What's new

1962: For anyone who haven't read this...

Yeah I truly believe those times were a lost chance for better American-Chinese relations. I can't speak about it direct but from what I've read, the majority of the Chinese had a favourable view of America then(after all, relations were normalized and they were an ally against the USSR)

All this to be ruined later...

The same congrats on senior status.

There are several signs event, but more because the West is still a more objective and more comprehensive understanding, we need to say thank you to our students and Internet applications, control information is no longer a simple matter.
 
.
Any ways the geopolitical situation right now is a lot more different. Even if Tiananmen Square didn't happen I don't think there could've developed a serious pact between China and the U.S. The Soviet Union, for one, is gone and China and the U.S. no longer have a common enemy. To make the matters worse China is becoming a super power as well. It is only reasonable for American to feel uneasy about this.

Right now there are two paths for China and the U.S. They could either have a healthy competition (coupled with LOTS of cooperation) or they could, as Texas John puts it, have a "full scale pi$$ing contest". I think we all know which option is better for the world as a whole.

That's a very good summary of the situation. :tup:
 
.
OK. Granted China HAS to keep Aksai Chin.

If your stance that "India never dared to provoke China" is correct, how do you explain this?

1987 Sino-Indian skirmish - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both sides decided to not go to war.

That was not the only incident. The other forum I frequent actually has a complete discussion on it, Invite you to read it.

India Vs. China (borderline War)

Some of the people there (Lemontree is an Indian Army arty officer), OOE is a retired Canadian Forces Colonel ( and an avid China watcher - he is Chinese also) and there are others. Both sides know it is a pi$$ing contest. Given the terrain, there is no clear winner.

1987 is not a big deal, except for jingoistic Indians. But again, which country doesn’t have jingoists?

My point was the provocations like Nehru’s “forwarding Policy” was brought into a sudden stop and the border has been since largely peaceful.

This is precisely what China wants. If you can read sources from the Chinese side, the Chinese never wanted to “rule Indians” or occupy Indian lands as their tradition considers all non-Chinese “barbarians”. To the contrary, CPC leaders at that time considered India also a victim of western colonists. They were actually perplexed by what they perceived as a victim (India) to oppress another victim (China).

BTW, thanks for the link. I was there for a while before, but failed to appreciate the atomsphere there too much...will see if there is any change.


…
There are a few big differences though. The CCP controls both the media and the PLA. They will parrot the party line ( unless they want to be shot). ...

Your picture is too simplified and, to some degree, is a little bit distorted. This is probably due to either Western vilification or is measured according to Western standards.

In fact, except for some “mouth pieces”, in civil territories, there are lots voices that are pretty independent AND SOUND. One example is Economics 财经 based in Shanghai(?). The other is South Capital Daily 南方都市. The latter openly celebrated Tiananmen Incident recently. Of course they will be brought into reign if they go off track too irrationally, unlike Indian media where nobody cares even if they are freely lying.
 
.
For some of the members who weren't around for this discussion. this is probably the most insightful account of the 1962 Sino-Indian war I've read on the web. It was posted by an Indian member here at PDF Joe Shearer. It was just such a great post, I felt the need to share it.



To all Indian members here. A question... | Page 2


Dear Sir,

It is regrettable that the vast majority of us Indians have been kept in the dark, and ill-served both by our government and by our intellectuals with regard to the differences with China. Perhaps a good way to address these issues would be to start with your enclosed article, and to comment it suitably.


This only is the beginning of the deception. The facts are that for decades, more than a century, the nearby imperial powers, Czarist Russia and Imperial Britain, had acknowledged China's suzerainty over Tibet. The facts are that China had not been consulted either during the establishment of the line in the west, nor during the establishment of the line in the east. Of the two, the demarcation in the east was the worse of the two, and consisted of an arbitrary line drawn by Mr. MacMahon on the map, representing the watershed of the Himalayan ridges. He did this against the instructions of the British government in India. But let us go on.


Brahm Chellaney's account reads like bad propaganda, and is bad propaganda. Nehru accepted Chinese occupation of Tibet; he did not confirm the boundary with China, not because China offered no opportunity, but because he sought more than China was offering.

On the other hand, Noorani assessed the situation correctly and described Nehru's activities in greater frankness.



Both these facts are correct and well-established.

The position on the west had not been established clearly. The position on the east, the McMahon Line, was drawn arbitrarily by McMahon, with the hapless Tibetans consenting, but without the consent of the Chinese representative in Lhasa.

The McMahon Line sought to establish the line south of the watershed, but very largely deviated from this principle; it actually was in places NORTH of the watershed.



The underlying belligerence that was a part of Nehru's posiion is clear from the extract above.


This (the publication of the official map with a firm boundary in the west, in unilateral supersession of the previous correct position) is factual, and was a falsehood by Nehru and the External Affairs Ministry.



Here, for those who have not caught the allusion, it is necessary to recall that in 1841, General Zorawar Singh, the outstanding general of the Dogra Maharaja of Kashmir, had swept through Ladakh, conquered it (it was then a dependent principality of Tibet, itself a dependent on suzerain China) and mounted a sharp attack on Tibet. This attack failed; he was killed, his troops repelled and in a precursor of 62, they were thrust pell-mell back into Ladakh. There they made a stand and were able to beat off the Tibetan forces. The resultant peace treaty of 1842 was between the Dogra forces and the Tibetan general.


This is from memory and may need minor correction.




This, after he had cooked up the facts, both in the west and in the east.

It is not clear what political weakness this reference is about. Otherwise the rest of the facts are correct.


The Henderson-Brooks Report was not written by two amateurs; it was written by a very senior general, a veteran of WWII, and by the darling of the Army, the VC winner, the bravest of the brave, Prem Bhagat.

It was a damning indictment.

Reading it, even today, is for a patriotic Indian with a fierce pride in the Indian Army, and the Navy and Air Force, like undergoing a public whipping.



They actually withdrew to the McMahon Line, even when it was north of the watershed.



As a student of military history, i have gone through the accounts on the Chinese side and the Indian side carefully. Contrary to the accounts of brute force Chinese massed attacks on small groups of isolated Indians who fought to the last with unmatched valour, the picture that emerges is that of the last of the Mao-led wars in history. It showed all the hallmarks of the military style prescribed by Mao in his textbook on Military Warfare, "On Guerrilla Warfare".

There was no frontal massed attack.

Typically, the Chinese drove regiments, even brigades through defiles and ravines, and outflanked or attacked from the rear totally unprepared Indian positions. They attacked at night, and captured bunkers in a linear sequence* that ensured that they always had a local superiority, although overall the numbers were nowhere so disparate as to dictate a military disaster. They used noisy and alarming tactics, bugles, loud-hailers and concerted shouts, to alarm and upset a rattled, befuddled enemy fighting without good leadership, in exposed positions.

* This reminded me so much of the enfilading tactics of Frederick the Great that I read and re-read the comparative passages several times. It was true; this was classic concentration of force on a thin section of the line, its overwhelming, and then on to the next thin section.

Put very bluntly, NEFA 62 was not Thermopylae; it was Cannae.

The Indians did not move; the Chinese moved, moved, moved all the time.




It is time to deal with another myth.

We are told that our troops were badly-clothed, badly-armed and badly-positioned. True, but the Chinese were not better clothed. These attacks were made, in wet weather, in October and November. There are authentic reports of serious and significant Chinese deaths due to exposure to the weather. They struggled against local conditions as much as the Indians.


Why, oh why, does a Chinese analyst have to post this?

I would like to console myself with one thought.

This was a classic Maoist campaign. Mao is acknowledged as an outstanding military genius, quite apart from his outstanding grip over politics. The old master was up against a nouveau-riche barrister who had never practised, was brought up in the lap of luxury, and had appointed the grotesque Krishna Menon as the Defence Minister. Menon, with his penchant for doing the wrong thing at the wrong time, encouraged the ambitious B. M. Kaul to weaken the authority of the then COAS, General Thapar (Karan Thapar's father, if I'm not mistaken) and to arrogate power.

Kaul, in turn, lined up a stellar constellation: the bluff, blunt Lionel Pratap (Bogey) Sen, his COS, the sinister Monty Palit, and some hapless field officers to serve as his official cover.

Was this a contest?

[THIS SECTION OFF TOPIC: ONLY INDIANS TO READ THIS SECTION PLEASE]

Look at what happened twenty years later. A sharp contrast.

In 1982 and before and after, during the Chinese conflicts with Vietnam, when Deng was Chief, and everybody took their cue from him, we saw a different story. The invincible PLA had its nose bloodied by a hard-fighting Vietnamese Army which put up its traditional rugged, indefatigable resistance to their old foes, their historical enemy. It was a lesson to the PLA, even more of a lesson to the Indian Army.

I am frankly writing this to take away some of the pain and humiliation of the sacrifice of IV Indian Div and its gallant soldiers, who died as political pawns of Nehru, Krishna Menon and Kaul, and because their own professional leadership did not turn around and kick these people in the seats of their churidars.

[END OF SECTION OFF-TOPIC]

Sadly,

Very interesting indeed, so basically Chinese won squarely over India, I thought reading Indian versions and Indian media, it was India who crushed China in 1962 war.
 
. .
Which Indian version you are talking about?
Don't worry about him. Today he is going around commenting on old India bashing threads. Looks like his girlfriend/boyfriend giving some tough time.
 
.
Don't worry about him. Today he is going around commenting on old India bashing threads. Looks like his girlfriend/boyfriend giving some tough time.
Never heard of any Indian version or media report where it was claimed that 1962 was a victory for us. Let's wait and see, if he comes out with some underground archive stuffs.
 
.
@scorpionx & @Spade, the Indian kids who came out of hibernation. I donot make stories my self. But after this, pls go back to the holes where you came from.

India Crushed China: 1962 war Diaries

we all know what propaganda is and how effective it is among civilians. Constant propaganda can make you believe in things that are not correct. This is why every well established view needs to be rechecked in the light of new evidences. In the past, people used to believe the earth is flat till there was an invention of a machine which made that belief entirely false.

We have a belief that in 1962 China won against India which is not the case in reality. People still believe it was India which suffered greater causalities which again is not the case. And because of such beliefs current generation Indians lack confidence and sufficient morale. Many Indians for the same reason believe that India is weaker than China which is a great violation of the universality of truth. India was, is and will always be stronger than China because that is determined by the theory of natural selection. Chinese cannot win against Indians just like how Africans cannot win against Europeans.

Now, I collected some pieces of contemporary news reports, published in well reputed international news papers, and they show that the Indian military offensive was successful just like how the American military invasion of Iraq was successful. It was true that we could not annex Tibet with India but we at least managed to occupy much of land we had intended to annex. If our failure to annex Tibet with India is considered our defeat then yes, we were defeated in 1960 military conflict with China. But I don't think it was our defeat, we invaded and we were able to throw out the Chinese everywhere.

Now, some may say Chinese came closer to Assam etc etc to glorify the Chinese PLA. But there is no Chinese in Assam today and this says it all. Actually there is nothing that the Chinese military can be glorified of or proud of. In terms of casualties, the Chinese KIAs outnumbered those of the Indians.

As the Henderson Brooks report is still in the darkness, I believe, my collection of the contemporary news cuttings will enlighten you and establish what I just said above.

66d33a247b897ce969ec53b5382586b3.png


Montreal Gazette, 22-10-1962

2668db9e2c2ae44b8240660b64ea59ba.png


The Montreal Gazette, 13-9-1967

27ac555ac269aa8e9c081f91afb52bb8.png


Toledo Blade, 23-10-1962

84aa071c9fecd2c138ec6404f54f789a.png


The Times News, September 22, 1965

7067d05e2f77b2a709cf016596cea653.png


Ocala Star-Banner, November 27, 1962
 
.
@scorpionx & @Spade, the Indian kids who came out of hibernation. I donot make stories my self. But after this, pls go back to the holes where you came from.

India Crushed China: 1962 war Diaries

we all know what propaganda is and how effective it is among civilians. Constant propaganda can make you believe in things that are not correct. This is why every well established view needs to be rechecked in the light of new evidences. In the past, people used to believe the earth is flat till there was an invention of a machine which made that belief entirely false.

We have a belief that in 1962 China won against India which is not the case in reality. People still believe it was India which suffered greater causalities which again is not the case. And because of such beliefs current generation Indians lack confidence and sufficient morale. Many Indians for the same reason believe that India is weaker than China which is a great violation of the universality of truth. India was, is and will always be stronger than China because that is determined by the theory of natural selection. Chinese cannot win against Indians just like how Africans cannot win against Europeans.

Now, I collected some pieces of contemporary news reports, published in well reputed international news papers, and they show that the Indian military offensive was successful just like how the American military invasion of Iraq was successful. It was true that we could not annex Tibet with India but we at least managed to occupy much of land we had intended to annex. If our failure to annex Tibet with India is considered our defeat then yes, we were defeated in 1960 military conflict with China. But I don't think it was our defeat, we invaded and we were able to throw out the Chinese everywhere.

Now, some may say Chinese came closer to Assam etc etc to glorify the Chinese PLA. But there is no Chinese in Assam today and this says it all. Actually there is nothing that the Chinese military can be glorified of or proud of. In terms of casualties, the Chinese KIAs outnumbered those of the Indians.

As the Henderson Brooks report is still in the darkness, I believe, my collection of the contemporary news cuttings will enlighten you and establish what I just said above.

View attachment 122665

Montreal Gazette, 22-10-1962

View attachment 122666

The Montreal Gazette, 13-9-1967

View attachment 122667

Toledo Blade, 23-10-1962

View attachment 122668

The Times News, September 22, 1965

View attachment 122669

Ocala Star-Banner, November 27, 1962
Do you even read what you post, genius?
 
.
Do you even read what you post, genius?


All but from an Indian source I read, who collected these so called facts, to show his fellow Indians that China was crushed based on the archived newspaper cuttings, lolxxxx

There are many more.
 
.
All but from an Indian source I read, who collected these so called facts, to show his fellow Indians that China was crushed based on the newspaper cuttings, lolxxxx
You still have not. Go through them first before asking me to go back to holes.
 
.
Interesting conflict. The reality is that the Chinese withdrew from Arunachal because their front lines there had collapsed due to weak supply lines. Not so the case with Aksai Chin. So they kept that.

Little understood fact...
100% correct. The PLA ran out of supplies and especially water. They drank from dirty streams and hundreds fell sick and many died of stomach related diseases. They had to eat shoots of grass to keep themselves alive!

And the Chinese say they withdrew from areas captured in Arunachal Pradesh because they wanted to 'teach India a lesson only'. Bullshit. No bloody army will withdraw just like that without a quid pro quo especially when they considered the area as part of Southern Tibet and therefore part of China!

I wish the Indian Air Force was used in the conflict. That was the biggest mistake of the entire war. Thanks to Krishna Menon and Nehru who didn't want to 'escalate' the conflict by employing the IAF!

Idiots!
 
.
You still have not. Go through them first before asking me to go back to holes.


I have seen Indians claiming they lost less soldiers and less land compared to the Chinese. lolz

some Indians still claim they won the peace. lolx

China CRUSHED, HUMILIATING DEFEAT to India...PERIOD.
 
.
I wish the Indian Air Force was used in the conflict. That was the biggest mistake of the entire war. Thanks to Krishna Menon and Nehru who didn't want to 'escalate' the conflict by employing the IAF!

Idiots!

Well, it's not too late to see your dreams come true. Check the escalating levels of border conflict in recent times.
 
.
I have seen Indians claiming they lost less soldiers and less land compared to the Chinese. lolz

some Indians still claim they won the peace. lolx

China CRUSHED, HUMILIATING DEFEAT to India...PERIOD.
Whatever makes you happy then.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom