India worried over PLA’s expanding transborder military capabilities

[Hellraiser007]

Show me on which one of our borders, are soldiers shooting at each other, like the India-Pakistan border? I.e. The border with the highest risk of nuclear war in the world?

On which border, are soldiers mutilating each others dead bodies and cutting off their heads?

It also depends on the neighbor which you have and you cannot change your neighbors. Pakistan is engaged in terror war with India since its formation, we have to deal with that. It is not India's doing, here the aggressor is Pakistan. Regarding beheadings and mutilations those are isolated incidents.

China is the country which spends more budget for internal security than external one, If you go through the torture and human right abuses in Chinese prisons that happens every year which are in high numbers, you will say India - Pakistan border is relatively safer place.

Do you know the physical torture in Chinese prisoners ??, go and check some online content if you have proxy. Most inhuman treatment to ordinary citizens by CCP.

Sorry, we prefer to work things out without bloodshed, like in the South China sea right now.

Peace in SCS you must be dreaming , that conflict will be there simmering for decades to come, China uses it to unify Chinese and USA uses it to justify its presence.

Or like in Ladakh, where we pushed and you folded like a house of cards. Without even a word of protest, you just bowed down to all of our demands, without even a whimper.

Interesting thing is the aggressor is talking about peace and diplomacy, pathetic isn't it?????

Your nut job CCP did some stupid things in Leh, India acted maturely and resolved the dispute peacefully. Compare the things happening with Japan, Phillipines and Vietnam. Where is Chinese maturity here??? .

 

[janon]

...

Or like in Ladakh, where we pushed and you folded like a house of cards. Without even a word of protest, you just bowed down to all of our demands, without even a whimper.

India made no concessions in Ladakh's Chumar region: China

'No concessions in Daulat Beg Oldi' | Business Standard

India made no concessions in Ladakh's Chumar region: China - India | Frrole

China on Tuesday rejected talks that India had made concessions in the Chumar region in southern Ladakh to end its standoff across the Line of Actual Control (LAC), triggered by the recent incursion by Chinese troops in Ladakh's Daulat Oldi Begi sector.

...

But Beijing rejects any talk that India made any concessions to China in the Chumar region of Ladakh.

Both govts have flatly denied that India made any concessions for the Chinese withdrawal. Now if you want to play hongwu, and start grand claims of India "falling like a pack of cards" and an armoured division capturing ladakh from India and so on, that's your choice. The wiser thing to do may be to admit that China tried to bite off more than it can chew, and India acted maturely by its restrained but firm response.

 

[senkakudefender]

China is target of US surround and containment policy.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

India made no concessions in Ladakh's Chumar region: China

Did you even read the article?

New Delhi: China on Tuesday rejected talks that India had made concessions in the Chumar region in southern Ladakh to end its standoff across the Line of Actual Control (LAC), triggered by the recent incursion by Chinese troops in Ladakh's Daulat Oldi Begi sector.

China rejected TALKS. That means we didn't actually sit down and talk about anything.

It's not confirmation of anything, which is our usual style.

Both govts have flatly denied that India made any concessions for the Chinese withdrawal. Now if you want to play hongwu, and start grand claims of India "falling like a pack of cards" and an armoured division capturing ladakh from India and so on, that's your choice. The wiser thing to do may be to admit that China tried to bite off more than it can chew, and India acted maturely by its restrained but firm response.

Read the above and see why that is a lie.

And give me a break, destroying an entire set of strategic bunkers, halting all infrastructure work, as well as cancelling all troop patrols... do you not consider these to be concessions?

 

[janon]

Did you even read the article?



China rejected TALKS. That means we didn't actually sit down and talk about anything.

It's not confirmation of anything, which is our usual style.



Read the above and see why that is a lie.

And give me a break, destroying an entire set of strategic bunkers, halting all infrastructure work, as well as cancelling all troop patrols... do you not consider these to be concessions?

Did YOU read the sentence you highlighted? Read the words after "talks". China rejected talks that.....go on, read the rest, after the part you bolded.

If you still don't get it, the word "talks" in this context means "rumors" about India making concessions. I will reword it for you:

"China on Tuesday rejected rumours that India had made concessions in the Chumar region in southern Ladakh to end its standoff across the Line of Actual Control (LAC)."

If the word "talks" meant what you think it meant, then that sentence would make no grammatical sense.

Now understand why what I said was NOT a lie, but your statements are. (About halting all infra work and so on....both IA and IAF have reiterated that all infra work will go on, and airstrips and roads will continue to be built.)

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Did YOU read the sentence you highlighted? Read the words after "talks". China rejected talks that.....go on, read the rest, after the part you bolded.

If you still don't get it, the word "talks" in this context means "rumors" about India making concessions. I will reword it for you:

"China on Tuesday rejected rumours that India had made concessions in the Chumar region in southern Ladakh to end its standoff across the Line of Actual Control (LAC)."

If the word "talks" meant what you think it meant, then that sentence would make no grammatical sense.

Now understand why what I said was NOT a lie, but your statements are. (About halting all infra work and so on....both IA and IAF have reiterated that all infra work will go on, and airstrips and roads will continue to be built.)

Pure bullsh*t.

Indian troops suspend patrols at Chumar - Times Of India

NEW DELHI: Apart from dismantling a SET of strategically-located bunkers at Chumar as part of an arrangement to end the standoff at Depsang Bulge in eastern Ladakh, the Indian troops seem to have suspended patrols to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Chumar, at least for now. Senior officials briefed by personnel on the ground said the Army has discontinued the round-the-clock patrolling it was undertaking in the area for the last few months.

Your senior Army officials confirmed that not only did you dismantle an ENTIRE SET of strategic bunkers, you also cancelled troop patrols.

Do you guys know more than your own Army officials? Tell me how these are not concessions?

And if Chinese officials said anything of the sort that you are claiming, then there will definitely be a Chinese source, Hell even an International source apart from Indian sources (and even your Indian source only claimed we rejected "talks"). Give me something like BBC or CNN or any other major international news source, that states something clear, unlike the source you provided which only stated that we rejected talks.

 

[janon]

Pure bullsh*t.

Indian troops suspend patrols at Chumar - Times Of India



Your senior Army officials confirmed that not only did you dismantle an ENTIRE SET of strategic bunkers, you also cancelled troop patrols.

Do you guys know more than your own Army officials? Tell me how these are not concessions?

And if Chinese officials said anything of the sort that you are claiming, then there will definitely be a Chinese source, Hell even an International source apart from Indian sources (and even your Indian source only claimed we rejected "talks"). Give me something like BBC or CNN or any other major international news source, that states something clear, unlike the source you provided which only stated that we rejected talks.

The link I gave said clearly that you rejected talks about India having made any concessions. It is clear enough, and you are trying to distort it to mean that you rejected "talks".

Also, these very rumours were the ones denied by both India and china. It is precisely because such rumours appeared in the media that both countries denied them. And I showed you links for that. (Funny you ask me to provide something from BBC or CNN, after yourself providing a link from the much ridiculed times of india.)

You can use google and find a thousand links in all respected Indian media sources quoting both the defence minister as well as army officers reiterating that no deal was made and no concessions given to end the stand off. Chinese soldiers withdrew when their gambit failed to intimidate anybody. China's official position is still that it did not enter India. And china herself has admitted (in the links I provided, who's text you misunderstood) that India made no concessions.

India to take up incursion issue with Chinese Premier Lastupdate:- Fri, 10 May 2013 18:30:00 GMT GreaterKashmir.com

India made no concessions in Ladakh's Chumar region: China-India News - IBNLive Mobile

Hindustan Times e-Paper

However, they maintained that India stood its ground and made it amply clear to the Chinese side that status quo as of April 15 must be restored and that the Chinese troops must withdraw unconditionally.
The sources denied reports that an army bunker was removed in Chumar area as a concession for the withdrawal of Chinese troops.

And in later reports, plenty of officials have asserted repeatedly that India will not halt any infra development, and that contruction of airstrips and roads would continue. Since you ask me to repose faith in my army officers....

Here is a definitive report from later:
Hindustan times - Ladakh incursion: India denies deal to end China standoff

The Chinese have demanded that some forward observation posts, bunkers and shelters in the Chumar and Fukche areas be removed.

Its contention is that some of the build-ups along the line of actual control (LAC) are in violation of protocols governing borders that have not been mutually delineated.

But as a result of diplomatic activity, China reportedly agreed to delink the demands for removing such infrastructure from simultaneous disengagement.

"Our sense is that they miscalculated our response," said one. Beijing may have assumed New Delhi would buckle rather than sacrifice that visit and that of Khurshid.

NOW do you get it? China first had a set of demands, and then agreed to delink the demands from its withdrawal. In other words, your troops went back without getting any demands met.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

^^^ Hahaha, "GreaterKashmir.com"?

Again, the fact is that India was crying non-stop that Chinese troops were 20 km into Indian territory, yet instead of ejecting the soldiers, India instead chose to bow down and make an entire host of concessions.

And "failed to intimidate"? Are you kidding, the whole of India was crying during this incident, with uncountable news reports of how "India is no match for China" (like the Indian Naval Chief said before) and Indian TV hosts crying about how India can't do anything.

It is such a joke that you can't see past your blind nationalism. Do you SERIOUSLY believe that China backed down in front of India? If so, then I have nothing more to say because you have obviously been blinded by nationalism.

India made all the concessions, India had no guts to eject the Chinese soldiers. The military balance is so skewed in China's favour that India's own Army Chiefs have officially said that India can't match China ever.

India can't match China's military force - Indian Navy Chief - YouTube

It is an open and shut case. India made all the concessions, we made none. India backed down in front of a military force that is multiple times its superior, according to the Indian Army itself.

 

[janon]

^^^ Hahaha, "GreaterKashmir.com"?

Again, the fact is that India was crying non-stop that Chinese troops were 20 km into Indian territory, yet instead of ejecting the soldiers, India instead chose to bow down and make an entire host of concessions.

And "failed to intimidate"? Are you kidding, the whole of India was crying during this incident, with uncountable news reports of how "India is no match for China" (like the Indian Naval Chief said before) and Indian TV hosts whining about how India can't do anything.

It is such a joke that you can't see past your blind nationalism. Do you SERIOUSLY believe that China backed down in front of India? If so, then I have nothing more to say because you have obviously been blinded by nationalism.

India made all the concessions, India had no guts to eject the Chinese soldiers. The military balance is so skewed in China's favour that India's own Army Chiefs have officially said that India can't match China ever.

India can't match China's military force - Indian Navy Chief - YouTube

It is an open and shut case. India made all the concessions, we made none. India backed down in front of a military force that is multiple times its superior, according to the Indian Army itself.

"India can't match china in military..." is an undeniable fact. But India can very well hold off China is also a fact, and was amply demonstrated. Fine, forget the greaterkashmir link, and look at all the other links I provided. How about YOU live up to YOUR own standard and show me CNN and BBC links that say India has given up infra work? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Now you are shifting the argument from your specific claim of India having buckled and so and so, after seeing all the links I gave, and giving none of your own, and now you are talking about a more general point of India not being able to match china in military might, and putting videos of people saying that.

Well, that has never been in question. But the fact is that we don't HAVE to match china soldier for soldier or bullet for bullet o plane for plane, since our conflicts are fewer, and with less powerful countries than china's. What we have is more than enough to fend off any attempt by pak or china to steal any territory from us. End of story.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

"India can't match china in military..." is an undeniable fact. But India can very well hold off China is also a fact, and was amply demonstrated. Fine, forget the greaterkashmir link, and look at all the other links I provided. How about YOU live up to YOUR own standard and show me CNN and BBC links that say India has given up infra work? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Now you are shifting the argument from your specific claim of India having buckled and so and so, after seeing all the links I gave, and giving none of your own, and now you are talking about a more general point of India not being able to match china in military might, and putting videos of people saying that.

Well, that has never been in question. But the fact is that we don't HAVE to match china soldier for soldier or bullet for bullet o plane for plane, since our conflicts are fewer, and with less powerful countries than china's. What we have is more than enough to fend off any attempt by pak or china to steal any territory from us. End of story.

Indian media reporting the statements of Indian officials, Chinese media reporting the statements of Chinese officials. Is that too hard to understand?

India clearly did back down, only the most nationalistic (and deluded) fanboy would think that China could back down in front of India.

You destroyed an entire set of strategic bunkers and cancelled troop patrols. Tell me, what are these if not concessions?

And here from Reuters:

India demolishes Himalaya outpost to end China standoff - Reuters

However, an official from the Indian army's northern command said India had taken down more permanent structures from Chumar.

"The bunkers in Chumar were dismantled after we acceded to Chinese demand in the last flag meeting. These bunkers were live-in bunkers," the army officer told Reuters on Tuesday.

 

[janon]

Indian media reporting the statements of Indian officials, Chinese media reporting the statements of Chinese officials. Is that too hard to understand?

India clearly did back down, only the most nationalistic (and deluded) fanboy would think that China could back down in front of India.

You destroyed an entire set of strategic bunkers and cancelled troop patrols. Tell me, what are these if not concessions?

And here from Reuters:

India demolishes Himalaya outpost to end China standoff - Reuters

From your own reuters link:

An official in India's Defence Ministry said on Monday the deal to end the standoff was "quid pro quo" and said China had also demanded India take down listening and observation posts in the Chumar area, which is close to a Chinese road through Tibet.

The source in New Delhi denied India was dismantling anything more than the border shelter.

As I said before: It is precisely because of misleading reports quoting unnamed sources, that both the army and the ministry of defence categorically denied any concessions to end the dispute.

I have given you enough links from enough sources saying that the reported "concessions" were rumours. Heck, even Beijing said so, which you tried to twist into something else.

Also, note that I asked you for a foreign media link for your claim that India is stopping all infrastructure work on the border.

The failed Chinese incursion is a dead horse. No amount of beating it will turn it into a victorious steed. You might want to argue the general point of the thread, rather than harking back to the comically failed incursion (which your country still denies ever having happened, BTW) and claiming a failed attempt as a victory. China sent in a platoon with a banner and assumed India would buckle. India stood its ground, the platoon went back. Here it is again:

Ladakh incursion: India denies deal to end China standoff - Hindustan Times

The Chinese have demanded that some forward observation posts, bunkers and shelters in the Chumar and Fukche areas be removed.

Its contention is that some of the build-ups along the line of actual control (LAC) are in violation of protocols governing borders that have not been mutually delineated.

But as a result of diplomatic activity, China reportedly agreed to delink the demands for removing such infrastructure from simultaneous disengagement.

"Our sense is that they miscalculated our response," said one. Beijing may have assumed New Delhi would buckle rather than sacrifice that visit and that of Khurshid.

Sorry, but a platoon waving a banner is simply not enough to intimidate one of the largest military powers on earth. You should stick to talking about the more general point of china's military superiority (a point not denied by anybody) than trying to paint a comical farce of an intrusion as a grand victory.

 

[anonymus]

^^^ Hahaha, "GreaterKashmir.com"?

Again, the fact is that India was crying non-stop that Chinese troops were 20 km into Indian territory, yet instead of ejecting the soldiers, India instead chose to bow down and make an entire host of concessions.

And "failed to intimidate"? Are you kidding, the whole of India was crying during this incident, with uncountable news reports of how "India is no match for China" (like the Indian Naval Chief said before) and Indian TV hosts crying about how India can't do anything.

It is such a joke that you can't see past your blind nationalism. Do you SERIOUSLY believe that China backed down in front of India? If so, then I have nothing more to say because you have obviously been blinded by nationalism.

India made all the concessions, India had no guts to eject the Chinese soldiers. The military balance is so skewed in China's favour that India's own Army Chiefs have officially said that India can't match China ever.

India can't match China's military force - Indian Navy Chief - YouTube

It is an open and shut case. India made all the concessions, we made none. India backed down in front of a military force that is multiple times its superior, according to the Indian Army itself.

Dragon,



What Admiral was saying is that Navy could not sustain an operation in South China sea under the combined pressure of PLAN and PLAFF.

This is a logical statement that any Admiral would make. It does not in any way portend to him admitting weakness of India Navy which is dominating force vis-a-vis PLAN in Indian ocean Theater due to geography and logistics.

 

[mirage2K]

I would bother copy and pasting my rebuttals to you on the other thread too if I was getting 5 cents for every post of mine.

Maybe if I do it long enough I could get a plate of hakka noodles schezwan style.

 

[SirHatesALot]

Only way to counter this is by improving economy and military.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You might want to argue the general point of the thread, rather than harking back to the comically failed incursion (which your country still denies ever having happened, BTW) and claiming a failed attempt as a victory. China sent in a platoon with a banner and assumed India would buckle. India stood its ground, the platoon went back.

What a joke.

Again, India was crying that we intruded 20 km into Indian territory for several weeks. And India did not dare to forcibly evict them (which would have been the logical thing to do) because they knew using force might lead to another Sino-Indian war.

Instead, you backed down and granted every concession we asked for. Destroying an entire set of strategic bunkers, halting infrastructure in the region, and cancelling all troop patrols in Chumar.

There is no way around it Janon, India was the one who made concessions, we didn't make any at all. This is obvious to everyone including you.

Your intent here is to try and push the point that "such actions are futile and don't give results". Except that reality is the opposite, your administration is always backing down, such as the threats of "surgical strikes" in retaliation to Mumbai, that never came about.

If you wanted to punish our behaviour, you had several weeks to forcibly evict those Chinese soldiers. But you never did, out of fear (rightfully so) that any use of force, legitimate or not, could have led to another Sino-Indian war. Even though you have no problem shooting "intruders" from Bangladesh and Pakistan, in this case you couldn't.