, IA Divisions were rushing north?

Abir can shed more light on the supply line collapsing part
 
Back
Top Bottom