China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan

[Brotherhood]

China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan - People's Daily Online September 02, 2010

China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."

"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.

The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.

Source: Xinhua

 

[siegecrossbow]

China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan - People's Daily Online September 02, 2010

China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."

"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.

The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.

Source: Xinhua

The final nail in the coffin for this piece of China-bashing rumor !

 

[graphican]

Great. We never had doubted about it but India and USA who knew little made more noise about it.

 

[HUD1]

We totally believe the Chinese.

 

[siegecrossbow]

We totally believe the Chinese.

Your sarcasm didn't exactly come across as.... sarcastic.

 

[xinhui]

rebuff from NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/opinion/09iht-edletters.html?_r=1

and Selig S. Harrison responds (the person who wrote the first OpEd)

True, the Chinese in Gilgit-Baltistan are not combat soldiers, and their work on flood relief and economic development has positive benefits. But the impact of such a large foreign presence in a thinly populated, undeveloped region has been profound.

You can read the entire exchange in the NYT link above.

 

[challenger]

rebuff from NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/opinion/09iht-edletters.html?_r=1

and Selig S. Harrison responds (the person who wrote the first OpEd)

True, the Chinese in Gilgit-Baltistan are not combat soldiers, and their work on flood relief and economic development has positive benefits. But the impact of such a large foreign presence in a thinly populated, undeveloped region has been profound.

You can read the entire exchange in the NYT link above.

It seems if someone wants to know about Pakistan, he should ask Americans as they claim to be more aware of Pakistan's internal affairs than Pakistanis themselves.

 

[CardSharp]

rebuff from NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/opinion/09iht-edletters.html?_r=1

and Selig S. Harrison responds (the person who wrote the first OpEd)

True, the Chinese in Gilgit-Baltistan are not combat soldiers, and their work on flood relief and economic development has positive benefits. But the impact of such a large foreign presence in a thinly populated, undeveloped region has been profound.

You can read the entire exchange in the NYT link above.

It's really hard to explain the unconventional nature of the PLA and how much of a mixed bag it really is. Fighting a war is only part of its traditional responsibility.

I again recommend this excellent talk on the PLA given by Denny Blasko if you have the attention span to sit through it.

My original post about the lecture here if you want to leave your thoughts.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...lligence-officer-china-hand-explains-pla.html

 

[siegecrossbow]

It seems if someone wants to know about Pakistan, he should ask Americans as they claim to be more aware of Pakistan's internal affairs than Pakistanis themselves.

Let me sum up Mr. Harrison's little retort:

"While the Chinese look like they are genuinely trying to help the Pakistanis, they are not. The yellow peril will take over the sparsely populated areas and use them as bases for their sinister plan of global domination."

 

[challenger]

Let me sum up Mr. Harrison's little retort:

"While the Chinese look like they are genuinely trying to help the Pakistanis, they are not. The yellow peril will take over the sparsely populated areas and use them as bases for their sinister plan of global domination."

In another way,

"We whites are losing to the Yellows. They are not allowing the whites to occupy the rest of the planet."