"India will take decades to catch up with China's military capabilities." Prof. Harsh V. Pant

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Pakistan shall remain indepted to two Indian leaders: 1) Nehru, for opening a can of worms, with China and initiating a totally unnecessary conflict, with it 2) Modi, for reigniting the conflict, and putting his foot on the tail of dragon

You said you read a lot on 1962 war. What were the sources? List the books and other items that you read.

 

[SIPRA]

You said you read a lot on 1962 war. What were the sources? List the books and other items that you read.

1) Dalvi 1969 Himalayan Blunder
2) Garver 2003 China's Decision for War with India in 1962
3) Hershberg 2011 Quietly Encouraging Quasi-Alignment
4) Kaul 1967 The Untold Story
5) McGarr 2011 India's Rasputin
6) Neville Maxwell 1970 India's China War
7) Neville Maxwell 2011 How the Chinese Saw the Conflict
8) Ramachandra Guha 2011 Jawaharlal Nehru and China
9) Shiv Kunal Verma 2016 1962 - The War That Wasn't

 

[mazeto]

Been looking at your responses throughout, I sometime wonder are you actually Indian or just trolling with false flags? Everyone seems to point good and bad about their own country, but you seem to never point anything good but always critical and mocking. I remember you mentioned you are from NE (manipur, IIRC). But I highly doubt that. I was born in NE, studied in Arunachal, I can't comprehend your responses of always trolling India.

He is a pakka manipuri, not false flag. Most Indians don't know that the strongest feeling for Independence is in Manipur, not Kashmir or Nagaland as they suppose. A major cause of Kashmiri separatism is religion, as in not wanting to live under a kuffar. A large number of their fighters are religious warriors from abroad. They wouldn't mind living under a Muslim india.
Similarly Naga insurgency partly derives from their Christian identity. Still they are negotiating autonomy within india.
In contrast notice Meitei insurgents typically don't care to negotiate on anything other than independence? They are based in a small valley eminently suitable for COIN operations but still manage to thrive there. This inspite of them sharing Hindu religious identity with the mainstream. Nor do they have foreign sympathizers( like Nagas) or godfathers ( eg Kashmir).
Hence Manipuri independence movement is the purest independence movement in India. This may help explain this posters response.

 

[SIPRA]

He is a pakka manipuri, ....

Is there a "katcha" Manipuri, as well? Is it Manipuri or some "amrood".

 

[peagle]

1) Dalvi 1969 Himalayan Blunder
2) Garver 2003 China's Decision for War with India in 1962
3) Hershberg 2011 Quietly Encouraging Quasi-Alignment
4) Kaul 1967 The Untold Story
5) McGarr 2011 India's Rasputin
6) Neville Maxwell 1970 India's China War
7) Neville Maxwell 2011 How the Chinese Saw the Conflict
8) Ramachandra Guha 2011 Jawaharlal Nehru and China
9) Shiv Kunal Verma 2016 1962 - The War That Wasn't

There's a recent book JFK's forgotten crises, Bruce riedel.

Extremely interesting book, well worth the read. He is an India lover and Pakistan hater, so you'll need to ignore his venom towards Pakistan, few misinterpretations of historical events regarding Pakistan.

I also heard him in an interview that I have not been able to find again, that the Americans threatened China to back off via it's embassy in Poland, and readied it forces in the Philippines to show China that America will intervene if China does not back off.


The book starts with a meeting between Ayub and Kennedy, where Kennedy promised Ayub that he will not supply weapons to India without discussing with Pakistan first, this clarification was needed because Pakistan was an allied nation, and Kennedy had made anti China and pro India statements before his presidency.

When India was getting a beating In 1962, American delivered nearly a billion dollars worth of weapons right to the front lines, feeding the Indian army. And, discouraged Pakistan from attacking in return for a negotiated settlement of issues.

 

[SIPRA]

There's a recent book JFK's forgotten crises, Bruce riedel.

Extremely interesting book, well worth the read. He is an India lover and Pakistan hater, so you'll need to ignore his venom towards Pakistan, few misinterpretations of historical events regarding Pakistan.

I also heard him in an interview that I have not been able to find again, that the Americans threatened China to back off via it's embassy in Poland, and readied it forces in the Philippines to show China that America will intervene if China does not back off.


The book starts with a meeting between Ayub and Kennedy, where Kennedy promised Ayub that he will not supply weapons to India without discussing with Pakistan first, this clarification was needed because Pakistan was an allied nation, and Kennedy had made anti China and pro India statements before his presidency.

When India was getting a beating In 1962, American delivered nearly a billion dollars worth of weapons right to the front lines, feeding the Indian army. And, discouraged Pakistan from attacking in return for a negotiated settlement of issues.

Thanks. I have not read this book; but I have gone through it's some excerpts, reproduced in certain articles. Of course, it is a very important historical document, about machinations of US viz a viz China and Pakistan, in that crucial period.

Bruce is an old fox. His revelations about Nawaz Sharif & Co, in the wake of Kargil Conflict, are also very illuminating.

 

[peagle]

Thanks. I have not read this book; but I have gone through it's some excerpts, reproduced in certain articles. Of course, it is a very important historical document, about machinations of US viz a viz China and Pakistan, in that crucial period.

Bruce is an old fox. His revelations about Nawaz Sharif & Co, in the wake of Kargil Conflict, are also very illuminating.

I have read and heard his account of that event, when Clinton was in touch with Vajpayee whilst negotiating with Nawaz, I think they call it blackmail.

Although, I find his retelling a bit dramatic and packed with few lies to make Pakistan look bad. The most glaring stupidity being the potential for nuclear use. How the heck could nuclear weapons have even been considered when there was no full blown war. It was a border skirmish akin to the Siachen glacier conflict.

If it had turned into a full blown hot war, then one could entertain that this story might be true, depending on the war outcome, but to claim nuclear option came into play for a border skirmish is utterly stupid and people are idiots to have believed such lies.

The fact Pakistan was not losing at that time makes this story even more incredible, most of the Pakistani loses occurred while withdrawing its forces, not when the conflict was active. It is just a shame that our stupid analyst buy into sensationalism. This is the same point we discussed before, original thinking is a crime among Pakistanis.

 

[SABRE]

"India will take decades to catch up with China's military capabilities." Prof. Harsh V. Pant

Lady's voice at the end though ...

 

[SIPRA]

I have read and heard his account of that event, when Clinton was in touch with Vajpayee whilst negotiating with Nawaz, I think they call it blackmail.

Although, I find his retelling a bit dramatic and packed with few lies to make Pakistan look bad. The most glaring stupidity being the potential for nuclear use. How the heck could nuclear weapons have even been considered when there was no full blown war. It was a border skirmish akin to the Siachen glacier conflict.

If it had turned into a full blown hot war, then one could entertain that this story might be true, depending on the war outcome, but to claim nuclear option came into play for a border skirmish is utterly stupid and people are idiots to have believed such lies.

The fact Pakistan was not losing at that time makes this story even more incredible, most of the Pakistani loses occurred while withdrawing its forces, not when the conflict was active. It is just a shame that our stupid analyst buy into sensationalism. This is the same point we discussed before, original thinking is a crime among Pakistanis.

Right, you are, as far as broader issues are concerned. I was referring to his claim that Mian wanted to have a one-to-one meeting with Clinton, which he plainly declined. Clinton ensured that Bruce is present there. Second, that Mian was shit scared of Army takeover; and his principal concern was to somehow get an assurance from US, that his government wouldn't be toppled. "Mulk jaaye bhaarh main".

 

[peagle]

Right, you are, as far as broader issues are concerned. I was referring to his claim that Mian wanted to have a one-to-one meeting with Clinton, which he plainly declined. Clinton ensured that Bruce is present there. Second, that Mian was shit scared of Army takeover; and his principal concern was to somehow get an assurance from US, that his government wouldn't be toppled. "Mulk jaaye bhaarh main".

I understand.
But, personally I have started to view our political leaders little less harshly. Allow me to explain why.

The Nawaz of 1990s was different to modern day Nawaz, I think it is an important point to highlight. He was and is a dumb "fker", but I do believe his heart was in the right place back then, although he was way out of his comfort zone or his capabilities.

I still hate Bhutto, but I cannot ignore the good he did for Pakistan.
I used to hate Benazir, I still dislike her but do not hate her because there are things I did not know before. She played an important political role in the development of Pakistan's missile program. She was in exile due to Nawaz at the time of testing the bomb, even whilst living abroad she encouraged him to do it, did not play politics. She could have taken the approach of avenging her father, when she came back, but I recognise that she didn't. I can't help but respect that.

I've come to a conclusion that our political leaders are a bunch of flawed idiots, we have to recognise the good with the bad. The only red line being the one Nawaz is crossing nowadays, to my knowledge, no other major political leader has done what Nawaz has done recently, playing with the country to save his "God given right to rule", that is unforgivable.

 

[SIPRA]

I understand.
But, personally I have started to view our political leaders little less harshly. Allow me to explain why.

The Nawaz of 1990s was different to modern day Nawaz, I think it is an important point to highlight. He was and is a dumb "fker", but I do believe his heart was in the right place back then, although he was way out of his comfort zone or his capabilities.

I still hate Bhutto, but I cannot ignore the good he did for Pakistan.
I used to hate Benazir, I still dislike her but do not hate her because there are things I did not know before. She played an important political role in the development of Pakistan's missile program. She was in exile due to Nawaz at the time of testing the bomb, even whilst living abroad she encouraged him to do it, did not play politics. She could have taken the approach of avenging her father, when she came back, but I recognise that she didn't. I can't help but respect that.

I've come to a conclusion that our political leaders are a bunch of flawed idiots, we have to recognise the good with the bad. The only red line being the one Nawaz is crossing nowadays, to my knowledge, no other major political leader has done what Nawaz has done recently, playing with the country to save his "God given right to rule", that is unforgivable.

I understand, what you are saying; though I don't agree to it. In my opinion, Nawaz & Co, Zardari & Co, Altaf & Co., Mulla Fuzla & Co. etc. etc. etc. are nothing more than a bunch of criminals, and, above that, these people don't give a damn to, what happens to Pakistan. They are mere political mafias, to serve their personal and family interests. They are utterly devoid of any chatacter or broader conviction, of any type, whatsoever. Yes, they possess a capability to fool a large numbers of people. This is their strength. As, for ZAB, BB, Zia, I hold my judgement. In any case, they are no more in this transient world.

 

[Shotgunner51]

He is a pakka manipuri, not false flag. Most Indians don't know that the strongest feeling for Independence is in Manipur, not Kashmir or Nagaland as they suppose. A major cause of Kashmiri separatism is religion, as in not wanting to live under a kuffar. A large number of their fighters are religious warriors from abroad. They wouldn't mind living under a Muslim india.
Similarly Naga insurgency partly derives from their Christian identity. Still they are negotiating autonomy within india.
In contrast notice Meitei insurgents typically don't care to negotiate on anything other than independence? They are based in a small valley eminently suitable for COIN operations but still manage to thrive there. This inspite of them sharing Hindu religious identity with the mainstream. Nor do they have foreign sympathizers( like Nagas) or godfathers ( eg Kashmir).
Hence Manipuri independence movement is the purest independence movement in India. This may help explain this posters response.

Good to know, I guess a lot of Chinese like me have limited knowledge about complexity of India. Are these people (regions), say Manipur, Kashmir, Naga and Meitei (pls correct me if I've used wrong vocab) hostile towards China like the typical group (or mainstream like you've described)?

 

[SIPRA]

Good to know, I guess a lot of Chinese like me have limited knowledge about complexity of India. Are these people (regions), say Manipur, Kashmir, Naga and Meitei (pls correct me if I've used wrong vocab) hostile towards China like the typical group (or mainstream like you've described)?

China can separate these areas and people, from India, whenever it likes. It has all the capability and circumstances are ripe. If China doesn't want to do it, it is her choice and strategy.

 

[Shotgunner51]

China can separate these areas and people, from India, whenever it likes. It has all the capability and circumstances are ripe. If China doesn't want to do it, it is her choice and strategy.

Bro no matter what policymaker does I think it's useful for the public to know more about the enemy state especially the geographically and socially diversified ones. Some content on PDF does get translated and used in China. I bet most Chinese folks here have good knowledge about enemy states like US, Canada, Australia and such, but obviously not about India.

 

[peagle]

I understand, what you are saying; though I don't agree to it. In my opinion, Nawaz & Co, Zardari & Co, Altaf & Co., Mulla Fuzla & Co. etc. etc. etc. are nothing more than a bunch of criminals, and, above that, these people don't give a damn to, what happens to Pakistan. They are mere political mafias, to serve their personal and family interests. They are utterly devoid of any chatacter or broader conviction, of any type, whatsoever. Yes, they possess a capability to fool a large numbers of people. This is their strength. As, for ZAB, BB, Zia, I hold my judgement. In any case, they are no more in this transient world.

It will be interesting to explore this further in an another thread. I think @Mangus Ortus Novem will have interesting insights as well.

I agree with what you say, the difference in my viewpoint is how you deal with the situation. If we both of you are interested, I'll open a thread in about a week or so. I need to think about it as well.