China opposes Indian bid to supply submarine technology to T ..

[Tshering22]

Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai forever.

China has always been a country of harsh climate, harsh consequences and harsh situations. It respects a position of power. Diplomacy is seen as a sign of weakness, especially when lacking the military or quasi-military backing behind that diplomacy.

Which is exactly why things went downhill the time the whole Bhutan episode happened.

It is good to see that our relations with China have strengthened since that incident and the Chinese side has been appreciative of the positive gestures made.

Two civilisational countries should remain friends especially with a 2,000 year old friendship.

No temporary failed state with 14 centuries of medieval borrowed history should ever be an obstacle in such a relationship.

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

Indian subs in taiwanese hands lol... What good would that do?

 

[Viva_Viet]

Agent Orange afflicted brain damage cannot differentiate between swarm attack and human wave tactic.
.


.

Wow, seem like Cnes history book is full of shame ( Cnese force only know 1 stupid human wave tactic since its early history and many times it didnt work well like in Mongol-Qing-Jap invasion, 1979 war etc) , so now u try to twist it to make Cnese "look smarter"

---'-----

As on the other fronts, the out numbered Vietnamese troops put up a stiff defense; after five days, the Chinese had advanced only a few kilometers. The Chinese employed human wave attacks to overcome the Vietnamese positions, but the battle continued until March 5 when Lao Cai fell to the attackers.

While the main Chinese thrusts focused on Lao Cai, Cao Bang and Lang Son, several supporting attacks were conducted elsewhere along the China-Vietnam border. Many of these attacks resembled the larger Chinese operations. For example, in Quang Ninh, on the eastern edge of the border, a platoon of Vietnamese held up an attack on Cao Ba Lanh Mountain for five hours, inflicting 360 casualties on the attacking Chinese force that numbered over 2,800 men.

The day after the Chinese captured Lang Son, Beijing declared that the gate to Hanoi was open; that the Vietnamese had been sufficiently chastised; and announced that it was withdrawing its forces. By March 16, all Chinese forces had crossed the border back into China, blowing bridges and railroads and generally laying waste to the Vietnamese countryside along the way.

WINNERS AND LOSERS?

The Chinese had hoped to win a quick decision against the Vietnamese, but they found out that their troops were no match for the better-trained and combat-experienced Vietnamese and that they only succeeded when their forces outnumbered the defenders. The Chinese had used outdated and obsolete equipment, some dating back to World War II and/or the Korean War, and their tactics were slow and deliberate. Rather than pursue the infiltration and envelopment tactics that had proved so successful in Korea, the PLA had most often turned to massive frontal assaults that were both wasteful and ineffective.

https://www.historynet.com/sino-vietnamese-war-1979.htm

 

[Han Patriot]

So basically, you built a military base in your own country to save face after the humiliation of not being able to build your road in Bhutan. I think you are forgetting that India controls the high ground in the region, so all that Chinese infrastructure is useless. That is why China wanted to build the road, so they can move military equipment to a dominant position over India. Here is google maps that show no raod in Doklam other than the dirt road before unsuitable for military transposrt
https://earth.google.com/web/@27.31...iUweDM5ZTE1MDg1NjZjZDNkNTE6MHhhYzQ5MzRjMTgyOD
That "road" does not even go to China

Technically it was a disputed area and India was the one claiming protection for Bhutan not China. Remember Bhutan was an Indian protectorate, that's why until today we don't have even a consulate there. Now instead of protecting Bhutan, you ran after being threatened with war. No road in Bhutan? Please check the map and look at the kilometers of roads inside Doklam. Check the map and view in 3D, it's a plateau and you are at the fringes of the plateau, that's why you think you have higher altitude, don't forget a single bang at that road leading up to that plateau, you are gone. No access at all, China OTOH is coming from the Tibetan plateau, that's the real high ground my friend, we are going slightly downhill, you are climbing uphill. If we really thought of using a kilometer of road to theaten India, we WOULDN'T HAVE CONVEYED OUR INTENTION to India right? Don't be paranoid and shiver all the time my dear Gangu. By building a kilometer of road, we were just using it for patrols, no bases whatsoever, now India is really threatened, we have a full fledged base there at the higher ground. Check google maps, the ridge is lower than the plateau. NO ROADS? See those yellow lines? . You should read Colonel Vinayak's analysis.

The fact is Chinese got kicked out of Bhutan in front of the whole world and there was nothing they could do but withdraw and not build their road

As for Sikkim, it is so funny to see you Chinese deny how you tried to prevent India from annexing it. Think about it, if Sikkim is not part of India, DOklam would never have happened.

Arguing with CPC trolls is just like hitting a brick wall

Deny you from annexing Sikkim, we have no capability to hold Sikkim even if we wanted to, what's there to deny? The truth was it was a border tension rather than a 'war' as you put it and the 'thousands' you killed in Sikkim was a guesstimate. You lost a war in 1962 and was trying to create a 'victory' to claim back wounded pride.

We got kicked out of Doklam? Ask your Ret. Colonel Vinayak if that was true. He was supposed to be a witness for a parliamentarian hearing which was mysteriously cancelled. I wonder why?
New trouble for India: China occupies North Doklam, with armoured vehicles & 7 helipads
https://theprint.in/security/new-trouble-for-india-as-china-fully-occupies-doklam/29561/

You need to check the results, in the end, Doklam was militarized and now we don't even need to barter with the Bhutanese for control of Doklam, all because of a kilometer of road to a ridge? You expect us to invade India by jumping down a ridge genius? Geeshhh. Btw, if India were to fight a war with China one on one, you would lose that war, and you know that is true. =)

You are SO IGNORANT of your own country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Sikkim
British and Indian protectorate
Under the 1861 Treaty of Tumlong Sikkim became a British protectorate, then an Indian protectorate in 1950.

Sikkim is an Indian protectorate since 1950, how did China prevent India from annexing it without Sikkimese request.
Sorry, China is not the troublemaker and interfering bully like India, always bullying and interfering with their small neighbors.
The road don't control the Donglang area but the military base does.
India had been dumb and duped by China.
While Indian attention was focused with that stupid road, China built an entire military base that will now control the Donglang high plateau.
Sorry to let you know, China now control the plateau high ground.
China can blast the Indian Doka La base, perched off the perilous cliff, to their doom anytime.
.

Exactly, I was trying to explain to them, but they just couldn't get it? A kilometer of road to a cliff doesn't threaten India, a base on the flat plateau does. Deep down, I think they know they just did a big blunder but exert a 'victorious' facade to save face.

This is their so called advantageous higher ground hanging precariously on the side of a cliff. . The flat part is now controlled by China.

 

[Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA]

When did I mention 1962? Yes, China won against India with an army 7 times bigger. Big deal. China did get humiliated by india when it tried to capture Sikkim in 1967 though.

You mean PLA killed and wounded 607 Indians sodiers in 1967？！

Wow, seem like Cnes history book is full of shame ( Cnese force only know 1 stupid human wave tactic since its early history and many times it didnt work well like in Mongol-Qing-Jap invasion, 1979 war etc) , so now u try to twist it to make Cnese "look smarter"

---'-----

As on the other fronts, the out numbered Vietnamese troops put up a stiff defense; after five days, the Chinese had advanced only a few kilometers. The Chinese employed human wave attacks to overcome the Vietnamese positions, but the battle continued until March 5 when Lao Cai fell to the attackers.

While the main Chinese thrusts focused on Lao Cai, Cao Bang and Lang Son, several supporting attacks were conducted elsewhere along the China-Vietnam border. Many of these attacks resembled the larger Chinese operations. For example, in Quang Ninh, on the eastern edge of the border, a platoon of Vietnamese held up an attack on Cao Ba Lanh Mountain for five hours, inflicting 360 casualties on the attacking Chinese force that numbered over 2,800 men.

The day after the Chinese captured Lang Son, Beijing declared that the gate to Hanoi was open; that the Vietnamese had been sufficiently chastised; and announced that it was withdrawing its forces. By March 16, all Chinese forces had crossed the border back into China, blowing bridges and railroads and generally laying waste to the Vietnamese countryside along the way.

WINNERS AND LOSERS?

The Chinese had hoped to win a quick decision against the Vietnamese, but they found out that their troops were no match for the better-trained and combat-experienced Vietnamese and that they only succeeded when their forces outnumbered the defenders. The Chinese had used outdated and obsolete equipment, some dating back to World War II and/or the Korean War, and their tactics were slow and deliberate. Rather than pursue the infiltration and envelopment tactics that had proved so successful in Korea, the PLA had most often turned to massive frontal assaults that were both wasteful and ineffective.

https://www.historynet.com/sino-vietnamese-war-1979.htm

You mean shame like this:
South China Sea Conflit

Date 14 March 1988
Chigua Reef
Territorial changes:
Chinese retook Chigua Reef
Belligerents

China

Vietnam

Casualties and losses
China 0 killed =VS= Vietnam 64 killed
China 1 wounded =VS= Vietnam 11 wounded
China 0 captured =VS= Vietnam 9 captured
China 0 armed transporters sunk =VS= Vietnam 2 armed transporters sunk
China 0 landing craft destroyed =VS= Vietnam 1 landing craft destroyed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Chinese_domination_of_Vietnam

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Technically it was a disputed area and India was the one claiming protection for Bhutan not China. Remember Bhutan was an Indian protectorate, that's why until today we don't have even a consulate there. Now instead of protecting Bhutan, you ran after being threatened with war. No road in Bhutan? Please check the map and look at the kilometers of roads inside Doklam. Check the map and view in 3D, it's a plateau and you are at the fringes of the plateau, that's why you think you have higher altitude, don't forget a single bang at that road leading up to that plateau, you are gone. No access at all, China OTOH is coming from the Tibetan plateau, that's the real high ground my friend, we are going slightly downhill, you are climbing uphill. If we really thought of using a kilometer of road to theaten India, we WOULDN'T HAVE CONVEYED OUR INTENTION to India right? Don't be paranoid and shiver all the time my dear Gangu. By building a kilometer of road, we were just using it for patrols, no bases whatsoever, now India is really threatened, we have a full fledged base there at the higher ground. Check google maps, the ridge is lower than the plateau. NO ROADS? See those yellow lines? . You should read Colonel Vinayak's analysis.

Deny you from annexing Sikkim, we have no capability to hold Sikkim even if we wanted to, what's there to deny? The truth was it was a border tension rather than a 'war' as you put it and the 'thousands' you killed in Sikkim was a guesstimate. You lost a war in 1962 and was trying to create a 'victory' to claim back wounded pride.

We got kicked out of Doklam? Ask your Ret. Colonel Vinayak if that was true. He was supposed to be a witness for a parliamentarian hearing which was mysteriously cancelled. I wonder why?
New trouble for India: China occupies North Doklam, with armoured vehicles & 7 helipads
https://theprint.in/security/new-trouble-for-india-as-china-fully-occupies-doklam/29561/

You need to check the results, in the end, Doklam was militarized and now we don't even need to barter with the Bhutanese for control of Doklam, all because of a kilometer of road to a ridge? You expect us to invade India by jumping down a ridge genius? Geeshhh


Exactly, I was trying to explain to them, but they just couldn't get it? A kilometer of road to a cliff doesn't threaten India, a base on the flat plateau does. Deep down, I think they know they just did a big blunder but exert a 'victorious' facade to save face.
View attachment 533140

This is their so called advantageous higher ground hanging precariously on the side of a cliff. . The flat part is now controlled by China.

It does not matter how you spin it, the fact is China tried to build a road in Bhutanese territory or territory claimed by Bhutan but failed. So what if you militarized the Plateau, what was stopping you from doing so earlier? You have a right to militarize your own territory. India did the same, and we hold a dominant position over you. I still do not see why you had to humiliate yourselves in front of the entire world by trying to expand that dirt road in Bhutan if you could have just built that road in the first place. The facts are

China attempted to modify a dirt road in territory claimed/controlled by Bhutan. It failed, and there is no such road capable of moving military infrastructure today. The images you posted prove that.

However you spin it, we still have the higher ground in the region. Which means WE have the advantage. That is hwy your army was not able to remove the Indian soldiers by force, and your "militarization" is useless. BTW, we militarized the area as well, so it looks like you are not as threatening as you claim.

When did I say you got kicked out of Doklam? Doklam is shared between China, India, and Bhutan. The problem arose when China attempted to modify a road in Bhutanese territory to try and compensate for the disadvantage they have against India in the region. China could have militarized its portion of Doklam all it wanted with no problem at all.

When did I say india killed thousands of soldiers in 67? I simply said India was able to annex the entirety of Sikkim despite Chinese opposition. Even if you could not control it, you definitely did not want it to go to India because as I have pointed out, possessing Sikkim gives India the tactical advantage over China in the region, particularly in Doklam. And at the time, the border between North Sikkim and China was disputed, but India was still able to annex that occupied territory. And btw, Sikkim is about the same size as Aksai Chin, the only territory India lost in it big "defeat,"

So if China's new military base in its portion of Doklam allows it to invade India despite the fact it failed to build the road it wanted, why has China made ZERO transgressions in either Indian or disputed Bhutanese territory since then? In fact, China has made almost no transgressins into Indian soil at all. Looks like you don't want to receive more international humiliation. Overall, it looks like India got what it wanted after Doklam. It was able to secure Bhutanese territory, and that territory is still controlled and patrolled by Bhutan even today. Bhutan remembers that, which is why it is still a reliable Indian ally and why their new PM has visited India in his only state visit. Yet he hasn't even made a phone call to China. So much for winning over India's neighborhood. In addition, China made more concesions to India later, like the river sharing and rice import deal. Meanwhile what did China get? Nothing except having to save face by building a military base on its own territory and that is at a tactical disadvantage compared to India.

 

[sinait]

Wow, seem like Cnes history book is full of shame ( Cnese force only know 1 stupid human wave tactic since its early history and many times it didnt work well like in Mongol-Qing-Jap invasion, 1979 war etc) , so now u try to twist it to make Cnese "look smarter"

---'-----

As on the other fronts, the out numbered Vietnamese troops put up a stiff defense; after five days, the Chinese had advanced only a few kilometers. The Chinese employed human wave attacks to overcome the Vietnamese positions, but the battle continued until March 5 when Lao Cai fell to the attackers.

While the main Chinese thrusts focused on Lao Cai, Cao Bang and Lang Son, several supporting attacks were conducted elsewhere along the China-Vietnam border. Many of these attacks resembled the larger Chinese operations. For example, in Quang Ninh, on the eastern edge of the border, a platoon of Vietnamese held up an attack on Cao Ba Lanh Mountain for five hours, inflicting 360 casualties on the attacking Chinese force that numbered over 2,800 men.

The day after the Chinese captured Lang Son, Beijing declared that the gate to Hanoi was open; that the Vietnamese had been sufficiently chastised; and announced that it was withdrawing its forces. By March 16, all Chinese forces had crossed the border back into China, blowing bridges and railroads and generally laying waste to the Vietnamese countryside along the way.

WINNERS AND LOSERS?

The Chinese had hoped to win a quick decision against the Vietnamese, but they found out that their troops were no match for the better-trained and combat-experienced Vietnamese and that they only succeeded when their forces outnumbered the defenders. The Chinese had used outdated and obsolete equipment, some dating back to World War II and/or the Korean War, and their tactics were slow and deliberate. Rather than pursue the infiltration and envelopment tactics that had proved so successful in Korea, the PLA had most often turned to massive frontal assaults that were both wasteful and ineffective.

https://www.historynet.com/sino-vietnamese-war-1979.htm

Nobody is saying the Vietnamese is feckless like the Indians.
Vietnam is a worthy opponent and had a lot of war booty modern equipment from the retreating Americans.
If the Vietnamese were so STRONK, why the Vietnamese did not prosecute the Chinese military while they were "WINNING" but instead allowed the Chinese to scorch North Vietnam on their return to China.

Don't you find it odd that Vietnam the "VICTOR" had to cede land to China to conclude the war.
Dumb people will go on and on about trivialities and ignore the result from FACTS.
Don't keep harping on the various battles.
Its who won the WAR that matters.

Ah, it has to do with Agent Orange brain damage.

http://viettan.org/China-rift-opens-in-Vietnam.html
" To date, neither Hanoi nor Beijing has disclosed the exact details of the border agreement or a new official map. In a single interview with state media, a Vietnamese deputy foreign minister responsible for the negotiations downplayed Vietnam’s loss of major cultural landmarks, including the Ai Nam gate and the Ban Gioc waterfall.
.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

One has to appreciate the irony of a chinese calling Indians "feckless"

 

[Han Patriot]

It does not matter how you spin it, the fact is China tried to build a road in Bhutanese territory or territory claimed by Bhutan but failed. So what if you militarized the Plateau, what was stopping you from doing so earlier? You have a right to militarize your own territory. India did the same, and we hold a dominant position over you. I still do not see why you had to humiliate yourselves in front of the entire world by trying to expand that dirt road in Bhutan if you could have just built that road in the first place. The facts are

It's not a spin, it's a fact, you created a mess by claiming to protect Bhutan then left them. If we controlled that plateau, we wouldn't need to negotiate and trade territories with Bhutan right? It was disputed from the start. China had no intention of militarizing that plateau, roads were used for patrols and that's it. Out of your own insecurity and blatant disregard for peace, you created a mess, instead of reducing security threats, you just created one. Humiliated ourselves? It was not just a dirt road, the road before that were all paved to military grade for vehicles. We had the courtesy to inform the Indian side about our intention and there were no replies, had this been discussed on a bilateral channel, things wouldn't need to go this far. You must understand China had no intention to create conflicts, India created this conflict. You could have used proper channels to show protest.

China attempted to modify a dirt road in territory claimed/controlled by Bhutan. It failed, and there is no such road capable of moving military infrastructure today. The images you posted prove that.

Zoom in the images carefully and you will see concrete roads instead of the so called dirt road you thought it was. Those roads were a concern for India because there were military grade road capable of handling tanks.

However you spin it, we still have the higher ground in the region. Which means WE have the advantage. That is hwy your army was not able to remove the Indian soldiers by force, and your "militarization" is useless. BTW, we militarized the area as well, so it looks like you are not as threatening as you claim.

Take a look at that google images properly and understand the situation, it's a plateau as I told you, if we go a few hundred meters behind, we would also be on a higher ground, so? The fact remains, there is only one road up to that plateau and you are hanging by a cliff. Do you know the significance of a piece of flat real estate at high altitude facing Silliguri? . You were already at Doka La for decades bhai. How much can you militarize on the side of a cliff? You know how many howitzers we can put on that flat big piece of real estate? . If you have any strategic mind, you would have known that, China at all cost should never be allowed to control that flat piece of plateau.

When did I say you got kicked out of Doklam? Doklam is shared between China, India, and Bhutan. The problem arose when China attempted to modify a road in Bhutanese territory to try and compensate for the disadvantage they have against India in the region. China could have militarized its portion of Doklam all it wanted with no problem at all.

Doklam is a plateau, as per treaty, you are at your side fringes of Doklam, we are at the flat plateau of Doklam. Compensate what disadvantage? A km of roads to a cliff for patrols doesn't add any advantage bro, a base on that flat high altitude plateau does. . Well we had no intention at all to militarize Doklam, now you gave us an excuse. You need to understand China is not a conflict seeking nation especially on a country as generous as India giving us 50bil$ surplus annually. Imagine if we tried to militarize that area, and India protested as per proper channels, I believe out of diplomatic concerns, we might have just stopped since there is no claims on Sikkim at all. The opposite happened now. You have no excuse for peaceful protest, we will just militarize based on your 'threat' to us.

The fact is Chinese got kicked out of Bhutan in front of the whole world and there was nothing they could do but withdraw and not build their road

This is what you said previously...being forgetful again? hehe

When did I say india killed thousands of soldiers in 67? I simply said India was able to annex the entirety of Sikkim despite Chinese opposition. Even if you could not control it, you definitely did not want it to go to India because as I have pointed out, possessing Sikkim gives India the tactical advantage over China in the region, particularly in Doklam. And at the time, the border between North Sikkim and China was disputed, but India was still able to annex that occupied territory. And btw, Sikkim is about the same size as Aksai Chin, the only territory India lost in it big "defeat,"

That was the propaganda being thrown around in our forum previously. The point is we can't do anything even if we cared, Sikkim was below plateau, we can't hold AP let alone prevent you from annexing Sikkim. How can we lose something, when we didn't even fight for it in the first place? . Aksai Chin was the disputed territory, we captured it, it's ours, if you want to annex Bhutan, we can't stop you, the UN is the one responsible.

So if China's new military base in its portion of Doklam allows it to invade India despite the fact it failed to build the road it wanted, why has China made ZERO transgressions in either Indian or disputed Bhutanese territory since then? In fact, China has made almost no transgressins into Indian soil at all. Looks like you don't want to receive more international humiliation. Overall, it looks like India got what it wanted after Doklam. It was able to secure Bhutanese territory, and that territory is still controlled and patrolled by Bhutan even today. Bhutan remembers that, which is why it is still a reliable Indian ally and why their new PM has visited India in his only state visit. Yet he hasn't even made a phone call to China. So much for winning over India's neighborhood. In addition, China made more concesions to India later, like the river sharing and rice import deal. Meanwhile what did China get? Nothing except having to save face by building a military base on its own territory and that is at a tactical disadvantage compared to India.

I don't understand all this Indian obsession about us invading you. Geographically it is impossible for us to invade India. We can only attack and hold Aksai Chin. Chinese designs on the border is mostly for defense purposes, check the troop deployment in Tibet vs your deployment in your NE area. You have a almost 8 to 1 superiority in terms of number. That base is use as a strategic node to cut off Siliguri not INVADE INDIA. If case India and China were to fight in AP, Doklam is the node that will cut off Siliguri. In the meantime, at least for the next few decades, China has no intention of invading India, hell business is good and booming, why kill the golden goose.

Patrolled by Bhutan? are you sure my friend?. Previously the Bhutanese do make patrols into that plateau, with a Chinese base there, you think they will 'patrol'. You must be pretty naive. Btw, how many times did you NSA and PM came to China begging to negotiate? and how many times did we go to India? It was you who came to beg for peace, not US.

Bhutan is an Indian poodle, I can't control their PM. Rice concessions? River sharing? Since when did we have a river sharing agreement with you? You mean basmati rice import? Bro you give us a 50bil$ surplus importing industrial goods, of course we will buy your rice.

Nobody is saying the Vietnamese is feckless like the Indians.
Vietnam is a worthy opponent and had a lot of war booty modern equipment from the retreating Americans.
If the Vietnamese were so STRONK, why the Vietnamese did not prosecute the Chinese military while they were "WINNING" but instead allowed the Chinese to scorch North Vietnam on their return to China.

Don't you find it odd that Vietnam the "VICTOR" had to cede land to China to conclude the war.
Dumb people will go on and on about trivialities and ignore the result from FACTS.
Don't keep harping on the various battles.
Its who won the WAR that matters.

Ah, it has to do with Agent Orange brain damage.

http://viettan.org/China-rift-opens-in-Vietnam.html
" To date, neither Hanoi nor Beijing has disclosed the exact details of the border agreement or a new official map. In a single interview with state media, a Vietnamese deputy foreign minister responsible for the negotiations downplayed Vietnam’s loss of major cultural landmarks, including the Ai Nam gate and the Ban Gioc waterfall.
.

The Viets were definitely a more formidable force compared to slumdog India. Deng knew we couldn't stay long inside Vietnamese heartland, we saw how the Americans were decimated through monkey guerilla warfare. Our aim was go in spank them and leave.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

It's not a spin, it's a fact, you created a mess by claiming to protect Bhutan then left them. If we controlled that plateau, we wouldn't need to negotiate and trade territories with Bhutan right? It was disputed from the start. China had no intention of militarizing that plateau, roads were used for patrols and that's it. Out of your own insecurity and blatant disregard for peace, you created a mess, instead of reducing security threats, you just created one. Humiliated ourselves? It was not just a dirt road, the road before that were all paved to military grade for vehicles. We had the courtesy to inform the Indian side about our intention and there were no replies, had this been discussed on a bilateral channel, things wouldn't need to go this far. You must understand China had no intention to create conflicts, India created this conflict. You could have used proper channels to show protest.


Zoom in the images carefully and you will see concrete roads instead of the so called dirt road you thought it was. Those roads were a concern for India because there were military grade road capable of handling tanks.



Take a look at that google images properly and understand the situation, it's a plateau as I told you, if we go a few hundred meters behind, we would also be on a higher ground, so? The fact remains, there is only one road up to that plateau and you are hanging by a cliff. Do you know the significance of a piece of flat real estate at high altitude facing Silliguri? . You were already at Doka La for decades bhai. How much can you militarize on the side of a cliff? You know how many howitzers we can put on that flat big piece of real estate? . If you have any strategic mind, you would have known that, China at all cost should never be allowed to control that flat piece of plateau.




Doklam is a plateau, as per treaty, you are at your side fringes of Doklam, we are at the flat plateau of Doklam. Compensate what disadvantage? A km of roads to a cliff for patrols doesn't add any advantage bro, a base on that flat high altitude plateau does. . Well we had no intention at all to militarize Doklam, now you gave us an excuse. You need to understand China is not a conflict seeking nation especially on a country as generous as India giving us 50bil$ surplus annually. Imagine if we tried to militarize that area, and India protested as per proper channels, I believe out of diplomatic concerns, we might have just stopped since there is no claims on Sikkim at all. The opposite happened now. You have no excuse for peaceful protest, we will just militarize based on your 'threat' to us.



This is what you said previously...being forgetful again? hehe


That was the propaganda being thrown around in our forum previously. The point is we can't do anything even if we cared, Sikkim was below plateau, we can't hold AP let alone prevent you from annexing Sikkim. How can we lose something, when we didn't even fight for it in the first place? . Aksai Chin was the disputed territory, we captured it, it's ours, if you want to annex Bhutan, we can't stop you, the UN is the one responsible.



I don't understand all this Indian obsession about us invading you. Geographically it is impossible for us to invade India. We can only attack and hold Aksai Chin. Chinese designs on the border is mostly for defense purposes, check the troop deployment in Tibet vs your deployment in your NE area. You have a almost 8 to 1 superiority in terms of number. That base is use as a strategic node to cut off Siliguri not INVADE INDIA. If case India and China were to fight in AP, Doklam is the node that will cut off Siliguri. In the meantime, at least for the next few decades, China has no intention of invading India, hell business is good and booming, why kill the golden goose.

Patrolled by Bhutan? are you sure my friend?. Previously the Bhutanese do make patrols into that plateau, with a Chinese base there, you think they will 'patrol'. You must be pretty naive. Btw, how many times did you NSA and PM came to China begging to negotiate? and how many times did we go to India? It was you who came to beg for peace, not US.

Bhutan is an Indian poodle, I can't control their PM. Rice concessions? River sharing? Since when did we have a river sharing agreement with you? You mean basmati rice import? Bro you give us a 50bil$ surplus importing industrial goods, of course we will buy your rice.

So you yourself admitted China cannot invade Northeast India. It looks like we are on the same page in that regard. But you are mistaken in your assertion that China can utilize its position on Doklam to cut of Silguiri. Like I have already stated, India still controls the higher territory and has roads supplying its army, not to mention air support thanks to new air bases India has built nearby in response to China's militarization of its own territory. Like I said, there is nothing we can do if you choose to militarize on your own soil, the problem was when you violated Bhutan's soveireignty. If China was smart, it would have simply built a base in the first place and India would have not been able to do anything. The fact is there is still no road capable of carrying military infrastructure from China to the Plateau, which means that India's position in Doklam is safe. China does not have the capability of cutting of Silguiri, which is the most millitarized part of India outside of Kashmir.

I alrady told you, the Chinese failed to build any military infrastructure on the BHUTANESE side of the Plateau. How hard is it to understand the Plateau is split between three countries, India, China, Bhutan, with the majority being territory controlled by Bhutan and claimed by China? the Bhutanese side is still jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India, which regularly patrols with Bhutan. The area with the road the Chinese attempted to modify falls in the Bhutanese portion, which is jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India. Hence, China does not have the capability to cut of Silguiri, like India once feared. And Aksai Chin was not the only disputed territory, China also claimed Arunachal Pradesh and refused(and still refuses) to accept the McMohan line. Yes India lost Aksai Chin, but held onto Arunachal Pradesh, which is bigger. But anyway, the argument about whether China can cut off Silguiri to capture Arunachal is largely irrelevant, since China has finally realized it can never get back AP. The fact that there have not been any transgressions in the area for a year is a good example of this.

In addition to the Basmati import, China agreed to share Brahmagupta data with India. I am pretty sure there was a thread about this topic.

BTW, I have nothing against China. TBH, I think India should remove its claim on Aksai Chin, that will make things easier with regards to Indo-Sino relations. But China needs to understand India is not the same as 62, both in terms of military and leadership.

 

[Viva_Viet]

Nobody is saying the Vietnamese is feckless like the Indians.
Vietnam is a worthy opponent and had a lot of war booty modern equipment from the retreating Americans.
If the Vietnamese were so STRONK, why the Vietnamese did not prosecute the Chinese military while they were "WINNING" but instead allowed the Chinese to scorch North Vietnam on their return to China.

Don't you find it odd that Vietnam the "VICTOR" had to cede land to China to conclude the war.
Dumb people will go on and on about trivialities and ignore the result from FACTS.
Don't keep harping on the various battles.
Its who won the WAR that matters.

Ah, it has to do with Agent Orange brain damage.

http://viettan.org/China-rift-opens-in-Vietnam.html
" To date, neither Hanoi nor Beijing has disclosed the exact details of the border agreement or a new official map. In a single interview with state media, a Vietnamese deputy foreign minister responsible for the negotiations downplayed Vietnam’s loss of major cultural landmarks, including the Ai Nam gate and the Ban Gioc waterfall.
.

We had to sent most of our soldiers( 150,000 men) to eliminate Pol Pot Cambodia in 1979.

We also didnt think CN dare to attack VN cos PLAF suck, could not gather Intel to deploy the attack.Thats our mistake,Deng willing to lick daddy US at all cost, so he got all Intel he need for the attack from US spy bird.

So, PLA got our surprise even when its still a loss for PLA when they could not force VN troops withdraw from Cambodia in 1979 war and of course its a big loss for stupid human wave tactic when so many PLA troops killed and only survive cos VN border guards ran out of bullet

For Ban Gioc water fall, can u prove that CN Qing dynasty said it belong to VN ?? Or its just simply a disputed zone ??

 

[Han Patriot]

So you yourself admitted China cannot invade Northeast India. It looks like we are on the same page in that regard. But you are mistaken in your assertion that China can utilize its position on Doklam to cut of Silguiri. Like I have already stated, India still controls the higher territory and has roads supplying its army, not to mention air support thanks to new air bases India has built nearby in response to China's militarization of its own territory. Like I said, there is nothing we can do if you choose to militarize on your own soil, the problem was when you violated Bhutan's soveireignty. If China was smart, it would have simply built a base in the first place and India would have not been able to do anything. The fact is there is still no road capable of carrying military infrastructure from China to the Plateau, which means that India's position in Doklam is safe. China does not have the capability of cutting of Silguiri, which is the most millitarized part of India outside of Kashmir.

Of course we can't and we have no intention to add slumdogs to our population to feed. If we could, why the heck we left AP 50 years ago? I can't predict the future, but you should be worried about the new rail from Sichuan to Tibet. Whether we can or cannot use Doklam to cut off Siliguri remains to be seen, but the fact remains, previously there was no base, now there is a base, previously there was no threat, now there is a threat. See the change in status quo? Bro do you know geography, how many times do I have to show you the map, the military grade roads WERE ALREADY IN DOKLAM plateau 4-5km from the disputed border, the BASE IS INSIDE DOKLAM. You are on the fringes of Doklam as you have been for the past 5 decades.

I alrady told you, the Chinese failed to build any military infrastructure on the BHUTANESE side of the Plateau. How hard is it to understand the Plateau is split between three countries, India, China, Bhutan, with the majority being territory controlled by Bhutan and claimed by China? the Bhutanese side is still jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India, which regularly patrols with Bhutan. The area with the road the Chinese attempted to modify falls in the Bhutanese portion, which is jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India. Hence, China does not have the capability to cut of Silguiri, like India once feared. And Aksai Chin was not the only disputed territory, China also claimed Arunachal Pradesh and refused(and still refuses) to accept the McMohan line. Yes India lost Aksai Chin, but held onto Arunachal Pradesh, which is bigger. But anyway, the argument about whether China can cut off Silguiri to capture Arunachal is largely irrelevant, since China has finally realized it can never get back AP. The fact that there have not been any transgressions in the area for a year is a good example of this.

Seriously, I am being a neutral analyst here, but you seem to be ignorant of the geography of Doklam, let alone understand the current ground situation. There is no BHUTANESE SIDE OR CHINESE side of Doklam, there is Doklam plateau, based on treaty, the border with India ends on the ridges along the plateau on the fringes, that's the reason why Indian base is hanging on a cliff on a slightly elevated position. If you follow the map and go back a few hundred meters, there is also another high point controlled by China, so the assertion that you are on a high point and hence you are advantageous is erroneous. Both country control high points but China has the added advantage of controlling the plateau too. In case of war, China will definitely cut off the only road leading up your cliff base, and you will be just sitting ducks. Get it? Previously both Bhutanese and Chinese soldiers patrol the plateau and China only had a road till Doka La, no bases, no helipads, no munitions dumps, whatsoever. In the meantime, we were negotiating with Bhutan to swap territories. The road China wanted to extend was a 1km section to the end of the plateau to a lower elevated ridge for patrol purposes along the border with India. Whether we can cut off Siliguri is not something I can confirm, but I can confirm we know have the capacity to house hundreds of howitzers facing Siliguri. You can argue that you can attack them, but remember if we wanted to attack you, we would first cut off that only small road hanging by the cliff up to that plateau, and godd bye Doka La. This is how vulnerable India is in that plateau. We are coming from Tibetan plateau, you are coming from the Indian plains, you see the difference? Ever wondered why China was never worried about your 8 to 1 advantage in terms of troops, because you can't get all your troops up to that plateau, it's not a plain. Once the road is cut off, your few hundred thousand troops are stuck in the Indian plains looking up at the plateau in awe.

Well, whether we will get back AP remains to be seen, the fact remain, we manage to conquered AP and AC but left AP. India did not fight to get back AP, you crawled back in after we left. That's the difference.

In addition to the Basmati import, China agreed to share Brahmagupta data with India. I am pretty sure there was a thread about this topic.

BTW, I have nothing against China. TBH, I think India should remove its claim on Aksai Chin, that will make things easier with regards to Indo-Sino relations. But China needs to understand India is not the same as 62, both in terms of military and leadership.

Bhai, we share hydro data annually until that incident. Once the relationship normalized, of course we will share again. China did propose a swap for Aksai Chin for AP, it was India who rejected it. If our borders were settled, Pakistan wouldn't exist. You did not want peace, you had designs for Tibet, Nehru had a forward policy, that's why he took in the Dalai Lama. In the end, he lost more than he could chew, Pakistan survived for decades. Without China, India would be the only South Asian hegemon. We could have divided spheres of influence.

 

[sinait]

So you yourself admitted China cannot invade Northeast India. It looks like we are on the same page in that regard. But you are mistaken in your assertion that China can utilize its position on Doklam to cut of Silguiri. Like I have already stated, India still controls the higher territory and has roads supplying its army, not to mention air support thanks to new air bases India has built nearby in response to China's militarization of its own territory. Like I said, there is nothing we can do if you choose to militarize on your own soil, the problem was when you violated Bhutan's soveireignty. If China was smart, it would have simply built a base in the first place and India would have not been able to do anything. The fact is there is still no road capable of carrying military infrastructure from China to the Plateau, which means that India's position in Doklam is safe. China does not have the capability of cutting of Silguiri, which is the most millitarized part of India outside of Kashmir.

I alrady told you, the Chinese failed to build any military infrastructure on the BHUTANESE side of the Plateau. How hard is it to understand the Plateau is split between three countries, India, China, Bhutan, with the majority being territory controlled by Bhutan and claimed by China? the Bhutanese side is still jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India, which regularly patrols with Bhutan. The area with the road the Chinese attempted to modify falls in the Bhutanese portion, which is jointly patrolled by Bhutan and India. Hence, China does not have the capability to cut of Silguiri, like India once feared. And Aksai Chin was not the only disputed territory, China also claimed Arunachal Pradesh and refused(and still refuses) to accept the McMohan line. Yes India lost Aksai Chin, but held onto Arunachal Pradesh, which is bigger. But anyway, the argument about whether China can cut off Silguiri to capture Arunachal is largely irrelevant, since China has finally realized it can never get back AP. The fact that there have not been any transgressions in the area for a year is a good example of this.

In addition to the Basmati import, China agreed to share Brahmagupta data with India. I am pretty sure there was a thread about this topic.

BTW, I have nothing against China. TBH, I think India should remove its claim on Aksai Chin, that will make things easier with regards to Indo-Sino relations. But China needs to understand India is not the same as 62, both in terms of military and leadership.

Chinese failed to build any military infrastructure on the BHUTANESE side of the Plateau.

You sound very silly now with your so called "BHUTANESE side of the Plateau".
Go check a map to see where at the plateau that India consider belong to China.

India says China is limited ONLY to within that silly pink line.
Now you tell me where the Chinese are now.
Where did you learn that frightened India DARED to patrol the Donglang Plateau after the standoff.
You should request coward Modi to sent patrol now to Donglang Plateau and see what tragedy will unfold.

Sorry, China is not interested to invade India.
China makes tens of billions off India.
It will be silly of China to kill off this idiot of a golden goose.

But its nice to have a military base at a high plateau at Donglang to be able to threaten India in case India got funny ideas.
Seems like frightened India got that MESSAGE.
https://www.ft.com/content/1aa2876c-2149-11e8-a895-1ba1f72c2c11
India orders officials to stay away from Dalai Lama rally
Coward MODI return China a favor for not killing all the Indians at the Donglang standoff.
.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Of course we can't and we have no intention to add slumdogs to our population to feed. If we could, why the heck we left AP 50 years ago? I can't predict the future, but you should be worried about the new rail from Sichuan to Tibet. Whether we can or cannot use Doklam to cut off Siliguri remains to be seen, but the fact remains, previously there was no base, now there is a base, previously there was no threat, now there is a threat. See the change in status quo? Bro do you know geography, how many times do I have to show you the map, the military grade roads WERE ALREADY IN DOKLAM plateau 4-5km from the disputed border, the BASE IS INSIDE DOKLAM. You are on the fringes of Doklam as you have been for the past 5 decades.



Seriously, I am being a neutral analyst here, but you seem to be ignorant of the geography of Doklam, let alone understand the current ground situation. There is no BHUTANESE SIDE OR CHINESE side of Doklam, there is Doklam plateau, based on treaty, the border with India ends on the ridges along the plateau on the fringes, that's the reason why Indian base is hanging on a cliff on a slightly elevated position. If you follow the map and go back a few hundred meters, there is also another high point controlled by China, so the assertion that you are on a high point and hence you are advantageous is erroneous. Both country control high points but China has the added advantage of controlling the plateau too. In case of war, China will definitely cut off the only road leading up your cliff base, and you will be just sitting ducks. Get it? Previously both Bhutanese and Chinese soldiers patrol the plateau and China only had a road till Doka La, no bases, no helipads, no munitions dumps, whatsoever. In the meantime, we were negotiating with Bhutan to swap territories. The road China wanted to extend was a 1km section to the end of the plateau to a lower elevated ridge for patrol purposes along the border with India. Whether we can cut off Siliguri is not something I can confirm, but I can confirm we know have the capacity to house hundreds of howitzers facing Siliguri. You can argue that you can attack them, but remember if we wanted to attack you, we would first cut off that only small road hanging by the cliff up to that plateau, and godd bye Doka La. This is how vulnerable India is in that plateau. We are coming from Tibetan plateau, you are coming from the Indian plains, you see the difference? Ever wondered why China was never worried about your 8 to 1 advantage in terms of troops, because you can't get all your troops up to that plateau, it's not a plain. Once the road is cut off, your few hundred thousand troops are stuck in the Indian plains looking up at the plateau in awe.

Well, whether we will get back AP remains to be seen, the fact remain, we manage to conquered AP and AC but left AP. India did not fight to get back AP, you crawled back in after we left. That's the difference.



Bhai, we share hydro data annually until that incident. Once the relationship normalized, of course we will share again. China did propose a swap for Aksai Chin for AP, it was India who rejected it. If our borders were settled, Pakistan wouldn't exist. You did not want peace, you had designs for Tibet, Nehru had a forward policy, that's why he took in the Dalai Lama. In the end, he lost more than he could chew, Pakistan survived for decades. Without China, India would be the only South Asian hegemon. We could have divided spheres of influence.

Couple of things here.

1. Your statement about Pakistan not existing if India had settled its dispute with China definitely raised my eyebrows. Could you elaborate? Because China never really provided extensive support to Pakistan during any of the Indo Pak Wars. Not to mention, India never tried to destroy Pak, it was Pakistan that tried to vapture Kashmir.

2. The area near the Plateau is not plains. Sikkim is a mountainous state, in fact there are peaks even higher than doklam right behind the plateau. There is no way China can cut off those roads(there are more than one) leading to Doklam. Not to mention India now has air support in that region. No need to worry, India's position in Doklam is quite secure. The reason India started the standoff had nothing to do with its own security, but was as a response to china violating Bhutan's territory. Like I said, India succeeded in protecting Bhutan's territory, and even jointly patrols with Bhutan on the Bhutanese portion as it had before. Nothing had changed in that regard. And like I said before, China had every right to build a base on doklam as long as it was in ITS OWN territory, I don't know why it took a standoff for that to happen.

3. Why should China feel worried about Indian troops in NE India? They are mostly for dealing with domestic insurgencies, but can of course be deployed in case of emergency.

4. you yourself stated China has no intention of attacking India, so why should India feel worried about the Tibetan Railway? India has already connected AP to mainland india by rail via the Silguir corridor, and we have airbases all along the border, including one we just built in Doklam.

You sound very silly now with your so called "BHUTANESE side of the Plateau".
Go check a map to see where at the plateau that India consider belong to China.
View attachment 533153

India says China is limited ONLY to within that silly pink line.
Now you tell me where the Chinese are now.
Where did you learn that frightened India DARED to patrol the Donglang Plateau after the standoff.
You should request coward Modi to sent patrol now to Donglang Plateau and see what tragedy will unfold.

Sorry, China is not interested to invade India.
China makes tens of billions off India.
It will be silly of China to kill off this idiot of a golden goose.

But its nice to have a military base at a high plateau at Donglang to be able to threaten India in case India got funny ideas.
Seems like frightened India got that MESSAGE.
https://www.ft.com/content/1aa2876c-2149-11e8-a895-1ba1f72c2c11
India orders officials to stay away from Dalai Lama rally
Coward MODI return China a favor for not killing all the Indians at the Donglang standoff.
.

Your little base does not threaten India as it controls the higher peaks, and we have greater capability to mobilize because our troops are not as far away as yours. And we also built a new base, as well as an airbase.

The Indian army routinely does joint patrols with Bhutan, including along Doklam. That's how it was before the standoff, that is how it is today. Nothing has changed.

You sound very silly now with your so called "BHUTANESE side of the Plateau".
Go check a map to see where at the plateau that India consider belong to China.
View attachment 533153

India says China is limited ONLY to within that silly pink line.
Now you tell me where the Chinese are now.
Where did you learn that frightened India DARED to patrol the Donglang Plateau after the standoff.
You should request coward Modi to sent patrol now to Donglang Plateau and see what tragedy will unfold.

Sorry, China is not interested to invade India.
China makes tens of billions off India.
It will be silly of China to kill off this idiot of a golden goose.

But its nice to have a military base at a high plateau at Donglang to be able to threaten India in case India got funny ideas.
Seems like frightened India got that MESSAGE.
https://www.ft.com/content/1aa2876c-2149-11e8-a895-1ba1f72c2c11
India orders officials to stay away from Dalai Lama rally
Coward MODI return China a favor for not killing all the Indians at the Donglang standoff.
.

The Chinese are within their own territory, not Bhutanese territory claimed by China.

 

[sinait]

Couple of things here.

1. Your statement about Pakistan not existing if India had settled its dispute with China definitely raised my eyebrows. Could you elaborate? Because China never really provided extensive support to Pakistan during any of the Indo Pak Wars. Not to mention, India never tried to destroy Pak, it was Pakistan that tried to vapture Kashmir.

2. The area near the Plateau is not plains. Sikkim is a mountainous state, in fact there are peaks even higher than doklam right behind the plateau. There is no way China can cut off those roads(there are more than one) leading to Doklam. Not to mention India now has air support in that region. No need to worry, India's position in Doklam is quite secure. The reason India started the standoff had nothing to do with its own security, but was as a response to china violating Bhutan's territory. Like I said, India succeeded in protecting Bhutan's territory, and even jointly patrols with Bhutan on the Bhutanese portion as it had before. Nothing had changed in that regard. And like I said before, China had every right to build a base on doklam as long as it was in ITS OWN territory, I don't know why it took a standoff for that to happen.

3. Why should China feel worried about Indian troops in NE India? They are mostly for dealing with domestic insurgencies, but can of course be deployed in case of emergency.

4. you yourself stated China has no intention of attacking India, so why should India feel worried about the Tibetan Railway? India has already connected AP to mainland india by rail via the Silguir corridor, and we have airbases all along the border, including one we just built in Doklam.

Your little base does not threaten India as it controls the higher peaks, and we have greater capability to mobilize because our troops are not as far away as yours. And we also built a new base, as well as an airbase.

The Indian army routinely does joint patrols with Bhutan, including along Doklam. That's how it was before the standoff, that is how it is today. Nothing has changed.

The Chinese are within their own territory, not Bhutanese territory claimed by China.

The Indian army routinely does joint patrols with Bhutan, including along Doklam. That's how it was before the standoff, that is how it is today. Nothing has changed.

The Chinese are within their own territory, not Bhutanese territory claimed by China

Good that you acknowledge that Donglang is Chinese territory.
As for frightened Indian Army patrolling Donglang, I suggest you remember to take your meds.
Am I wasting my time with someone drunk with gau mutra?
.