Which is?
Claim it. See it get disproved. This isn't your safe space.
India failed Balakot.
India failed to push into galwan with PP14 forward policy and lost patrol rights to F8 in Pangong Tso.
Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
Claim it. See it get disproved. This isn't your safe space.
India failed Balakot.
India failed to push into galwan with PP14 forward policy and lost patrol rights to F8 in Pangong Tso.
Wrong.
Since you are the one claiming things here, it's upto you to submit better evidences backing them up.
There is a counter point of equal relevance posted for the "evidences" you provided. The onus is on you to provide superior evidences
Just post some evidence that can't be refuted easily. Simple as that.
That's your take from all this? That's awful.
I realize that you've comprehension issues. Take ample time to process it. Hopefully, you'll realize the "logic".
Wrong.
China didn't move back "more". Are you forgetting Kailash ranges? Do you want me to measure km by km how much India retreated from Kailash ranges too?
India patrolled upto Finger 8.
During the standoff-
China stopped patrols to F8, setting up forward positions and posts at F4 and confronting India at F2/3.
After disengagement China removed the posts and pulled back to its permanent posts at F8. India couldn't move up so kept at its F2/3 posts.
Basically his argument seems to be boiled down to:
1. Yes your soldiers killed a lot more than ours (dubious whether he actually believes this or not - most Indians don't believe this).
2. You invaded and occupied our territory, built forward camps and infrastructure.
3. The peace deal meant you had to make a partial withdrawal and dismantle those camps,, so India has won.
The lesson from this in future conflicts would be not to give up an inch of gains. You want peace? You'll need to publically admit to being responsible for the aggression you will have to pay compensation for every soldier you killed.
Anything other than that will be deemed a "victory" in the eyes of millions of Indians.
1. Yes your soldiers killed a lot more than ours (dubious whether he actually believes this or not - most Indians don't believe this).
2. You invaded and occupied our territory, built forward camps and infrastructure.
3. The peace deal meant you had to make a partial withdrawal and dismantle those camps,, so India has won.
The lesson from this in future conflicts would be not to give up an inch of gains. You want peace? You'll need to publically admit to being responsible for the aggression you will have to pay compensation for every soldier you killed.
Anything other than that will be deemed a "victory" in the eyes of millions of Indians.
But then India could escalate it elsewhere (South Tibet, Around Bhutan, Western Nepal etc) creating a domino effect resulting in large scale war. A willing alliance is also there backing India.
China's gains at North Pangong Tso when considered with the fact that China allowed India to move unopposed to Kailash ranges south (well after June incidents) paints a picture of China setting up the table for prompt resolution, rather than conflict.
If China wanted conflict, large scale troop deployments and mechanized regiments would be ready to confront India along the vast borders including Kailash.
The stronger part here took steps for a resolution by giving the other side a chip at the table to bargain (Kailash).
As a side note since I don't think I've wrote it, I do believe that the indians transgressed into the contested LAC zones way more often than the PLA, as said by the random retired indian general that @twineedle so proudly brought up. I mean it's clear as day given the gap of how much resources and attention (quantity-wise) each side has given into it before the start of the skirmish. China's main priority is always gonna be in the east, against renegade taiwan and the south china sea, both are an extension of the current China-america rivalry. It is laughable to think that china has ever taken this skirmish as serious as india, yet given the quality gap between each side, it is also very clear from the start that china will still get the upper hand at the end of the day with faster deployments, better weapons, better infrastructures, and better scalability.
This time however, the proven over aggression that india has done to china, coupled with the timing of them clearly trying to take advantage of china during its low of managing (at the time) the epidemic, the indians clearly have touched the bottom line. Our response, be it the 'intrusions', building infrastructures, etc.; ALL of them, are justified as a DEFENSIVE act against the intruding indians. This has been the official narrative from our side since the beginning, which is the closest it can be to the truth of the what, how, and why of the whole fiasco.
In conclusion, people shouldn't be disappointed with the new agreement of buffer zones established on the LAC, since it actually restricts india more than China. Not to mention that while the agreement asked us to dismantle 'all' equipments from f4 to f8, many things are just simply cannot be dismantled. One easy example is the additional roads that are built, which would make China's position and deployment even stronger and faster if further conflicts ensue in the future.
This time however, the proven over aggression that india has done to china, coupled with the timing of them clearly trying to take advantage of china during its low of managing (at the time) the epidemic, the indians clearly have touched the bottom line. Our response, be it the 'intrusions', building infrastructures, etc.; ALL of them, are justified as a DEFENSIVE act against the intruding indians. This has been the official narrative from our side since the beginning, which is the closest it can be to the truth of the what, how, and why of the whole fiasco.
In conclusion, people shouldn't be disappointed with the new agreement of buffer zones established on the LAC, since it actually restricts india more than China. Not to mention that while the agreement asked us to dismantle 'all' equipments from f4 to f8, many things are just simply cannot be dismantled. One easy example is the additional roads that are built, which would make China's position and deployment even stronger and faster if further conflicts ensue in the future.
You don't think that is going to happen anyway? If Indians see this as a victory like our Indian friend here, there's nothing stopping them from trying again elsewhere, or here again.
In the background they are probably being egged on to continue this by America.
America doesn't fight wars directly, they do it through proxies. No doubt the Americans. You need to vigilant with all of your borders, that includes the SCS, India and probably Russia/Mongolia too.
I don't think China is planning for a war (this isn't what you said FYI). It may be preparing for one and certainly has been for a long time but war does no good for China. If India is going to invade China, then yes a war will certainly happen but India's high echelon leaders have less delusion because it is their heads on the line both against the Chinese and against their own when they fail to deliver and have no way of dressing up a loss.
With respect to Pakistan and China, the new ceasefire and disengagement serve ALL sides very well. China seems to have gotten India to agree to a buffer which means no more Indian patrols beyond F3 and that means no more confrontation. This does indeed resemble 1959 offer to India far more than Indians seem to realise and admit. It makes sense China gains more from the negotiations since PLA demonstrated that IA is both unwilling to militarily challenge (with shooting war) and unable to use man waves to push PLA out. PLA stayed for an entire year to show them this and the reward is getting India to concede ever so slightly more in the 1959 direction.
Pakistan proved capable of holding its own against India and India didn't respond after Swift Retort. Now demonstrations and lessons are given, India has honestly decided to play nice in meetings and diplomacy but they will do what they do best in public - exhibitions of grand self delusion combined with confusing the truths and misrepresenting them with foul intent. Fooling self vs fooling enemy.
Neither China Pakistan will want to really engage India in war. Well for Pakistan there is greater potential of actual pay-off. Such a thing doesn't really exist for China. I don't think China will get directly involved between Pakistan and India. More likely to assist Pakistan with material and financing if such a thing were to happen. No gain means no incentive and India understands it is totally outmatched BUT they will surely now be working towards patching gaps - Rafale over MKI, EM spectrum warfare etc.
Correct the former Indian four star General V.K. Singh himself stated that India performed patrols and intruded into the disputed zone frequently.
Not only that but V.K. Singh said the Indians do more transgressions than PLA. Why would India's own General say that the Indians perform intrusions more than PLA? If this ain't true?
The bahkts want to discredit him here specifically because what he says doesn't align with what they want to claim - IA rarely went beyond F4 LOL!.
They discredit him by saying he is now no longer in Indian military. So what?! He was very recently still a FOUR STAR in the Indian military. Everyone knows Indian patrolled up to F8 in the past with plenty of IA and PLA confrontations with banners and some shouting/ light pushing.
Now India can do zero intrusion but surely are itching for it
Such a warped view.
Satellite imagery used for arguments were often out of context, no dates, no indication what "troops and equipment" is shown despite Indians wild conclusions. Anyway I think Galwan river bend disengagement happened after the river flooded. This is like the F4 of valley side. The PLA still were occupying many parts of what India claims. The equivalent of leaving F4 as the river flooded and staying on F6. You aren't saying anything about Galwan valley apart from PLA had tents on the bend and after the river flooded, they moved out.
Are you forgetting that IA also settled on the bend in the past? Then PLA, then no one? How is that Indian victory especially when India claims a whole 10km further from that one spot of satellite footage?
What is the point of contention when it comes to sources? I'm assuming it is about death count? In that case, literally ALL the sources that say PLA have more than 4 deaths come from India or from "anonymous source" which have been disclosed as Indian in origin. Why does Indian gov not officially declare PLA lost n soldiers OR challenge CCP's declaration it lost 4? Why doesn't any third party do that? Seems like those iffy numbers WERE indeed made up by Indians because 1. They vary immensely (get your lies in order), 2. They are all from anon or Indian sources and US intel has never declared this despite Indian controlled media propagating this lie, 3. No authority figure wants to publicly declare those iffy PLA loss figures or say that CCP is lying. This isn't because they don't want to. It's because they know CCP is saying the truth or they know the CCP has ample evidence to back up claim and retaliate by embarrassing India further with the true nature of Indian captives and exactly how many Indians actually lost in June.
When has Sawhney been proven wrong? I'm not aware and could be a case of iffy small details between Pak and India where India says xyz officially and Pak says abc. Then again India claims it shot down an F-16 with a magic invisible missile from a Mig-21. India isn't the boy who cried wolf. India is the child who cried wolf 20 times in an empty room. Its lies that were exposed are beyond pathetic.
I'm not basing all my attention in Pravin but he does provide a decent summary like Shukla. They are both two of many less biased Indians and certainly don't work for BJP IT Cell. So yeah that makes them a lot better (if their writings aren't obvious enough) than your garden variety anon Jai Hind troll. He's as potentially biased as anyone but Dinny surely is. Dinny like VK Singh works for India. When they say stuff that is against India, it is very likely true or so comically undeniable there is no point lying about it. When they say things for India like Dinny's IA rarely patrolled up to F8. Well that depends on his personal definition of the word rarely. Dinny himself admits that IA did patrol up to F8. That's your entire argument gone. IA patrolled up to F8 and now gets to go nowhere beyond F3.
Last edited:
- Status