What's new

China picked up more than 60 casualties during Galwan clash says head of Northern command

Clearly you have no sense of military affairs or what even combat means.

Let me try to dumb it down for you. The Chinese took out the entire leadership of your Brigade. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and even 5th in Command were taken out. The Indian Soldiers were leaderless, they had no one to give them orders. 30+ Indian soldiers are useless if they have no leadership, have no idea what is happening. This is why the Indians were not even able to capture a single Chinese soldier while the Chinese on the other hand captured the entire Officer Core of the Indian Brigade deployed there. This is not a Bollywood movie.

That being said, this by no means is a measure of India's combat prowess in the region. The Indian Brigades deployed on the LAC are extremely well equipped, well trained and are by no means a joke. The PLA is aware of the Indian Army deployments and the capability they possess, this is why the situation has been de-escalated and rightly so. If a shooting war breaks out between the two sides, my money is on the Indian side to be able to defend their positions.

I am not in military. But I know that for sure, they are well trained and stronger than ordinary civilians .

The Chinese took out the entire leadership of your Brigade. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and even 5th in Command were taken out.

How did PLA taken out entire command without any fight or injury?
 
. .
They aren't my troops, but I get why you would want to make that dig. I'm happy to align with the indains every day and twice on Sunday over the Chinese.

BTW- What video are you speaking about - is it the one the Chinese cut, and selectively edited? I may have missed it, but did they show them taking the soldiers on the video, or you know at what point they captured soldiers among the multiple engagements we have now learned that took place?

There were multiple battles, as we know. 1. Ambush of over 20 unarmed soldiers 2. commanders with some troops went back to discuss (attacked again by Chinese) 3. a big pitch fight with Indian/Chinese soldiers with sticks used by Indians, while the Chinese had clubs with barbed wire around it.

Secondly, just because Indians did not capture their soldiers means nothing- why capture when you can kill 60. Why would the Chinese, who are the biggest propaganda drama queens, hide their deaths if they had only 5 who died versus killing 20 Indians? Those guys are infamous for never failing to brag wins and use it in their propaganda.

Let's not play games here, you're Indian.
Right, yes that video. The question here where is the Indian footage, heck even an edited version? There's nothing which makes your comments about the credibility of the video just hypocritical.
There were skirmishes but not 'multiple battles' as you put it. The clear indicator of there having not been previous battles was that there were no deaths. The deaths only occurred during the big clash.

The rest of your post is so ludicrous I don't know where to start. The fact they were unable to capture a single Chinese soldier shows they were overwhelmed and taken out of the fight quickly.
As for killing 60, have you ever read accounts of trench fighting in the first World War? Hand to hand fighting, whilst capable firearms are around was ineffective at gaining any battle turning advantage. It was tiring and attritional. You can't simply kill troops with one blow each, especially those who were prepared for melee combat.
Let's say they did, how on earth can you leave your commanders and so many men behind? How is that evidence of a clear victory for the Indian troops? Even YouTube fights between groups of football hooligans show that the side which leaves its leaders and men on the floor has lost.

Another key bit of damming evidence is that the Indian military admitted that they had no one missing after the clash i.e. they were unaware totally of the locations of their own men, once they had been scattered after the battle.
 
.
This claim is made by none other the chief of northern command and it can't get more official than this. Do get that or not?

Or this forum is for Chinese propaganda who till month back didn't even accept any causality figure?

Their whole country runs on propaganda.
They put Jack Ma in "re-education" camp....what choice do ordinary Chinese have than to "believe" the continuous crap CCP throws at them.
They don't want to end up in one of those camps.
 
. .
Let's not play games here, you're Indian.
Right, yes that video. The question here where is the Indian footage, heck even an edited version? There's nothing which makes your comments about the credibility of the video just hypocritical.
There were skirmishes but not 'multiple battles' as you put it. The clear indicator of there having not been previous battles was that there were no deaths. The deaths only occurred during the big clash.

The rest of your post is so ludicrous I don't know where to start. The fact they were unable to capture a single Chinese soldier shows they were overwhelmed and taken out of the fight quickly.
As for killing 60, have you ever read accounts of trench fighting in the first World War? Hand to hand fighting, whilst capable firearms are around was ineffective at gaining any battle turning advantage. It was tiring and attritional. You can't simply kill troops with one blow each, especially those who were prepared for melee combat.
Let's say they did, how on earth can you leave your commanders and so many men behind? How is that evidence of a clear victory for the Indian troops? Even YouTube fights between groups of football hooligans show that the side which leaves its leaders and men on the floor has lost.

Another key bit of damming evidence is that the Indian military admitted that they had no one missing after the clash i.e. they were unaware totally of the locations of their own men, once they had been scattered after the battle.

Let me understand this.
1. because the Indian side did not go with camera's they must have lost.
2. The fact there's NO video showing when the 10 soldiers were taken, does not make a difference to your narrative. Oddly you don't hold China to the same level of analysis i.e. They had video being shot, why did they show when the capture took place? By golly, you know it happened in the timeline you decided it happened
3. You claimed deaths only occurred in the big battle- you know this how?
4. You pontificate that since no Chinese capture occurs, it means Indians lost. Could it have been they were not going for any capture? A capture order comes from a commander typically.
5. leaving a commander behind. That commander could have been part of the first 20 to patrol, could have been part of the second group who went there trying to settle it peacefully
6. In your wars with India, did you lose every war because you left your commanders that were captured?
7. finally - you say the evidence is damning because India initially said none were captured but quickly updated everyone. HOWEVER, it is not damning when the Chinese said no one died on their side. That's a convenient assessment

Thanks for indulging, my advice is there are only two knowns, the rest is unknown...Chinese hid their deaths and 20 Indian soldiers died. I chose to believe international accounts that say anywhere from 35-60 of the Chinese soldiers died. The Chinese repeatedly lie, have no honor when they hid their soldier's deaths, and that's my reasons for going with other's assessment
 
.
Well, what part makes no sense. For a moment, please take off your cheerleading cloths and think in common sense. The galwan clash happened hand to hand combat. If you take worst case senario, they were min 30+ Indian soldiers present at the clash. Do you think, 30+ trained army soldiers can't inflict a single injury or death to PLA soldiers?
This is a question you should ask Indian army. Why they couldn't even take a one picture of a death or captured Chinese soldiers? I've only seen couple videos released from shameless Indian but those were the time they attacked the Chinese soldiers who tried to negotiated.
 
. .
I am not in military. But I know that for sure, they are well trained and stronger than ordinary civilians .

The Chinese took out the entire leadership of your Brigade. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and even 5th in Command were taken out.

How did PLA taken out entire command without any fight or injury?
If you have seen the videos when the Chinese reinforcement came. It was in dark but Chinese still have videos and pictures. That mean Chinese were in total controlled. More Indian soldiers mean more running pigs.
 
.
And I swear by Mao and Xi pandas and bats that Chinese are born bullet proof.
Bullet proof not necessary when your army fights so poorly and. Surrenders so easily
1615598147451.jpeg
 
. .
.
If you have seen the videos when the Chinese reinforcement came. It was in dark but Chinese still have videos and pictures. That mean Chinese were in total controlled. More Indian soldiers mean more running pigs.
So India did not call for reinforcement? Your high IQ makes you believe that Indian soldiers just waited for PLA re-infoment to arrive. being killed or captured.
 
. .
Oh shit..... Only took few weeks for Indians to increasing the number of PLA casualties from 4 to 40 to more than 60 in the Galwan clash. In few years from now the number will be in 1000s from wikipedia editing. I'm so sad..........:(
Just like they say an F-16 was shot but now maybe they say it was a JF-17. Maybe next it will be an entire PAF Squadron 😜
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom