Ladakh Flash Point

Mohsin77 said:

... Really?

Remind me again, how many centuries has "India" spent as a conquered entity? That is the "India" we are talking about, right? The same imagined ancient "India" that your Prime Minister keeps harping about? Because that "India" is probably the most conquered place on earth.

As for the list of conflicts in "modern" India you listed, it's funny how you used it to argue that your military isn't incompetent. Maybe you need to read that list again. Even against smaller countries like Pakistan, and even smaller countries like Sri Lanka, India has failed to establish its own political and strategic will on its own borders. India is the weakest large country in the history of large countries.

Click to expand...

You have no room to talk considering Pakistan has only lost territory since 1947. India, on the other hand, has won every war it fought in its independent history with the exception of 1962. While Pakistan lost nearly 2/3rds of JaK, Kargil heights, turtuk, Siachen, and obviously East Pakistan, while India has gained land by defeating a colonial empire to liberate goa, annexing Sikkim, the former NEFA(Arunachal Pradesh), the rest of the NE, and other areas. BTW, keep in mind that except 1971, all the Indo Pak wars were initiated by Pakistan with one specific purpose(you can guess what).

As for failing to impose strategic and political will on its borders, what has Pakistan done about Articel 370? Just over a year ago, your Prime Minister said no more talks. Well now, Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire that benefits India. This year there has been no infiltration, and as a result very few incidents in Kashmir. That sounds like exactly what India wants.



You can see for yourself how terrorism in Kashmir has fallen since Article 370 revocation



Anyway, back on topic, the Chinese Embassy statement makes it pretty clear, China objected to Indian infrastructure projects in the Valley, so China tried to shift the lac(dotted line) but failed.

If China's objective was to shift LAC even further west and presumably so it can shift the blue line west commensurately, then why would China disengage such a forward position at Pangong when it could obviously hold it without India escalating to war or pushing PLA out. Okay there is every chance India could have mobilised even more than PLA could put to this region and pushed PLA out with manpower. The thing is for nearly an entire year, they didn't.

If China's objective was to shift the LAC forward and control the remaining 20%, they wouldn't have done it this way. They would have sent monumentally significant volumes of military force to occupy up to LAC along all positions not just on Pangong. If China wanted to shift LAC and shift China's blue line of control forward to LAC, they would expect at least a shooting resistance to eventually come from India.

Everything about this shows that is absolutely nothing like the actual case. Just because a Chinese embassy made a statement bitching about Indian build up DOESN'T equate to actually meaning for a LAC shift. India has complained as well about the standoff pretty officially through mouthpieces and state sanctioned (approved) media pieces, while Modi himself refused to call it an issue and downplay it by saying the obvious "No Indian territory lost" line. Well this issue is over disputed land so yes.

If China's aim was to capture the remaining 20% they wouldn't be doing it this way. They'd simply do it. Occupy and take over the whole thing with all the forces backing the military occupation, while waiting for the first Indian shots and start the war. At the moment, PLA barely supplied western theatre with much backup like they're not believing this could really escalate... no serious PLA/PLAAF forces mobilised outside of tanks and the usual lower tier equipment. They occupied Pangong and negotiated with India for what it wants. They occupied Pangong because they were worried about increased Indian build up - they did complain right? And of course what they considered too many Indian patrols. After all, to China, a single Indian patrol along the disputed zone is one too many.

For India, it still claims Aksai Chin and that's threatening to China. Demarcating India still refuses because obviously if they did, they would lose Aksai Chin. Buffering the 20% is nearly the same practical result as demarcating for both India and China. China wants either one of the two and India refrains while still sitting inside the disputed stretch because vacating is one step towards making the rest a buffer just like on Pangong.

This is why some sections of Gogra Demchok etc are still engaged. India refuses to vacate disputed land and China won't leave because they want India off. The issue India faces is if it leaves, it's almost tacit acknowledgment of going with buffer just like on Pangong and losing claim for Aksai Chin. I mean if you can't enter a land 20km away from Aksai Chin, how can you salami slice your way to it or patrol or build up to it. That's why China desperately wants either a buffer or a demarcated line for good. That keeps India on its side and China on its own. While Aksai Chin is well within China's side so China is too happy to demarcate... I mean it has won now 80% of the disputed stretch since the first war fought over it. As things are, India still claims the full 100% old historic dispute and this worries China because it could potentially lose it if it's all still open ended and formally claimed.

China could potentially resolve this by offering India full sovereignty of the 20%... That means the territory between the LAC and the blue line on its east. I doubt that India may even take the offer. This is like saying "we'll let you have the remaining 20% if you formally stop claiming the other 80% we've controlled for the last 50 odd years but you must give it up officially and for good". I suspect China won't exactly offer this and even if it did, India may not even be happy taking it. However China's offers in the past to demarcate have been worse offers than this e.g. 1959 offer.

twineedle said:

You have no room to talk considering Pakistan has only lost territory since 1947. India, on the other hand, has won every war it fought in its independent history with the exception of 1962. While Pakistan lost nearly 2/3rds of JaK, Kargil heights, turtuk, Siachen, and obviously East Pakistan, while India has gained land by defeating a colonial empire to liberate goa, annexing Sikkim, the former NEFA(Arunachal Pradesh), the rest of the NE, and other areas. BTW, keep in mind that except 1971, all the Indo Pak wars were initiated by Pakistan with one specific purpose(you can guess what).

As for failing to impose strategic and political will on its borders, what has Pakistan done about Articel 370? Just over a year ago, your Prime Minister said no more talks. Well now, Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire that benefits India. This year there has been no infiltration, and as a result very few incidents in Kashmir. That sounds like exactly what India wants.



You can see for yourself how terrorism in Kashmir has fallen since Article 370 revocation

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

India "defeated" the colonial empire by having a poor old man starve himself for pity because India cannot fight. All of Pakistan is territory taken from India and you are here gloating about small territorial exchanges after that. This is a prime example of India losing swathes of territory and then saying they won and captured land when they get some scraps back. The last exchange between Pakistan and India saw India completely humiliated with a downed fighter, captured pilot, fratricide, proven lies about an F-16 shoot-down and all this to inflict no damage at all to any Pakistani forces.

twineedle said:

Anyway, back on topic, the Chinese Embassy statement makes it pretty clear, A China objected to Indian infrastructure projects in the Valley, so B China tried to shift the lac(dotted line) but failed.

Click to expand...

A and B have no logical connection. I can object to anything and then succeed or fail or do nothing afterwards. Only Indians who try to spin defeat into victory and land loss into land gain/status quo would even think to imagine such a relationship. Anything China wants to take, Indians have no power to stop. If China hasn't taken it, it is to show India mercy. And then Indians claim China "failed" just like whenever others return Indian POWS Indians claim it is out of fear of retribution when it is clearly out of kindness and mercy.

twineedle said:

You have no room to talk considering Pakistan has only lost territory since 1947.

Click to expand...

Your response to being conquered for a thousand years is that we lost territory in a civil war? lolz. The math is simple, Pakistan actually holds more territory it captured from India than vice versa. Your feeble rhetorical tactics aren't gonna help you. India is probably the weakest country in all of history. It can't even deal decisively with countries 5 times smaller on its own borders, and ends up losing territory to them. Pakistan has been punching far above its weight this whole time, since literally Day Zero... So yea, we have a lot of "room to talk" unlike you Indians.

twineedle said:

Anyway, back on topic, the Chinese Embassy statement makes it pretty clear, China objected to Indian infrastructure projects in the Valley, so China tried to shift the lac(dotted line) but failed.

Click to expand...

No matter how many times you keep reiterating, you will be caught. Won't even allow you to pass something like that unopposed.

The statement you keep bringing up -

Since April this year, the Indian border troops have unilaterally and continuously built roads, bridges and other facilities at the LAC in the Galwan Valley. China has lodged representations and protests on multiple occasions but India has gone even further to cross the LAC and make provocations. By the early morning of May 6, the Indian border troops, who have crossed the LAC by night and trespassed into China's territory, have built fortification and barricades, which impeded the patrol of Chinese border troops They deliberately made provocations in an attempt to unilaterally change the status quo of control and management. The Chinese border troops have been forced to take necessary measures to respond to the situation on the ground and strengthen management and control in the border areas.

The statements lays down that the Indian provocations were preceded by the construction activities. This is in line with the Chinese renewed claim for entirety of Galwan Valley. That region specifically.

Mohsin77 said:

Your response to being conquered for a thousand years is that we lost territory in a civil war? lolz. The math is simple, Pakistan actually holds more territory it captured from India than vice versa. Your feeble rhetorical tactics aren't gonna help you. India is probably the weakest country in all of history. It can't even deal decisively with countries 5 times smaller on its own borders, and ends up losing territory to them. Pakistan has been punching far above its weight this whole time, since literally Day Zero... So yea, we have a lot of "room to talk" unlike you Indians.

Click to expand...

Funny how you go back to that Thousand years stuff. Which country was Pakistan a part of then? The only part of India that was conquered for 1000 years is modern-day Pakistan. And in 1947, JaK was an independend country that only acceded to India after Pakistan invaded it. India seized almost 60 percent of the former kingdom after Pakistan attempted to conquer it. It is pretty clear math is not your strong subject. It is also telling you have not even addressed any of my points. Simple question. When since 1947 has Pakistan gained territory? With the exception of 1962, India has only been gaining territory and has enforced its will on the borders. The latest ceasefire is just the latest example.

twineedle said:

Funny how you go back to that Thousand years stuff. Which country was Pakistan a part of then? The only part of India that was conquered for 1000 years is modern-day Pakistan. And in 1947, JaK was an independend country that only acceded to India after Pakistan invaded it.

Click to expand...

Pakistan - India is not a subject of this thread.

India wasn't a country then. India wasn't shaped by Indians but rather a colonial power. The borders were determined by a foreign power.

manqiangrexue said:

India "defeated" the colonial empire by having a poor old man starve himself for pity because India cannot fight. All of Pakistan is territory taken from India and you are here gloating about small territorial exchanges after that. This is a prime example of India losing swathes of territory and then saying they won and captured land when they get some scraps back. The last exchange between Pakistan and India saw India completely humiliated with a downed fighter, captured pilot, fratricide, proven lies about an F-16 shoot-down and all this to inflict no damage at all to any Pakistani forces.

A and B have no logical connection. I can object to anything and then succeed or fail or do nothing afterwards. Only Indians who try to spin defeat into victory and land loss into land gain/status quo would even think to imagine such a relationship. Anything China wants to take, Indians have no power to stop. If China hasn't taken it, it is to show India mercy. And then Indians claim China "failed" just like whenever others return Indian POWS Indians claim it is out of fear of retribution when it is clearly out of kindness and mercy.

Click to expand...

By "Colonial Empire" I was referring to Portugal. But that would require you to do some basic research.
And no, India hasn't lost land. Satellite images prove that. If you have any clear evidence showing otherwise, please present it. But you have none. If anything, China has lost territory, considering India recently occupied Chinese territory according to the Chinese embassy statement. Once again, if you have any clear unbiased evidence proving otherwise please present it.


The ground reality is that China attempted to shift the lac(dotted line) west but failed, and now India has strategic infrastructure and permanent camps in the Galwan valley, where it never previously had any permanent constructions. China tried to stop these but failed, and had to withdraw from the Indian claim line.

twineedle said:

By "Colonial Empire" I was referring to Portugal. But that would require you to do some basic research.
And no, India hasn't lost land. Satellite images prove that. If you have any clear evidence showing otherwise, please present it. But you have none. If anything, China has lost territory, considering India recently occupied Chinese territory according to the Chinese embassy statement. Once again, if you have any clear unbiased evidence proving otherwise please present it.

Click to expand...

Yes. China indeed has territory it Claims (entirety of Galwan Valley) and small regions still occupied by India.

Recently occupied within Chinese traditionally controlled territory? A good use of words but no territory of China has been "recently occupied" and India still holds. China did thwart Indian efforts to maybe do that?

The net effect was China forcing India to shift back.