Recent Sino-Indian border conflict

[Han Patriot]

I don't know about the rest of your analysis, but China doesn't have to open its mouth with fanboys like you around.

Indians are famous for talking alot loudly.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Indians are famous for talking alot loudly.

And Chinese are famous for listening quietly and speaking only when they must, with the minimum of superlatives.

 

[Han Patriot]

Why else would Indian troops leave? The territory India had placed troops in was disputed between China and Bhutan. So Bhutanese withdrew and requested India to take over those positions. With the situation resolved, we can leave. This is common sense.

China is building roads in undisputed Chinese territory. You can build anything you want in your territory, simply not in disputed territory.

Because if you didn't withdraw from Doklam, there will be some fried chapatis? And now to persuade China to stop reinforcing troops in Doklam, you are withdrawing. If you had shown some diplomacy early on, I believe China might have actually accepted Indian request out of good will, but you sent in troops instead. India asked for a 'mutual withdrawal', but there are still Chinese troops there. The only concession is a postponement to road construction in return for defacto annexation of Doklam. Well done India.

 

[Han Patriot]

They’ve agreed to your territorial demands so much that there are still 1000 Chinese soldiers in Doklam who are constructing the road as we speak. Passing the burden to Bhutan is indicative of India’s weak position ... why transfer the work to a weaker party who shows no interest for India’s claims ...

That was the plan from day one, they were stuck in a situation where they couldn't withdraw. Now they are passing the shit to Bhutan after stirring it up. China was actually contemplating exchanging territories with Bhutan for Doklam, don't think we need to do it now since it's practically under Chinese occupation.

 

[randomradio]

Because if you didn't withdraw from Doklam, there will be some fried chapatis? And now to persuade China to stop reinforcing troops in Doklam, you are withdrawing. If you had shown some diplomacy early on, I believe China might have actually accepted Indian request out of good will, but you sent in troops instead. India asked for a 'mutual withdrawal', but there are still Chinese troops there. The only concession is a postponement to road construction in return for defacto annexation of Doklam. Well done India.

We have 300,000 troops in the region, 90000 are right next door. You can reinforce the area with how many ever troops you want, they will only add to PLA's casualties.

There has been mutual withdrawal. There are no Chinese troops there. There is no defacto annexation of Doklam either. China is no longer on the plateau. The only thing allowed there is Chinese and Bhutanese patrols, as was the status before the crisis.

If China reenters Doklam, Indian troops will come back, we are only 500m away.

 

[samsara]

Jealousy is killing! But reality is undeniable!

Whether one likes it or not, yet the reality is obvious that China has been attaining substantial progresses within the the last five years... and in all sectors.

When a nation is able to move the majority of 1,400,000,000 people to the much better lives and at the same time keeps on developing at very high pace in all sectors to be the champions, there is only one class word to depict it.

The Miracle! Miraculous!!

Perhaps Xi Jinping is very much destined to take the great role as one among the several China's great[est] modern statesmen:

• Dr. Sun Yat-sen or more popularly known as Sun Zhong-san 孙中山 in China as the Founder of the First Republic (ROC) and co-founder of Guomindang (Kuomintang or the Nationalist Party of China) and carried out the pioneering works of the embryonic modern China's statehood incl. in the overseas, abandoned the millennia-long dynastic (imperial) ruling (unfortunately he's shortlived).
• Mao Zedong 毛泽东 as the Great Unifier of modern China, provided the nation a foundation to live on, prevented the Middle Kingdom from falling apart into several smaller and weaker countries.
• Zhou Enlai 周恩来 as the Great Administrator and Diplomat, a key figure who stabilised the nation even during the crisis period.
• Deng Xiaoping 邓小平 as the Father of China's Reformation & Modernization.

And one day in the future the Chinese people may be able to add up President Xi Jinping's name 习近平 in the Chinese glorious history as the Father of China's Great Rejuvenation that catapulted the Middle Kingdom into the pinnacle of its civilization in the 21st century. Time-limit leadership is definitely not an absolute matter... not a religious dogma! Nation should be able to adapt its value and guidelines (rules and regulations) to give opportunity to a great leader who may not, or will not, come out in every era!

Well, a nation is very fortunate and much blessed to have a great leader to steer up the "Giant Mother-ship" across the oceans and great waves to its projected destination...

Personally I have much trust into President Xi and think he's a great leader for China... definitely exceeds his predecessors President Jiang and Hu!

Xi is truly a man who aspire to make China the great, strong and prosperous nation... and he has clear plans to realize such ideas!!! [ Unlike the empty words of MAGA ]
。

 

[Han Patriot]

We have 300,000 troops in the region, 90000 are right next door. You can reinforce the area with how many ever troops you want, they will only add to PLA's casualties.

There has been mutual withdrawal. There are no Chinese troops there. There is no defacto annexation of Doklam either. China is no longer on the plateau. The only thing allowed there is Chinese and Bhutanese patrols, as was the status before the crisis.

If China reenters Doklam, Indian troops will come back, we are only 500m away.

300K underfed, under equiped soldiers? . You think only you have thousands of soldiers bhai? If wars are won by numbers alone, India wouldn't have withdrawn right? So why did you withdraw if you are so 'powderful'?

There are no Chinese troops there? Even your own media admit we are there. You government didn't even dare mention the word 'mutual withdrawal'. There used to be Bhutanese and Chinese patrols, you just changed it to Chinese troops permanently stationed there. Had you approached this issue with diplomacy instead of trying to be SUPA POWA, China would have actually given concessions to India to maintain good relationship.

You are not 500meters away, you are only 100 meters away, so are the Chinese in DOKLAM. Do you dare cross the border now? . We are building roads in Doklam, so what can you do now? OOOO right, shift the goal post to only the road to the south is not allowed? Previously it was

1) No troops
2) Mutual withdrawal
3) No roads

Did China give a fck? The only reason we are giving you postponement is to give Modi some face since he withdrew and came kowtowing during BRICS.

 

[Han Patriot]

You need enough IQ for this topic, you don't have enough. So let's end it.

Bhai, no point arguing anymore, now the cat is out of the bag. You are still withdrawing even after China upped the ante in Doklam. There never was any agreement on 'mutual withdrawal', there was only Indian withdrawal followed by a buffer distance to reduce tension, that's the real 'disengagement'. When your MEA said the status quo didn't change near the stand off area, of course it didn't change, the Chinese troops are still there and the road building is still postponed. Instead the equipment is now used to enhance the other route through senche-la. China will definitely wait for this to die down, to give Modi face. He did hand us Doklam after all, we didn't even need to swap territories with Bhutan now. Great isn't it?

Previously Indians didn't even admit there were already completed all weather roads on the plateau. Now they know the truth, military grade roads had already been completed till Doka-La, that's essentially the whole damn plateau. Btw, there are actually two routes, there is another route through senche-la. Shocking isn't it?

When it comes to China, India is always the loser, be it in trade or politics. We are a determined, coordinated and well funded entity while you are the exact opposite.

 

[Han Patriot]

It's true that India has many more soldiers than China in the disputed sector. But logistics dictate that only a small percentage of that 300,000 can actually be used effectively in combat. Realistically speaking, only a couple thousand Indians would engage a similar number of Chinese soldiers should conflict arise ... it would be impossible to strike with hundreds of thousands of troops given the poor state of infrastructure around the Himalayas. China could also reinforce their position with tens of thousands of more troops, but it would be of little use to them and they know it. Hence, China feels safe to deter the Indians with just a couple thousand soldiers ... despite the Indians outnumbering them by a long shot. Regarding the "mutual withdraw", there was no such thing ... there are still hundreds of Chinese soldiers in the disputed area finishing the road as we speak. India knows it but they can do very little ... the best thing for them to do now is to beef up their own defenses, especially around Siliguri Corridor.

You can have a million soldiers but that mountain pass can only accommodate that many soldiers, why do you think China is not crazily sending in soldiers. Warfare will be precision warfare at high altitude. The bulk of Indian soldiers are located on the Indian plains below the plateau, their purpose is to deter Chinese invasion of the NE, not to defend the high altitude plateaus like Doklam.

 

[Figaro]

You can have a million soldiers but that mountain pass can only accommodate that many soldiers, why do you think China is not crazily sending in soldiers. Warfare will be precision warfare at high altitude. The bulk of Indian soldiers are located on the Indian plains below the plateau, their purpose is to deter Chinese invasion of the NE, not to defend the high altitude plateaus like Doklam.

If India loses Doklam, it would drastically hinder their efforts to defend the corridor. Then, China would be able to capture the lowlands and cut off northeastern India. That's why defending high ground such as the Doklam plateau is so important for them ... and the reason why they illegally trespassed to stop road construction. And once again, I'm not saying that India will send hundreds of thousands of soldiers to fight are on the mountains ... only specialized soldiers can fight on the mountain passes. But there's no doubt that the high ground around Doklam is central to India's defensive strategy ... otherwise, they would be in imminent danger from a Chinese invasion.

 

[Han Patriot]

If India loses Doklam, it would drastically hinder their efforts to defend the corridor. Then, China would be able to capture the lowlands and cut off northeastern India. That's why defending high ground such as the Doklam plateau is so important for them ... and the reason why they illegally trespassed to stop road construction. And once again, I'm not saying that India will send hundreds of thousands of soldiers to fight are on the mountains ... only specialized soldiers can fight on the mountain passes. But there's no doubt that the high ground around Doklam is central to India's defensive strategy ... otherwise, they would be in imminent danger from a Chinese invasion.

Agreed. China can essentially just shell them from Doklam and those 300K soldiers will be roasted chapatis. These geniuses are still thinking having numerical advantage is great. With Doklam in hand, we can now start militarizing it. Air bases, heli bases, radar bases and permanent missile installations. Bhutan is now essentially a non-actor...don't think we need to swap anything with them now. They were stupid enough to trust a third world supa powa like India who abandoned them.

 

[Figaro]

Agreed. China can essentially just shell them from Doklam and those 300K soldiers will be roasted chapatis. These geniuses are still thinking having numerical advantage is great. With Doklam in hand, we can now start militarizing it. Air bases, heli bases, radar bases and permanent missile installations. Bhutan is now essentially a non-actor...don't think we need to swap anything with them now. They were stupid enough to trust a third world supa powa like India who abandoned them.

Bhutan doesn't trust India because it wants to. Bhutan is basically a protectorate of India; its diplomacy and economics are completely dictated by the likes of Delhi. India doesn't even allow its vassal state to have any sort of diplomacy with the five permanent security council members ... that's why Bhutan was very hesitant to support India's side during the Doklam dispute. If you read anything Bhutanese publications, all of them are much more worried about an Indian military occupation than any Chinese invasion. Regarding the supposed Indian numerical advantage, even if one assumes that they magically make it over the border to China, they would run out of supplies and succumb to the winter very quickly as there is only one road linking Doklam to the nearest Tibetan city (Yadong, Road S204). It will be a repeat of Napoleon's 1812 Russian invasion, except with much more severe consequences. On the contrary, all China needs to do is concentrate their forces to secure Indian positions on the plateau and capture the narrow corridor. Back in 1962, Indian politicians and military leaders were afraid that China was actually going to capture New Delhi, so much so that they began moving governmental offices out. Now just imagine the ensuing panic if China manages to isolate northeastern India ... the path to Delhi will be blown wide open. That's why India backed down this August; had they not, China would've likely overwhelmed the Indians with artillery/mountain troops and secured this vital passage. Unfortunately for India, they have a significant geographical disadvantage when it comes to both the eastern and western sectors ... and there's nothing they can really do about it other than moving a bunch of troops to this area.

 

[Figaro]

I don't care whether China takes India a threat or all together ignore India. In an ideal situation, I would like good relations with China. But if China cast any eye on India's or its allies territory be ready for the consequences.

I don't think China wants to view India as a threat either. Unfortunately, India has taken this for granted and decided to intrude into Chinese territory back in June. If you want to maintain good relations with your neighbor, why would you decide to infringe on their sovereignty? I understand India was worried about the road construction; but that does not mean unlawfully trespassing into China's territory to accomplish that. The Chinese had every right to eject India by forceful means, but they didn't (which the Indians should be thankful for). If you're worried about Chinese road constructing altering the status quo, reinforce your defenses in your own territory. While China has shown restraint this time, I highly doubt they will be this kind again if India decides to repeat its actions in the future. The only reason why India to withdraw was due to threats of an imminent war with China.

 

[TaiShang]

Indians are famous for talking alot loudly.

Indian government (a reflection of its people) is an attention seeker. At any cost.

Just give it verbal assurance of greatness, it will behave.

And China stands as a pinnacle for receiving verbal assurance. But China is not as wordy as the West in making eulogies.

Hence Indian government's frustration and attempts to elicit forced recognition.

 

[grey boy 2]

Not to mention this "5 years" of our Air-force (中国空军这五年！飞向更高远天空)