Why China never attacked again after 1962?

[Chhatrapati]

Because first of all our new new leaders have no idea about that Indian is occupying lands which belong to us.

Even moon belongs to China. Based on the story of moon princess. (Logic applied on Tibet).

Nothing special here.

 

[淼淼De微笑]

excuse me !!

I just want to quote the indian who i often provide bones to ,but don't know why you were quoted too.
There must be someting wrong.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

The Chinese themselves think the 1962 war was a stupid move on their part.

Like "open lies" in India. Please let it stay in India. India's lowly lies can't be logically reasoning.

Even moon belongs to China. Based on the story of moon princess. (Logic applied on Tibet).

Nothing special here.

So India is a British colony. Does India have the right to inherit British rule over Australia?

1. Sikkim was never really disputed as far as I know. It was always a British protectorate which became an Indian protectorate and after some trouble between a political party there and the Chogyal - the integration happened.

In 62, China was well prepared. Also in 1962 the two major powers - USA and USSR were locked at the same time in the Cuban Missile Crisis. As soon as the Crisis was over, Kennedy sent military aid. Also, Krishna Menon didn't use the Air Force in 62 which itself is bizarre.

Stars aligned for China in 1962. They had more men, better weapons. This was not the case in other conflicts.

Hey, India baby, I know your history knowledge is 0, but I need to remind you not to forget the Korean War (1951-1953). China VS 17 country.

Why doesn't India use the air force at 1962? LOL. Macarthur told me - India air force?????? I hope India can withstand massive retaliation by the Chinese air force.

Similarly, China had atomic bombs in 1967 and hydrogen bombs in 1969. China never thinks of India as an enemy. Because - Chinese people look down on India, always.

The provocations equal to or even graver than those in 1962 have occurred in the later years. In 1962, India merely established some forward posts. In later episodes India was more pro-active.

Example 1: The 1967 Nathu La clash

Example 2: The annexation of Sikkim in 1975

Example 3: The Sumdorong Chu standoff in 1986-87

Example 4: The Doklam standoff

In these instances, China retreated after giving a lot of warnings. Compare this with the well-prepared attack over the entire front of India-China border in 1962. Why was it so?

1, once again reminded the indian members, don't forget to Nehru's "forward policy"

2, From Taiwan view, the 1962 war only "punishment". The Chinese government's definition of this war is "self defense and counterattack"（对印自卫反击战）. China has enough capacity to occupy Delhi, just like PLA occupied Seoul in 1951. We just don't want to turn "counterattack" into "aggression".

3, So my problem is —— "China sneak attack on India" in 1962, why does India not counter attack China's "aggression"?

 

[Jackdaws]

Like "open lies" in India. Please let it stay in India. India's lowly lies can't be logically reasoning.


So India is a British colony. Does India have the right to inherit British rule over Australia?


Hey, India baby, I know your history knowledge is 0, but I need to remind you not to forget the Korean War (1951-1953). China VS 17 country.

Why doesn't India use the air force at 1962? LOL. Macarthur told me - India air force?????? I hope India can withstand massive retaliation by the Chinese air force.

Similarly, China had atomic bombs in 1967 and hydrogen bombs in 1969. China never thinks of India as an enemy. Because - Chinese people look down on India, always.


1, once again reminded the indian members, don't forget to Nehru's "forward policy"

2, From Taiwan view, the 1962 war only "punishment". The Chinese government's definition of this war is "self defense and counterattack"（对印自卫反击战）. China has enough capacity to occupy Delhi, just like PLA occupied Seoul in 1951. We just don't want to turn "counterattack" into "aggression".

3, So my problem is —— "China sneak attack on India" in 1962, why does India not counter attack China's "aggression"?

Hey China baby, I know your knowledge of history is as pathetic as your English. Try sticking to the topic and writing in comprehensible English. Haha

 

[SBUS-CXK]

Hey China baby, I know your knowledge of history is as pathetic as your English. Try sticking to the topic and writing in comprehensible English. Haha

ah, india baby, don't you insist on your lies?

 

[Jackdaws]

ah, india baby, don't you insist on your lies?

Is that supposed to mean something in English? Come on, try again. Good Chinese baby.

 

[大汉奸柳传志]

we thought India would break into pieces after the 1962 defeat but much to our surprise that didn't happen, in fact some of the separatist movements which have been running rampant in India were laid to rest after 62. the union stood together more firmly than ever before. till today many Chinese strategic thinkers are still baffled by it, that is why since then China has been very hesitant to use force on India - if a war can not weaken your opponent no matter the outcome then what‘s the point of fight it

 

[El Sidd]

I just want to quote the indian who i often provide bones to ,but don't know why you were quoted too.
There must be someting wrong.

you should report the glitch like i did

 

[Chhatrapati]

So India is a British colony. Does India have the right to inherit British rule over Australia?

Like HK? I guess so.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

Like HK? I guess so.

Oh no, HK is Qing leased to Britain, and its sovereignty has always belonged to China.

So who "leased" India to Britain?

 

[Chhatrapati]

Oh no, HK is Qing leased to Britain, and its sovereignty has always belonged to China.

So who "leased" India to Britain?

Nobody did actually.

 

[Areesh]

Oh no, HK is Qing leased to Britain, and its sovereignty has always belonged to China.

So who "leased" India to Britain?

Leave the bharati alone. He knows sh!t about history like any other bharati.

 

[faithfulguy]

Nobody did actually.

True. No body can lease India to Britain. As India never existed as a country prior to British created it. Like US, Australia and Canada, India was founded by British people. As we can see, English is the language that their constitution is written in.

This has nothing to do with colonialism but creation.
Vietnam was colonized by France. But Vietnamese constitution was written in Vietnamese as Vietnam existed as a country before French arrival. India never existed. So their constitution was written in English.

 

[Trango Towers]

Nobody wants a billion refugees

Especially one that don't know what a toilet is for

 

[Chhatrapati]

True. No body can lease India to Britain. As India never existed as a country prior to British created it. Like US, Australia and Canada, India was founded by British people. As we can see, English is the language that their constitution is written in.

This has nothing to do with colonialism but creation.
Vietnam was colonized by France. But Vietnamese constitution was written in Vietnamese as Vietnam existed as a country before French arrival. India never existed. So their constitution was written in English.

First part is typical Pakistani style talks. Which is obvious.

And Vietnam is a monolinguistic nation. India is not, we can't enforce one language on another and end up like your country. Also what matters is not the method or language but the constitution. Ironically enough you are speaking on behalf of a country ruling with a western ideology known as communism. Now spin