So are you denying thatIf you were referring to some posts just prior, then I have to disagree.
They want to set a narrative that
1. India achieved all its "strategic goals".
Not explaining what these goals were prior to Ladakh and what makes them strategic and how they achieved it.
2.China had to "retreat".
As if India didn't and buffer zones were created in India's perception and possession of LAC.
3. China initiated the conflict.
Not discounting it but media evidences point to Indian aggression at Galwan rather than China that initiated it. No counter evidences.
Agreeing to disagree means allowing some people to repeat what they want to, without obstruction. That would set the narrative that Chinese has one set of fact and India has another and both are right.
Leave it. I wouldn't bother. Chinese soldiers then ought to be taken as reliable and infallible sources too.
The claim I've some issue with is how all this is advantageous to India or according to its strategic goals - a very bad cope if there was one.
China retreated from finger 4-8, and can no longer patrol or build infrastructure there
China dismantled all infrastructure it had built there last year, inclueding climate controlled buildings, jetties, boat repair stations, etc.
China failed to secure its 1959 claim line(which goes up to finger 2 and the Galwan mouth).
India never had any permanent or temporary structures past finger 4 and at best only sparingly made it past finger 4 due to the topographical challenges stated by Col Dinny. Whereas China actually occupied and was regularly patrolling the area.
India still has camps in Galwan and conducts regular patrol operations(weather permitting, obviously)
India has completed strategic infrastructure projects China objected to.
The Depsang Y Junction has always been on China's side of the LAC.
I have already presented evidence as to how India acheived strategic objectives, which you have failed to refute. So what did China gain? It had to desroy infrastructure in Pangong, can no longer patrol up to its claim line, lost dominating postitions on the f4 ridge line, and failed to evinct Indian soldiers from Galwan or stop bridge work there.
And no, I am not arguing this is a complete victory for India. But this is still a favorable outcome for India. ANd your claims of Chinese victory, 1000 sq km captured, have been proven wrong multiple times.