What's new

This Indian Land Is Chinese Land

Status
Not open for further replies.
hmmm. here i'll make this very clear about tibet being independent

"Tibet is a part of the People's Republic of China. It is an autonomous region of the People's Republic of China. Tibetan culture and Buddhism are part of Chinese culture. Many young Chinese like Tibetan culture as a tradition of China." - quote from the Dalai Lama

so as you can see, the area being a part of tibet mean its a part of china get the logic now?

Thats exactly what i wanted u to say :sniper:

The same Dalia lama has declared that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India.
 
Dude, he stays in India! What else can he say? India will kick his ***

Understandable But look at the previous post its not me who quoted the Dalai lama :cheers:
 
Understandable But look at the previous post its not me who quoted the Dalai lama :cheers:

let me take this one step further then, since tibet is a part of china as all world governments currently agree and as i have shown you.

then the dalai lama is not a national leader who can define borders.

^^if you understand the above then you can see that whether that land is chinese or indian he has no authority to say. understand now? even if we totally throw out everything he says the status of tibet is still not in doubt as i have shown you.

also if you dont mind can i have a source where he says Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India? i havent been able to find one.
 
wow AZADPAKISTAN2009!!

Along with Nepal, "Anchar Perdesh!!!" and Tibet, you could add some northern and north eastern parts of India as well. Ofcourse, dont forget those South-East Asians too!
I've seen some South Americans who kinda look like Japanese... and they in turn kinda look like the Chinese!
So shall we add the Japanese, Koreans and South Americans as well?
I'm sure if we stretch our imagination some more, all the world could be acceded to the Chinese.

You may get an award from the Chinese for having the most flexible spine! :victory:
Way to go!

How about other way around. All of chinese people look like people in Arunachal Pradesh by the same logic whole of China, korea, Japan, mongolia belongs to India. :rofl::rofl:

Why dont people think before writing? :hitwall::hitwall:
 
wow AZADPAKISTAN2009!!

Along with Nepal, "Anchar Perdesh!!!" and Tibet, you could add some northern and north eastern parts of India as well. Ofcourse, dont forget those South-East Asians too!
I've seen some South Americans who kinda look like Japanese... and they in turn kinda look like the Chinese!
So shall we add the Japanese, Koreans and South Americans as well?
I'm sure if we stretch our imagination some more, all the world could be acceded to the Chinese.

You may get an award from the Chinese for having the most flexible spine! :victory:
Way to go!


Well modern day Japanese were , origionally from China who migrated to Japanese lands - and over time and centuries they evolved with a distinct culture and textual language

But , most of the Northern India is all Asian looking people.

I don't see what the problem is its not like China is asking for Kerala or Delhi , they just want the parts that belong to it

Same old British , joke , they leave , and they make sure they leave some problems teritorial disputes so other nations would never get over that problem -

I actually am new to this whole China vs India thing ... :blink: they used to be very quiet friend untill US gave India Nuclear technology deal so China became active again wrong move

Peoples Republic Of China is #1 Economy and Nation in world now:coffee:

I mean but the issue with Chinese territories occupied by India is of course more relevant closer to our times problem.

I don't know how the regional ppl feel about it again I am new to this regional conflict issue
 
if indian do not give back the TANGWANG and south-tibet ,China will cut
the Yarluzangbur river (Indian call it Brahmaputra river), India people PLS remember 1962 Sino-India war, we like peace,but we dislike the person who take China’s land
 
if indian do not give back the TANGWANG and south-tibet ,China will cut
the Yarluzangbur river (Indian call it Brahmaputra river), India people PLS remember 1962 Sino-India war, we like peace,but we dislike the person who take China’s land

Well obviously if our chinese brother said that the river is called
Yarluzangbur river , it can't be called Brahmaputra?

Can it ? It does not even sound similar - I am with the chinese friend on this one ...

Yarluzangbur river sounds better too.

Just out of curiosity just when exactly did we had this name transition take place let me guess during british empire time ?
 
if indian do not give back the TANGWANG and south-tibet ,China will cut
the Yarluzangbur river (Indian call it Brahmaputra river), India people PLS remember 1962 Sino-India war, we like peace,but we dislike the person who take China’s land

it is not just india in the downstream area
 
if indian do not give back the TANGWANG and south-tibet ,China will cut
the Yarluzangbur river (Indian call it Brahmaputra river), India people PLS remember 1962 Sino-India war, we like peace,but we dislike the person who take China’s land

Have you forgotten how Japs raped your forefathers? Shut up and stop flaming. The only war you won was against India, I agree to that. What about Vietnam, Japan, Phillipines, Russia. Have the guts? No you don't. With stealing missile technology from US to Europe, from copying from even a III rated variety of rice, to making fake drugs, you guys sure made money, but good for none.

Today, many Indians occupy top posts in the Obama administration, tell me one Chinese doing the same? You cannot, because there ain't any.

We won't give Tawang, won't give nothing, go and cry now in front of your commie papa Hu Phu Phu!!!
 
Have you forgotten how Japs raped your forefathers? Shut up and stop flaming. The only war you won was against India, I agree to that. What about Vietnam, Japan, Phillipines, Russia. Have the guts? No you don't. With stealing missile technology from US to Europe, from copying from even a III rated variety of rice, to making fake drugs, you guys sure made money, but good for none.

Today, many Indians occupy top posts in the Obama administration, tell me one Chinese doing the same? You cannot, because there ain't any.

We won't give Tawang, won't give nothing, go and cry now in front of your commie papa Hu Phu Phu!!!

Oh yes, there are no Chinese in the top post of Obama's

administration ?

(1) Gary Locke=Commerce Secretary.
> High Post ?
(2)Stephen Chu=Secretary of energy.

U.S. President Obama appointed former Washington State Governor, Gary Locke, to the post of Commerce Secretary today. Locke will be the second Asian American to join the top White House brass, after Stephen Chu - who became the Secretary of Energy in January.
Another Asian American gets cabinet post in Obama administration - Shanghaiist

A frog in a well like you, not only embarrased youself, but also your

fellow countrymen. Please Learn some history before shooting trash,

1962 will always be a nightmare for you , live with shame for the

rest of your life. Priceless !!:smitten::pakistan::china:
 
Have you forgotten how Japs raped your forefathers? Shut up and stop flaming. The only war you won was against India, I agree to that. What about Vietnam, Japan, Phillipines, Russia. Have the guts? No you don't. With stealing missile technology from US to Europe, from copying from even a III rated variety of rice, to making fake drugs, you guys sure made money, but good for none.

Today, many Indians occupy top posts in the Obama administration, tell me one Chinese doing the same? You cannot, because there ain't any.

We won't give Tawang, won't give nothing, go and cry now in front of your commie papa Hu Phu Phu!!!

Adrenalin kiddo, you need to pipe down. The accomplishment of Indian Americans/Canadians are not your accomplishment. Whenever you feel the adrenalin pumping, just remember that. And 33% of NASA are not staffed by South Asians - and this is not to diminish the contribution of Indian-originated scientists.

I for one hold the opinion that China doesn't need Tawang. And China most definitely will not "dam" the Brahmaputra.

Words fly and temper flairs. Some high-level posturing definitely is ongoing - with Yanks feeling a little less self-confident, PRC appreciating the need to fan some flames for internal reasons, Saffronists getting a little cocky with their international brigades making waves, and Pakistan going through a quasi-civil war and may need a "second front" to keep the "enemy" tied up.

Some posturing may even be "necessary" - but let's not get side-tracked here. Even though we all do not all agree to what the "end" may be, but most things are means to an "end".

You need to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff - even in the rhetorical realm.

Same to the boy: don't over-do it.

:cheers:
 
India, China and water security​

More than one year ago, China announced plans to build a series of dams in Tibet, including a hydel power generation plant at Zangmu on the middle reaches of the Brahmaputra. The plan was part of a larger initiative by Beijing to tap Himalayan rivers for hydropower. Tibet’s rivers have remained largely untapped because of the difficult terrain, but with improvements in technology in the past decade, China’s leaders have embarked on a damming spree in the mounta ins of Tibet and Yunnan in the southwest.

The plans will have an impact on the lives of millions in seven countries that lie downstream of these rivers — India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and Thailand. The dams on the Salween river in Yunnan, by some reports, have already resulted in flooding in the Mekong region downstream. How concerned should India, which lies downstream on the Brahmaputra, be? Work on the Brahmaputra, or Yarlung-Tsangpo as it is known in Tibet, is still in the early stages. China’s projects on this river are of two kinds — one, for hydel power generation, and the more ambitious kind, still in the works, a massive diversion project that envisages diverting the river’s waters to the arid north.

The Zangmu project, which has been in the news in India recently, was publicly announced a year ago, and the contract awarded this March. Some reports have alleged that Beijing was going back on its commitment to India to not divert the Brahmaputra. The Zangmu site is essentially a hydel power project — a ‘run of the river’ power generation project, which experts say is no cause for alarm as it will have little impact on the course of the river downstream.

The real worry for India, experts and officials say, is when China embarks on its diversion plan. The mammoth $62 billion “South-to-North Water Diversion” project, currently embroiled in debates and delays in Beijing, is the centrepiece of the Chinese government’s plans to address its northern water crisis. The spreading water crisis, which already affects more than half of the country’s 660 cities, is largely sourced in its strikingly uneven distribution of water resources. The arid north and northwest, home to 35 per cent of the population, has only 7 per cent of the country’s water resources.

The diversion project, first mooted by Mao Zedong in the 1950s, involves diverting water from the south to the north along three routes. The central and middle routes, which have no impact on India, will divert water from the Yangtze river to Beijing and Tianjin in the north. The western route, from the Brahmaputra, is the most ambitious and is of huge consequence to India and Bangladesh. It involves building a dam on the ‘great bend’ of the Brahmaputra — the spot where the river does a u-turn of sorts and begins its journey east to India.

Work has begun on the central and eastern routes. It is four years behind schedule because of increasing costs and problems with relocating millions of people along the routes. The eastern route will be completed by 2012, but has also been plagued with environmental problems. Officials said last week the government has begun to relocate 330,000 people along the central route, which also runs from the Yangtze.

The delays and costs of the first two routes have resulted in growing opposition to the western route, which is also the most technically complicated. Its fate is undecided. According to Wang Shucheng, former water resources Minister, Beijing is even considering abandoning the project. Technical feasibility studies are still under way. Mr. Wang argues that it is “unnecessary” and “infeasible” to include the Brahmaputra in the diversion project, and that the Yangtze was large enough to deal with the northern shortages. He has cautioned that the speed of the flow of the river, which is the world’s highest and fastest-flowing, would damage dams and embankments. The ‘bend’ is also an earthquake-prone zone.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh raised India’s concerns about the western route when he met with Chinese President Hu Jintao in Beijing in 2008. National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan told The Hindu in a recent interview India was following a “trust but verify” approach on the diversion project. “Our information is, and satellite pictures also show, that there is no work which has taken place,” he said. “As of now, we have not seen any evidence of them doing the great bend so to say.”

Kenneth Pomeranz, an expert on China’s water issues at the University of California Irvine, says it is “hard to get a handle on” on the Chinese’s government’s views on the western route. There is clear dissent within the Ministry of Water Resources, with Mr. Wang leading the arguments against the project. But others among China’s leaders, including President Hu (a hydraulic engineer by training) and the influential former President Jiang Zemin, are thought to back the project. “A lot of people in government see it as a risky project, and kind of hope other things come along that make it unnecessary,” he says. But avoiding the project, according to him, would require massive improvements in water conservation in the arid north, the equivalent of “fixing a million leaky taps.”

The problem for India, Mr. Pomeranz says, is China has all the leverage in the issue, with weak international laws and no robust water-sharing arrangements between the two countries. The pressing concern for New Delhi, experts say, is to begin to actively engage with Beijing on water sharing issues. India needs to institutionalise a sharing mechanism before it is too late, and before Beijing presents New Delhi with a fait accompli about its dams.

“There is no ‘water-sharing’ arrangement between India and China,” Ramaswamy Iyer, former Water Resources Secretary of the Government of India, said in an email message. “Water has not figured in the India-China talks. It is now included in the agenda.” But Mr. Iyer argues the issue needs to be given more attention, and made as important a part of the agenda as the border issue. From India’s point of view the point to consider, according to him, is the “quantum of possible diversion and the impact it would have on the flows to India.” Hydel projects would not affect India “if the waters are returned to the river after they pass through the turbines”, but the Indian government needed to “keep questioning China constantly on their plans.”

“The issue for India and China is that there is no understanding, no agreement, on international rivers,” says Brahma Chellaney of the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi. “Between India and Pakistan, we have a treaty which provides for third party arbitration and defines what the rules and no-go areas are. But between India and China, there is a huge vacuum which is not good for stability and water security.”

“The run of the river projects [such as Zangmu] are of lesser concern to India,” he added. “I’m surprised at seeing the news reports now, as it is not a new issue… China has every right to use water resources for energy. International norms allow any country upstream to do so. The Indus river water treaty allows India to do the same.” But even hydel projects could have potentially disastrous effects, he said, if there are many dams that are large enough to decrease flow, which is not the case at present. In Yunnan, China built four hydel power dams along the Salween, which many experts say resulted in flooding downstream in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.

Mr. Chellaney says the first requirement for India is “discuss and define what the no-go areas are, and arrive at basic rules,” something the two countries have not done. Officials have so far had three meetings through a working group mechanism that has been set up, but it does not have the mandate to come up with such a robust agreement. “As long as there are no institutional arrangements,” he observes, “India’s position depends on China basically coming to an agreement by doing us a favour. And that is not a position India should be in.”

this article should solve the debate on Building a dam on Brahmaputra :cheers: so lets all come back to the topic.

http://www.thehindu.com/2009/10/21/stories/2009102155830900.htm
 
let me take this one step further then, since tibet is a part of china as all world governments currently agree and as i have shown you.

then the dalai lama is not a national leader who can define borders.

^^if you understand the above then you can see that whether that land is chinese or indian he has no authority to say. understand now? even if we totally throw out everything he says the status of tibet is still not in doubt as i have shown you.

also if you dont mind can i have a source where he says Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India? i havent been able to find one.

sorry am wrong even i didn't find any links. I correct my previous statement.:angel: sorry
 
Adrenalin kiddo, you need to pipe down. The accomplishment of Indian Americans/Canadians are not your accomplishment. Whenever you feel the adrenalin pumping, just remember that. And 33% of NASA are not staffed by South Asians - and this is not to diminish the contribution of Indian-originated scientists.

I for one hold the opinion that China doesn't need Tawang. And China most definitely will not "dam" the Brahmaputra.

Words fly and temper flairs. Some high-level posturing definitely is ongoing - with Yanks feeling a little less self-confident, PRC appreciating the need to fan some flames for internal reasons, Saffronists getting a little cocky with their international brigades making waves, and Pakistan going through a quasi-civil war and may need a "second front" to keep the "enemy" tied up.

Some posturing may even be "necessary" - but let's not get side-tracked here. Even though we all do not all agree to what the "end" may be, but most things are means to an "end".

You need to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff - even in the rhetorical realm.

Same to the boy: don't over-do it.

:cheers:


The way you explain your position and prove your point... terrific dude!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom