notsuperstitious
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
- Messages
- 10,473
- Reaction score
- -15
That comment was never made by the IA, it's a rumor
He knows. I've told him previously too. You are wasting your time.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That comment was never made by the IA, it's a rumor
Just as I tried hard not to post any Chinese material, you should consider the author's impartiality. There is no end to falsehood from both sides but the Indian side is necessarily more prolific in defending their position, (especially a biographer of Nehru's who was the buck-passer in chief) seeing as it was a defining moment and something that still rancors today.
No one is impartial, every job starts with a preoccupation. BTW i have not commented on the book but the discussion and its my personal opinion.
Your link book has given extensive details on war and operational tactics. It has nothing to opine in highlights, about the topic in hand. Its a torture to dig out from you link; what exactly you want to say.
As far as my link is concerned then i do believe in many critical glimpses the author has given which are missing in most of the typical
China -India debates. ''Punishing others'' is key the word for me to squeeze every thing out to understand 1962 debacle.
I am blogging from last 3 - 4 years and i am bitten by many Chinese theories against India about its border disputes, forward policy, nuclear program etc. The time is great healer, now China has recently engaged into disputes with its other neighbors. Border issues with Bhutan are also not fully resolved. Punishing Pakistan on not committing to curb extremism effecting China or settling peace with India is at the bay in foreseeable future. Though all disputes are isolated on its own merits but there is one generalization; China as a primary contestant. Like we say your reputation travels before you. Being an ordinary Indian i can afford enough tranquility to move on and be friend with Chinese people and i am sure Chinese too are gracious enough to understand the need than going into nauseating details.
But the question here is who is more alarmed, proactive and assertive? Who has more say upon its community to shout for the calm?
Regards
If India and China have to normalize their relations, they must solve their border disputes. This is only possible if Indians leaders are backed by a democratic consensus. In order for this consensus to evolve, Indians must know the truth of the war. No better beginning can be made than the official publication of the Indian army's own account in the Henderson-Brooks report.
If he is a terrorist as you have said then why you are not asking him to be handed over. Your hesitation can be used against you. Clear yourself and come up with a sound argument.
You are now nitpicking lines cause your accusation vis a vis Chinese sensitivity and DL in India has gone into dust. The holistic sense of my assertion is simply to snub the only one claim all Chinese typically make that India is harboring Tibetans against China. You have yourself supported my argument that he is not a factor to be in PLA simulations of war practices and any keen PLA watcher can tell you for sure. Like we say ''tel dekho tel ke dhar dekho'' See whats in oil and how it flows. Follow the money(foreign policy) if you want to follow the threat (military), no where in recent past China has invested military resources to curb would be uprising in Tibet rather they are busy investing in Japan et al.
If he is not a threat to China then why China should accuse India and punish on different issues sensitive to her (India). Bogeyman isn't it?
Why would you risk your diplomatic relations with any nation including USA if president is meeting with him?
1. No harm since there is no risk of back firing cause any sane nation would simply ignore the protest due to its low face value.
2. Lack of other powers (soft etc.) to project and to create diplomatic pressures/leverages thus DL good enough to inject guilt in other nations and threats of so called repercussions (trade, diplomatic etc).
3. Elephant's tusks for domestic exhibition.
Why would you challenge such high value package (an excuse) who is serving your 'a kind of power projection?
To answer your question i would say, when a MEA spokesperson draft a protest they do write it very carefully. Till today i haven't seen a single statement where DL was condemned but the nation. China can not order others to segregate him.
You can not establish relation between Tibet and China with this one sided generic imperial nonsense. Tibetan language, culture, religion was exported from some where else not China. How Chinese emperor was greater then rest of the humanity or his title, has nothing to do with if inferior legitimacy or status of DL. Tibet was a separate entity having relationships with Mongols and Indian kings as well, but only after 17th century Chinese started to Claim that Tibet was a under Qing administration which many Tibetans still disagree.
I do not want to go into this cause both parties have made different claims. Why he would revolt when Tibet was always a sovereign feudal monarchy and DLs were its supreme leaders. Treaty signed by DL to his disciple qing emperor was to protect Tibet against military invasions, not an instrument of Accession.
America offered help to India and India at the start accepted it. But timid India for not becoming west's proxy again, refused that help till today. 1962 war is testimony to that; when stakes were high and offer was more inviting.
They are not issuing passports or stapled visa's from Dharmshala.
''The govt in exile'' is a technicality not legality against China's claim of Tibet. India is not a signatory of United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. So to survive as a human and travel to other nations they need some de facto provision. Therefore there is nothing to give China sleepless nights about this. However what China is doing to Kashmiri people who own Indian Passport is a sheer hypocrisy and back stabbing. I reckon even Chinese immigration officers work with prejudice against India due to lack of proper information controlled by CCP. They (Tibetans) all are living like ordinary Indians facing poverty, unemployment, everyday struggle etc. Many wants to go back to China/Tibet cause they can not be as comfortable in India as they will be in China. But they love their religion and China has no place for their freedom.
They can do whatever they want withing the limits of their democratic rights, they are not assets like Taliban was once for Pakistan but liability for India. Tibet is yours and that the only thing you should focus on.
''Forward policy'' another Chinese propaganda and myth. If Nehru was to be a preemptive strategist then things would have been totally different. Before India army started petrolling, Chinese were encroaching over LAC and our parliament was cursing Nehru day and night (on the record of Parliament proceedings), to do something he was reluctant to, cause Chinese officials were doing double talk and PM was optimistic.
China is already supporting many rebels through its proxy 'one and the same thing'' and India is pretty capable of dealing with them.
China can not afford bad PR from west like Pakistan can, cause west has its interest in Pakistan. However China can try its luck so that west can expedite its propaganda against China on supporting terrorism directly into India. West is the key. India refused it on previous occasion, see the difference. India snubbed CIA's offer (so they can now publish the report to blame it on forward policy?!) and you never had the offer.
Fair enough,
But China's foreign policy is brute and over assertive, its like twisting of nickers without any good reason. They should come up clear that its all about strategic aspiration, it is all about this to me not sure about you!
He is CCP's bogeyman for Chinese nationalist and an asset to bully around without the fear of fire back. its like ''Hathi jinda lakh ka mara sawa lakh ka'' An alive elephant values hundred thousand (100000) and dead hundred twenty five thousand (125000).
If you are referring to the Henderson BrooksBhagat Report, a journalist Neville Maxwell had been given access right after the war and if you read his book, it cites directly from the report. His version of events corroborate China's version of events. It was Nehru's fault.
Also have you considered the reason behind the GoI's refusal to release the report despite the overwhelming benefit it would have provided in reforming the IA after the war? The sign of a guilty party.