Visualize Bangladesh in event of escalated regional military complications

[fallstuff]

I can reply to you just like you did, in a disrespectful manner too. But then I want maintain the difference.
Your attitude to a country and its soldiers which supported the struggle for your very existence is shameful.
If Mukti Bahini was so effective why was it unable to stop the large scale genocide? Why were the people flocking towards Indian borders?
We don't expect you to be grateful for the help my friend, but unexplained hate and display of cheap attitude for no clear reason is just a bit too much to take.
TKc

You are not the first Indian walking this street with a clear lack of knowledge, I am afraid positively, you are not the last one !

 

[eastwatch]

I can reply to you just like you did, in a disrespectful manner too. But then I want maintain the difference.
Your attitude to a country and its soldiers which supported the struggle for your very existence is shameful.
If Mukti Bahini was so effective why was it unable to stop the large scale genocide? Why were the people flocking towards Indian borders?
We don't expect you to be grateful for the help my friend, but unexplained hate and display of cheap attitude for no clear reason is just a bit too much to take.
TKc

I am not disrespectful to India for the kind of assistance we received from it. But, I am showing my disgust at the way Indian posters show disrespect to our brave Mukti Bahini troops. We were killed in many lakhs. And only 1300 Indian troops died in that war in 1971.

What is your idea about your small number of deaths? Why it is so small? If you do not know the answer, then read it here. It was because our people fought at the front line and your troops only followed our troops giving us long-range supports. However, the combined strength had cracked the Pakistani Army.

But, if you think we were just a bunch of onlookers when Pakistan army was killing many of our HINDUs, you are a fool. But, to fight against an well equipped military machine supported by our DESHI Razakars, you need people with comparable arms and military training.

Did our civilians in 1971, or your Indian civilians at any moment of time, are trained like a professional army? Did our civilians had anything more than spears (ballam) and single-barrel guns in their hands? Did our police had anything more than .303 rifles.

So, how do you expect them to win over a formidable enemy equipped with the most modern weapons supplied by the Americans in a few weeks? By the way, if you do not have this much of knowledge about military warfare, then please do not engage us with this kind of debate. It is a waste of time. Learn the basics and grow up a little, then come with posts.

 

[leonblack08]

......But it is highly unlikely that any of these Giants will let BD be neutral.So to remain neutral we need a strong military to act as a deterrent. Perhaps, you can not be more correct.

.........P.S. : All the above replies are my opinion, so not all are necessarily right. Yet most will be agreed by many. Interestingly true that China will not demand much of Bangladesh nor perhaps it will require Ctg Port to use.

However, do you feel that a CN-IN conflict will necessarily go nuclear ? China and India together comprise 40% of humanity. Any nuke that will hit India’s upper mainland, will generate radio-active materials that will wash down to Bangladesh through rivers. So, that 40% will now expand further. Pakistan, Nepal & Sri Lanka also very likely will not be spared.

On the other hand, peace cannot be taken for granted among these 2 ambitious countries with fastest growing militaries of the world. The chance for these two countries to develop peacefully and fulfill their national interests without entering into competition is getting smaller due to internal social pressures and rising nationalism. Only solace is that both have matured leaderships at the respective helms, and China so far has not shown any imperialistic attitude yet.

In view of above, to the very worst, perhaps a ‘limited’ war is in order to be thought as ‘probable'. I will appreciate your further comment after you give the point a re-thinking.

As regards to dams/barrages—by one-sided plan and implementation by India on commonly shared rivers—that are inflicting heavy distress to Bangladesh is one of the formidable stumbling blocks to normalize relationship between India and Bangladesh. You rightly think that we should not be tempted to undertake any opportunistic deft move. But how do you see that we can get rid of that strangulation ever ?

Regarding the nuke:
Once again speaking Hypothetically:

1. In first case,

In conventional warfare,China will most probably defeat India and thus capture most of its land.Perhaps even reaching the capital.
So when does one use nukes?

It is at this moment that India will be tempted to use Nuke or any biological,chemical weapon to tilt the balance of the war.Otherwise they won't be able to save their motherland.And once one nuke is fired,it will have domino effect.


India and China both have nuclear submarines.India is on the process of getting its Arihant ready.
Both have SLBMs,which can be launched from any where from deep ocean.

So even if China manages to dismantle and capture all India's nukes through conventional war,it still is in risk of being attacked by these SLBMs with nuclear warheads.

When Motherland is being invaded,Generals will not think about how many people gets killed or where the radiation spreads.



2.In second case,

In the future,India and China,might at that point be both on par in terms of conventional warfare.So generals trying to gain advantage,might opt for nukes to blow up an entire division of tanks or artillery or infantry of the approaching opposition.

Also fearing the nuke attack by the opposition,one might chose to attack first to level the opposition's capability to strike again.

And this is not new,If we remember correctly,Israel launched a preemptive attack on Egypt fearing attacks by Arab countries in the Six day war.
Similar case is possible here too.

If there is a technological advancement like creating a web of Anti Ballistic Missile or using Laser to destroy Missiles en route,then the opposition Generals might rethink about using nukes.Because using will be wasting.

So this is my belief that any large scale war between the two will definitely see nukes unless it is a small scale border skirmish.

We can't keep nukes out of the equation when these two giants fight.That's why I believe its unlikely there will be any HOT war.



And regarding dams..

I think there isn't an alternative to dialogues and discussions.May be going to UN and spending millions on lawyers will help.Creating awareness in the world through media and humanitarian groups.Lobbying Uncle Sam and other world leaders to side with us.

These are all we can do,unless off course we acquire Nukes and build a POWERFUL military(rivalling Indian military),both of which are Highly unlikely even in distant future.

 

[eastwatch]

BTW, I think if IAF will use BD skies without our consent and if AL will in power, then our ministers will say that it's mistake by IA as we have long boundary. Also I doubt that how much any BD govt, especially, AL govt will protest?

Any govt, AL or BNP, will protest only when the population protest.

 

[third eye]

I am not disrespectful to India for the kind of assistance we received from it. But, I am showing my disgust at the way Indian posters show disrespect to our brave Mukti Bahini troops. We were killed in many lakhs. And only 1300 Indian troops died in that war in 1971.

What is your idea about your small number of deaths? Why it is so small? If you do not know the answer, then read it here. It was because our people fought at the front line and your troops only followed our troops giving us long-range supports. However, the combined strength had cracked the Pakistani Army.

But, if you think we were just a bunch of onlookers when Pakistan army was killing many of our HINDUs, you are a fool. But, to fight against an well equipped military machine supported by our DESHI Razakars, you need people with comparable arms and military training.

Did our civilians in 1971, or your Indian civilians at any moment of time, are trained like a professional army? Did our civilians had anything more than spears (ballam) and single-barrel guns in their hands? Did our police had anything more than .303 rifles.

So, how do you expect them to win over a formidable enemy equipped with the most modern weapons supplied by the Americans in a few weeks? By the way, if you do not have this much of knowledge about military warfare, then please do not engage us with this kind of debate. It is a waste of time. Learn the basics and grow up a little, then come with posts.

EW,

There is no way the importance & relevance of Mukti Bahini & before them those who had the courage to stand up & resist can be taken lightly.

If they hadn't the courage to resist nothing would have happened in the first place. The fact that they were weak as compared to an organised military force actually makes them stronger for it needs a strong man to stand up against odds.

It was their strength & courage that led to the formation of BD, others helped only because they stood.

I hope this clears the air.

 

[leonblack08]

Flights of fancy.

It appears that for the Chinese, cutting the chicken neck off is like snatching candy from a 2 year old kid. Its like vini, vidi, vici for the Chinese.

Your entire hypothetical situation where BD would become important to India is one giant non-sequitur. It arises from a premise that China in recent or distant future will be able to pull something that they couldn’t even in 1962 when Indian Army was in complete disarray, and was essentially fighting AK-47 clones(?) with .303 bolt action rifles. Can you explain how would China completely run down NE and cut off the chicken neck at Shiliguri. Then explain how would China maintain an overstretched supply line near the chicken neck. Once you have done that, we can then begin to deliberate on BD's role in India's fight 'to regain control'.


I understand that it is nice to feel important every once in a while. But this illusion of grandeur is beyond ridiculous.

You know better about your country's establishments,but as far as I know,Indian NE isn't as well protected when compared to Western border.

1962 result is controversial,woudn't you agree on that?China declared unilateral ceasefire,so what does that imply?

And as for running down NE,I think Chinese help to NE rebels will keep Indian army busy enough, for them to launch an preemptive strike into India.Don't say NE rebels won't trouble Indian Army.We do read news about Naxals' misadventures.If they can do it,why not NE rebels?

You have to accept that,that geographically your weak point will be under attack at first.After that comes the question of China running down entire NE India.To cut down siliguri,one doesn't need to run down entire NE India.
They can even opt to cut through Bhutan.
I believe,China is mighty enough to cut a 40 km stretch of land within hours and hold the line for months.

And speak honestly,do you really have the same iron grip on NE India that you have on the Western front?

Regarding outstretched supply line,

I probably have also mentioned in my Hypothetical scenario that China will gain air superiority,so what's the problem of maintaining a long supply route.

Besides AFAIK,Chinese infrastructure near Indian border is better than India's.Correct me if I am wrong.


Now the topic of the thread is based on a Hypothetical scenario and what Bangladesh's role would be.So definitely I need to link my reply with Bangladesh's role.Its nothing about false feeling of importance.

And Yes there can be more than one possibilty,because this thread deals with Hypothesis.

But I would still bet that China will gain the upper hand in any conventional war with India on any day.

As I said earlier,Its my opinion so might not necessarily be correct.It might sound ridiculous to you,but not to me.

 

[Stumper]

@leon: Quoting you

India off course interfered,this is the main reason behind deterioration of Indo-BD realtion.

I believe this is a big mis-conception you need to get over. One of the reason India had to side up with single political party -- was not something of our choice. It was polarity in BD political system which shaped our BD policy. By Legacy, we have had reasons to counter Pakistan's influence on the islamist's in your political circles. China never had this dis-advantage to start with. So comparing BD-Ind and BD-China relationship is unfair without taking the pre-partition context.

India, has its own share of blames for its mis-handling of BD relationship. But both BD and India are EQUALLY responsible for the state we are in today. Lack of a deep maturity on Ind's part and turbulent/non consistent Ind policy on BD's part , have been the catalyst.

What i'm however happy to see is , both the countries have started a mature relationship which respect each other's concern's. As with all diplomatic relationship, it wont be a short-easy road .. but both the Governments have a trust relationship which needs to be matured carefully.

 

[third eye]

I dont understand why these separatist groups use English Name? Any thought?

Its quite simple actually .

The foreign govts who support & finance them find it easier to pronounce and write their names in English.

Or else they might remit funds in the wrong account !

 

[leonblack08]

@leon: Quoting you

I believe this is a big mis-conception you need to get over. One of the reason India had to side up with single political party -- was not something of our choice. It was polarity in BD political system which shaped our BD policy. By Legacy, we have had reasons to counter Pakistan's influence on the islamist's in your political circles. China never had this dis-advantage to start with. So comparing BD-Ind and BD-China relationship is unfair without taking the pre-partition context.

India, has its own share of blames for its mis-handling of BD relationship. But both BD and India are EQUALLY responsible for the state we are in today. Lack of a deep maturity on Ind's part and turbulent/non consistent Ind policy on BD's part , have been the catalyst.

What i'm however happy to see is , both the countries have started a mature relationship which respect each other's concern's. As with all diplomatic relationship, it wont be a short-easy road .. but both the Governments have a trust relationship which needs to be matured carefully.

I get your point Stumper,but we may be drifting away from the thread.

But I would like to point out that,the early interference by India to solidify its grip on Bangladesh actually caused resentment.

Indian leaders misunderstood Bangladeshis' psychology.We might have been allies in the war,but we did not trust you completely.That is because it takes time to build trust.

But Indian leaders in a hasty move wanted the result ASAP.That's why you see the backfire.This intervention and people's resentment actually allowed the Razakars in BD to gain support for them.Ironically India's move turned against it.

As you rightly pointed out the immaturity of Indian leaders.


Regarding China,They were simply quick to see the opportunity and seize it.One can't compare the two,but one tends more to remember things in the recent past,not the things over 4 decades.

So Indian leaders needs to be mature when it comes to dealing with Bangladesh.

 

[Straight]

@leon: Quoting you

.........By Legacy, we have had reasons to counter Pakistan's influence on the islamist's in your political circles......

...... But both BD and India are EQUALLY responsible for the state we are in today........

I wish I could agree with you 100%, Stumper.

1. Countering Pakistan is your right and choice, but not through meddling in a 3rd party’s affairs—should be the policy.

People of Bangladesh did and will not like ever any outside influence even on Islamist’s presence in some parties. Nor you are required to worry on that. Let it be whichever way Bangladeshi likes. Even AL leaders are as Islamic as BNP’s, and plays all ‘Islam-loving’ tricks fully for political gains. While opportunity required, AL did in the past, and will collaborate in future with other Islamists (of this form or another), if required. If Islamists or few of them desire development of relationship with Pakistan, it is their choice and right, and that should not cause India to resort to ‘puppet installation’ for & through meddling—because it will backfire and defeat your basic purpose.

China overtly (we did not note any covert attempt either) never creates any hindrance when AL leans so angularly on India—but keep on promoting / strengthening its positive approach.

The solace for you should be that though Bangladesh population is still highly Islamic—yet they do not subscribe at large to un-Islamic terrorism in the name of Jihad. See how successfully JMB and other terror-minded groups have been nipped, and contained. The deadly efficient RAB could not do it alone without people’s co-operation.

2. You just can not be complacent only by dividing the blame equally on both India and Bangladesh, and then just sit there hand in hand with AL. Since it is India’s impatient act—in the tone of demand—that alienated Bangladeshis right at the dawn of independence, now again it should be India again to move forward pro-actively.

Having an one-eyed reliance and relationship with AL only (or with BNP only, for that matter) in fact will destroy India’s trust & credibility factor further with our general mass. AL (or BNP in such case)—instead of becoming an asset—will soon turn to be India’s huge liability in developing trust in B’desh people’s mind.

Leadership of India should show maturity by sticking to a Bangladesh people-oriented foreign policy (not any party-oriented) with due respect to their rights, and show it through packages of assistance & projects as China has done—no matter who (AL / BNP / XYZ) is in power.

 

[Skies]

Leadership of India should show maturity by sticking to a Bangladesh people-oriented foreign policy (not any party-oriented) with due respect to their rights, and show it through packages of assistance & projects as China has done—no matter who (AL / BNP / XYZ) is in power.

Problem!

I think, no other party will listen or work for India as exactly as AL does. Suppose India wants transit via BD and AL agreed to give it to them but other party will not want to give transit to India. So it is not possible for India to support other party instead of AL, cos it is not possible for India to take its full and extra (sometimes they look for only their benefit even that will harm BD) benefits from BD without help of AL. So, unfortunately, AL will always remain as India's first choice.

 

[Straight]

Problem!

I think, no other party will listen or work for India as exactly as AL does. Suppose India wants transit via BD and AL agreed to give it to them but other party will not want to give transit to India. So it is not possible for India to support other party instead of AL, cos it is not possible for India to take its full and extra (sometimes they look for only their benefit even that will harm BD) benefits from BD without help of AL. So, unfortunately, AL will always remain as India's first choice.

That is why I suggested 'Peolpe-oriented' policy to be undertaken. Under that India will have to 'give' something equitable first / simultaneously in accordance to B'deshi peolpes' aspiration / benefit before / while 'taking' something---which will be happily obliged by any party in power. That will be the key to developing mutual trust & relationship.

Sorry, for repeated detour---let us revert to the thread again.

 

[toxic_pus]

You know better about your country's establishments,but as far as I know,Indian NE isn't as well protected when compared to Western border.

It is irrelevant if NE is just as well protected as West. Question is, whether NE is adequately protected and such security measure is commensurate with the threat perception. We obviously feel threat to our West is far more real and present than in NE and hence lay our emphasis on West.

1962 result is controversial,woudn't you agree on that?China declared unilateral ceasefire,so what does that imply?

It implies that China knew its supply line was so stretched that its front line would fall apart in the event of a spirited counterattack. That Nehru didn’t allow such counterattack to happen and obliged the Chinese by accepting the cease fire is another story.

And as for running down NE,I think Chinese help to NE rebels will keep Indian army busy enough, for them to launch an preemptive strike into India.Don't say NE rebels won't trouble Indian Army.We do read news about Naxals' misadventures.If they can do it,why not NE rebels?

Firstly IA is not involved in handling ‘Naxal misadventures’ so you can’t really get a measure of how IA would react in case of NE just by looking at Naxals. Secondly, unlike Naxals, NE rebels are fractured, mostly fighting against one another and has much less support base. Unlike Naxal’s area of operation, NE presents a relatively small theatre. The heavy concentration of IA will also give much less room to NE rebels to maneuver. Either they will run to Bruma or to BD. They can at best be a nuisance to IA in the event of Indo-Sino conflict.

You read news all right, but I doubt if you can make any sense of it.

You have to accept that,that geographically your weak point will be under attack at first.After that comes the question of China running down entire NE India.To cut down siliguri,one doesn't need to run down entire NE India.
They can even opt to cut through Bhutan.
I believe,China is mighty enough [yes, they are just next to Allah] to cut a 40 km stretch of land within hours and hold the line for months.

Firstly where did you get 40 Km stretch, unless you are referring to the Chinese chicken neck between Sikkim and Bhutan. Secondly, although on map, Bhutan looks like a flat land with wriggly lines, it actually is mountainous terrain. Pray tell how would the ‘mighty’ Chinese cross 40 Km of mountainous terrain in matter of hours. Thirdly, if the Chinese are idiot enough to attack India by first crossing Bhutan, they would loose the element of surprise and give plenty of time to IA to take defensive measures.

And speak honestly,do you really have the same iron grip on NE India that you have on the Western front?

Yes

Regarding outstretched supply line,

I probably have also mentioned in my Hypothetical scenario that China will gain air superiority,so what's the problem of maintaining a long supply route.

Pray tell how China will establish complete air superiority over NE, operating mostly out of the heights of Tibet which restricts an aircraft to carry full load - either reduced fire power or reduced range. By numbers you say? Then do elaborate how many assets can they devote to India while maintaining adequate level of deterrence against Japan and US. Then elaborate if China is capable enough to maintain such a constant and steady aerial supply from Tibet, even if air superiority is acheived.

Besides AFAIK,Chinese infrastructure near Indian border is better than India's.Correct me if I am wrong.

In fact one of the thoughts behind not developing the border area was based on a lesson learnt in 1962. Bad infrastructure slows down the speed of advance, and if IA can hold strategic points the Chinese advance can actually be choked to death right on its heels.

Now the topic of the thread is based on a Hypothetical scenario and what Bangladesh's role would be.So definitely I need to link my reply with Bangladesh's role.Its nothing about false feeling of importance.

You had to contrive a completely unrealistic fantastical situation to highlight the importance of BD in a Indo-Sino conflict. It has that ‘false feeling of importance’ written all over it.

And Yes there can be more than one possibilty,because this thread deals with Hypothesis.

Even hypothesis should be based on reality. Just because it is hypothesis I am not going to involve the Plutonions.

But I would still bet that China will gain the upper hand in any conventional war with India on any day.

Seeing it coming from a person who is convinced that the Chinese can walk right into Delhi, I am not surprised

As I said earlier,Its my opinion so might not necessarily be correct.It might sound ridiculous to you,but not to me.

In order to capture entire NE and then cut off the chicken neck, you have narrated a strategy that would require the Chinese to do things no one has ever done before - attack another country first, then cross mountainous terrain at a phenomenal speed, achieve complete air superiority, and then continuously maintain aerial supply to a massive frontline. Your strategy itself makes it clear that taking over entire NE is anything but a piece of cake and yet you are convinced that the Chinese would walk right into Delhi. That’s why it is ridiculous.

 

[toxic_pus]

1. Countering Pakistan is your right and choice, but not through meddling in a 3rd party’s affairs—should be the policy.

People of Bangladesh did and will not like ever any outside influence even on Islamist’s presence in some parties. Nor you are required to worry on that. Let it be whichever way Bangladeshi likes. Even AL leaders are as Islamic as BNP’s, and plays all ‘Islam-loving’ tricks fully for political gains. While opportunity required, AL did in the past, and will collaborate in future with other Islamists (of this form or another), if required. If Islamists or few of them desire development of relationship with Pakistan, it is their choice and right, and that should not cause India to resort to ‘puppet installation’ for & through meddling—because it will backfire and defeat your basic purpose.

If it had remained restricted to just ‘relationship’ with Pakistan then there wouldn’t have been anything to worry about. It is the effect of this ‘relationship’ that makes us weary of the political parties of the likes of BNP. Now the question is why should India bother to care for a party that promotes anti-Indian activities.

BD people are free to vote anybody in power. But that doesn’t mean that we have to change our threat perception and give up taking appropriate measures.

One more thing - India has never made any ‘puppet installation’ in BD. It is a favourite canard of certain BDs to rationalize their sympathy for the anti-Indian elements in their society.

 

[leonblack08]

It implies that China knew its supply line was so stretched that its front line would fall apart in the event of a spirited counterattack. That Nehru didn’t allow such counterattack to happen and obliged the Chinese by accepting the cease fire is another story.

So you still think Chinese supply caravan is in same shape as it was in 1962?Ridiculous to think that way isn't it?

Firstly IA is not involved in handling ‘Naxal misadventures’ so you can’t really get a measure of how IA would react in case of NE just by looking at Naxals. Secondly, unlike Naxals, NE rebels are fractured, mostly fighting against one another and has much less support base. Unlike Naxal’s area of operation, NE presents a relatively small theatre. The heavy concentration of IA will also give much less room to NE rebels to maneuver. Either they will run to Bruma or to BD. They can at best be a nuisance to IA in the event of Indo-Sino conflict.

You read news all right, but I doubt if you can make any sense of it.

Yes Nuisance,and in times of war if they are supplied well by the Chinese,they can become a "very irritating nuisance".

Firstly where did you get 40 Km stretch, unless you are referring to the Chinese chicken neck between Sikkim and Bhutan. Secondly, although on map, Bhutan looks like a flat land with wriggly lines, it actually is mountainous terrain. Pray tell how would the ‘mighty’ Chinese cross 40 Km of mountainous terrain in matter of hours. Thirdly, if the Chinese are idiot enough to attack India by first crossing Bhutan, they would loose the element of surprise and give plenty of time to IA to take defensive measures.

Firstly,your pathetic attempt at humour that China is next to Allah,was in very bad taste.Jeta ke bole bikrito ruchi.
I hope you reconsider that.

Regarding use of adjectives,I termed both countries as Giants,why didn't you ridicule that too?Ah yes,because it makes India sound very important,how can you ridicule it,right?

Now on the topic,



I am mentioning about this:



Between Bangladesh and Nepal or between Bangladesh and Bhutan.That's not more than 40km,as far as I know.And that is mostly plain land,not mountainous.I said capturing that within hours.I did not say the entire operation would take hours.You can go back and check instead of distorting.

And are you into the belief that Chinese or any other opposition will only attack only in one straight formation?

Does the idea of Flanking ring any bells?

Do they need to sweep entire NE first to choke those points,as you are claiming?

Pray tell how China will establish complete air superiority over NE, operating mostly out of the heights of Tibet which restricts an aircraft to carry full load - either reduced fire power or reduced range. By numbers you say? Then do elaborate how many assets can they devote to India while maintaining adequate level of deterrence against Japan and US. Then elaborate if China is capable enough to maintain such a constant and steady aerial supply from Tibet, even if air superiority is acheived.
In fact one of the thoughts behind not developing the border area was based on a lesson learnt in 1962. Bad infrastructure slows down the speed of advance, and if IA can hold strategic points the Chinese advance can actually be choked to death right on its heels.
You had to contrive a completely unrealistic fantastical situation to highlight the importance of BD in a Indo-Sino conflict. It has that ‘false feeling of importance’ written all over it.

For the bold part,

How many assets can India afford to remove from the Western frontier?It is important to know because a Sino-Indo war will see Pakistani troops massing on the indo-Pak border.

Also keep in mind Chinese defence expenditure in 3 times that of India's.

Bad infrastructure slows down speed of advance,but it also slows down speed of reinforcement,In case your first line of defence is broken.

Now exactly how do you plan to Choke the Chinese?How do you know they have not planned any countermeasure for that bad infrastructure.May be another route or whatever.Please elaborate,since I am having to plan the entire Indian invasion for the Chinese.That too in a Hypothetical discussion.


Don't be shy,if an armchair General like me can construct a plan to invade India,so can you to "Choke them to death".

Even hypothesis should be based on reality. Just because it is hypothesis I am not going to involve the Plutonions.
Seeing it coming from a person who is convinced that the Chinese can walk right into Delhi, I am not surprised
In order to capture entire NE and then cut off the chicken neck, you have narrated a strategy that would require the Chinese to do things no one has ever done before - attack another country first, then cross mountainous terrain at a phenomenal speed, achieve complete air superiority, and then continuously maintain aerial supply to a massive frontline. Your strategy itself makes it clear that taking over entire NE is anything but a piece of cake and yet you are convinced that the Chinese would walk right into Delhi. That’s why it is ridiculous.

Achieving air superiority can also be done through destroying Air fields and aircrafts on the ground using cruise missiles.Now you got to give that to the Chinese,they got better and more missiles in their arsenal.

Since my Hypothesis is based on China attacking first,then simultaneous cruise missile attacks on NE air bases,followed by air strikes can very well do the job of reducing IAF capability.It has the surprise element too.


For the bold part,

When Blitzkrieg happened,Germany did it for the first time when no other country has ever done before.Were they ineffective?

You Know the Maginot line,it was supposed to be impenetrable or that sort.

You know the answer.

BTW German army at that time still used horse carts for supply,I just hope Chinese have a better mode of transport.



And regarding Hypothesis to be based on reality,

Did I say Bangladesh will cut off Indian chicken neck and NE India?Now that is ridiculous.
When some Indian general say they can take care of China and Pakistan simultaneously within days,that is ridiculous.Or are you an ardent believer of that theory?

China can cut off India's Chicken neck,and that's not absurd.Its a possibility and we are talking about possibility.You don't even want to believe that because your Ultra nationalistic mind is not allowing you to.

In order to capture entire NE and then cut off the chicken neck

You are distorting my words over and over again.I said the attack would be first targetted on the Chicken neck to block off reinforcement from rest of India.And other wings will perhaps simultaneously attack the defence establishments in rest of NE.

This has completely different meaning than what you wrote there.
Don't distort my words to your advantage.