Ladakh Flash Point

There's nothing wrong with the DRDO website, can we not do the childish shit?

As things stand, there is too much in this thread that resemble exactly what Jai Hind crowd does, make and attack your own invented nonsense. It's not about India's grand delusions of invading China. They know 200K men isn't going to do that. It's about creating a narrative that they require 200K men to "defend" against big bad China. This carries the implication that China is "about to attack" or has desires to attack when in reality it doesn't and all the evidence, facts, and history of the last year (even the last 10 years on this border) proves that China has no desire or intention to attack India proper or to capture the last remaining disputed sections by force. Again, if that was China's desire, China would have sent half its army and airforce to do this and when it occupied disputed territory, it wouldn't have disengaged at all or even talked with India.

All this is clear, obvious, and measure up perfectly with every piece of verified and proven fact over the last year and half.

ougoah said:

There's nothing wrong with the DRDO website, can we not do the childish shit?

As things stand, there is too much in this thread that resemble exactly what Jai Hind crowd does, make and attack your own invented nonsense. It's not about India's grand delusions of invading China. They know 200K men isn't going to do that. It's about creating a narrative that they require 200K men to "defend" against big bad China. This carries the implication that China is "about to attack" or has desires to attack when in reality it doesn't and all the evidence, facts, and history of the last year (even the last 10 years on this border) proves that China has no desire or intention to attack India proper or to capture the last remaining disputed sections by force. Again, if that was China's desire, China would have sent half its army and airforce to do this and when it occupied disputed territory, it wouldn't have disengaged at all or even talked with India.

All this is clear, obvious, and measure up perfectly with every piece of verified and proven fact over the last year and half.

Click to expand...

So is the DRDO website childish or non childish?

So I predict India will in coming weeks and months, be playing this line of successfully preventing a Chinese advance... well of course that's easy for them to say if China is just quietly sitting there doing nothing with India shouting hysterically about 200K men and China invading etc.

While India does this with its mouth, it would be very much providing every piece of guarantee in diplomatic talks and military action that it has no intention to use those men aggressively. However if it did, expect China to respond with military activity and China reacting with sending more equipment to India border.

The western puppet masters probably would prefer India did its part and commit to its role. If it came to war, it's great for the west. If it just redirects Chinese attention and military positioning towards the south west, it is better than nothing. China better make sure it has enough nukes for all these imperialists and imperialist wannabes.

Div said:

So is the DRDO website childish or non childish?

Click to expand...

Why is this so important to you and can you not read what I wrote? I try to talk only directly and to the point. It is in my nature (and culture) to do so. I called the attempt at demeaning a website and its creators (which to me looks normal and perfectly fine) a childish act. I didn't call the website childish. Perhaps in other forums that would be the norm and the reason for your suspicion?

ougoah said:

No Modi needs to look like he's addressing a belligerent china. It benefits him in several domains. But he also has no plan on invading china. You don't do that with 200k troops which would get wiped out within days if not hours. If India truly had some intention to make moves on china or make moves to advance into all their claimed parts, they would need to move in every piece of military gram they have and even then it wouldnt be enough. A single type of Chinese artillery is fielded in about the same number as India's entire artillery inventory. Smart ordinance gap is even greater not that either side would be wasting too much of them, particularly not china with most of its hardware centred in the east. Again this shows china doesn't have and never had the desire to invade India despite what some may like to think. China responded to increasing Indian patrols on the 20%. India didn't expect china to respond so harshly. Now standoff and Modi is ruling over a country that was crumbling since 2018.

Click to expand...

But India is also within the 20%. As I said, both sides simply occupied disputes areas on both sides of the LAC that were previously unoccupied and patrolled by both sides as per the 1993 agreement. An example is when in 2013, before Modi, China not only reached the extent of its claim line but also occupied it, setting up camps around 15 kn west of is most forward camp today.

Based on official Chinese statements, it seems that the trigger was India finishing strategic infrastructure projects, including within the. 20%, abd areas beyond that China claims. Building Borser infrastructure was one of Modi's policies, and not surprisingly, almost all areas along the LAC are major BJP strongholds.

some members here are forgetting that India spent all of last summer constructing the necessary infrastructure to support large LAC deployments and setting up logistics networks. Which is why despite the large deployments, India has suffered very few weather related casualties.

twineedle said:

But India is also within the 20%. As I said, both sides simply occupied disputes areas on both sides of the LAC that were previously unoccupied and patrolled by both sides as per the 1993 agreement.

Click to expand...

It is no doubt within the 20% and has been even back before the PLA occupation of F8 to F4. PLA too have certainly since March last year been taking positions within the 20%. That doesn't have anything to do with what I said which was that India will not be using the additional troops development to control the 20%. It would even less likely be moving troops beyond the 20% - onto land it claims and certainly not be moving troops into China proper unless it is ready for an actual war. Even moving Indian troops beyond the 20% would probably trigger a war. A move to control the 20% would trigger a PLA mirror move and result in similar pushing matches like those of the past, basically breaking down any buffer agreements and de facto buffer understandings - separation between troops still stationed within 20%.

twineedle said:

An example is when in 2013, before Modi, China not only reached the extent of its claim line but also occupied it, setting up camps around 15 kn west of is most forward camp today.

Click to expand...

This I'm genuinely interested in. Can you provide some proof and details? Exactly what was the nature of such developments in 2013. Or is it something similar to saying "India not only trespassed the LAC but also set up some temporary camps 15km east of its most forward camps both south of the lake and north of it" ... when in reality it is referring to temporary patrols. I would imagine if there was any Chinese action 15km west of its most forward camp (where exactly did they venture 15km in?) it would be similarly temporary stuff. The only Chinese structure we know of within 20% is the road from F5 to F8 beyond.

So basically when and where did China reach and camp on its claim lines which formally are west of what China offers as demarcation line - so beyond the 20% into India.

twineedle said:

Based on official Chinese statements, it seems that the trigger was India finishing strategic infrastructure projects, including within the. 20%, abd areas beyond that China claims. Building Borser infrastructure was one of Modi's policies, and not surprisingly, almost all areas along the LAC are major BJP strongholds.

Click to expand...

Definitely is one major factor within the triggering of the confrontation. One among plenty that we can speculate and arguably justify but no doubt China considered Indian moves pretty brazen and required a response if it is to discourage India from making heavy handed moves on the 20%. The main worry is how that provides more for making moves on India's claims. Which is partly why China has been relatively willing to keep this 20% as a no man's land but it's never made it into a formal, bilaterally recognised buffer. Even now after Pangong disengagement, the stretch is almost entirely under standoff. Modi wanted the Pangong PLA occupation to end for political reasons but it is pretty clear both sides consider that a relatively unimportant thing. It's arguing a 2D thing on a 3D space which is almost entirely still under standoff. For China, keeping it under PLA occupation was also risky if anything were to start, they'd be pretty far west and isolated. Getting India's agreement to keep off the fingers is good enough but we all know the rest of the space is the meat of the issue and nothing significant has changed at all apart from some trivial shifting of positions which aren't actually important. The grand issue of dispute and dispute resolution opportunities are important and they are strategically determined.

ougoah said:

It is no doubt within the 20% and has been even back before the PLA occupation of F8 to F4. PLA too have certainly since March last year been taking positions within the 20%. That doesn't have anything to do with what I said which was that India will not be using the additional troops development to control the 20%. It would even less likely be moving troops beyond the 20% - onto land it claims and certainly not be moving troops into China proper unless it is ready for an actual war. Even moving Indian troops beyond the 20% would probably trigger a war. A move to control the 20% would trigger a PLA mirror move and result in similar pushing matches like those of the past, basically breaking down any buffer agreements and de facto buffer understandings - separation between troops still stationed within 20%.



This I'm genuinely interested in. Can you provide some proof and details? Exactly what was the nature of such developments in 2013. Or is it something similar to saying "India not only trespassed the LAC but also set up some temporary camps 15km east of its most forward camps both south of the lake and north of it" ... when in reality it is referring to temporary patrols. I would imagine if there was any Chinese action 15km west of its most forward camp (where exactly did they venture 15km in?) it would be similarly temporary stuff. The only Chinese structure we know of within 20% is the road from F5 to F8 beyond.

So basically when and where did China reach and camp on its claim lines which formally are west of what China offers as demarcation line - so beyond the 20% into India.



Definitely is one major factor within the triggering of the confrontation. One among plenty that we can speculate and arguably justify but no doubt China considered Indian moves pretty brazen and required a response if it is to discourage India from making heavy handed moves on the 20%. The main worry is how that provides more for making moves on India's claims. Which is partly why China has been relatively willing to keep this 20% as a no man's land but it's never made it into a formal, bilaterally recognised buffer. Even now after Pangong disengagement, the stretch is almost entirely under standoff. Modi wanted the Pangong PLA occupation to end for political reasons but it is pretty clear both sides consider that a relatively unimportant thing. It's arguing a 2D thing on a 3D space which is almost entirely still under standoff. For China, keeping it under PLA occupation was also risky if anything were to start, they'd be pretty far west and isolated. Getting India's agreement to keep off the fingers is good enough but we all know the rest of the space is the meat of the issue and nothing significant has changed at all apart from some trivial shifting of positions which aren't actually important. The grand issue of dispute and dispute resolution opportunities are important and they are strategically determined.

Click to expand...

In 2013, china set up camps right in front of Burtse and partially withdrew after India agreed to destroy a watch tower in Chumar.

From what I understand, what you say is the disputed 20% is between where China reached and where China withdrew as per the Colombo agreement. However, China claims it reached beyond where it actually reached, such as all of Galwan, CK junction, and Pangong finger 2, so China claims those areas under that rationale.

siegecrossbow said:

Guys, just

Click to expand...

@twineedle

Please please just let it go!

JSL said:

why indians are inferior ?

Guys check out india's DRDO aka DODO website !!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Actually... To be fair, we don't really judge a company basing ONLY on websites. And to say Indian are inferior bcos their website sucks is really kind of far fetch.