Recent Sino-Indian border conflict

[jhungary]

I realise something new.

I am so stupid, Doklam and Doklam plateau are two different things, China wanted to own Doklam not just the plateau, the road till Doka La essentially already covers the whole Doklam plateau. When we station troops there, we have de-facto control of Doklam plateau. Strategically, it was the plateau that mattered, the last big piece of flat land there facing Siliguri. Use google 3D, the plateau area is only at the top left quarter of Doklam, the rest are essentially river valleys with no strategic use.

Map from Indian analyst

Map from Chinese MOFA

How do you reach that conclusion? I found it strange for someone to say "Controlling the MSR" and you are controlling the area.

Beside River itself is a Strategic Target (I wonder do you actually know what is of Strategic Value to begin with?) A River is a Natural Defence Line. On the other hand, MSR (or Road, in layman term) is a strategic burden/liability, because you can set ambush by planting IED and also choking traffic to one or both side and it draw resources to protect the road.

Road usually are a Tactical Advantage, but that also depending on how effective you can protect your convoy.

 

[Figaro]

I'm surprised that this discussion is still going on ... India has clearly lost the "recent conflict" by unilaterally withdrawing in face of forthright Chinese opposition. What more is there to say? The people who say that India has an operational or strategic advantage in this scenario, please ask yourselves why they wanted to halt Chinese road construction in the first place? Surely if their position was impregnable, there would be no need to infringe on someone else's sovereignty just to prevent a "minor" road. And if India was so strong as some make it out to be, then why did they decide to withdraw? There's something called logical progression and common sense ... which some people I find are indeed sorely lacking.

 

[Han Patriot]

How do you reach that conclusion? I found it strange for someone to say "Controlling the MSR" and you are controlling the area.

Beside River itself is a Strategic Target (I wonder do you actually know what is of Strategic Value to begin with?) A River is a Natural Defence Line. On the other hand, MSR (or Road, in layman term) is a strategic burden/liability, because you can set ambush by planting IED and also choking traffic to one or both side and it draw resources to protect the road.

Road usually are a Tactical Advantage, but that also depending on how effective you can protect your convoy.

You see any roads going through that steep valley genius? I suggest you take a look at the 3D map before going I AM A PROFESSIONAL INFANTRY again. Roads are 'strategic burden'? With no roads, how are you gonna bring up the weapons genius? Damn, are you arguing for the sake of arguing? If there are a burden, wtf the Indians are still building it, genius?

all the parents called their sons back, they were afraid that if they attack us then all will be killed so moms and dads called them back and they ran home

But they are still there and you ran btw...

 

[jhungary]

You see any roads going through that steep valley genius? I suggest you take a look at the 3D map before going I AM A PROFESSIONAL INFANTRY again. Roads are 'strategic burden'? With no roads, how are you gonna bring up the weapons genius? Damn, are you arguing for the sake of arguing? If there are a burden, wtf the Indians are still building it, genius?

I never said it was a burden, I said Road are a strategic burden (Hence, I wonder what do you actually know about Strategic Value)

Road are of TACTICAL advantage (As said on my last post), simply because both side needed it and both side can access to it, and it offer tactical advantage to whoever use it (It could be the Chinese, it could be the Indian) it does not make it strategically important for an general area, because if one side did not have the access to the road, that does not mean it does not have the access to the area.

To be "STRATEGICALLY" valued, AS YOU SAID, Would mean the occupation of the road more valuable than the need to devote troop for that particular road. Meaning, you need to be

A.) Able to denied access the other party on that same road.
B.) The resource you devoted is worth that objective (Denied the Enemy Access)

For a road, you can neither effectively denied a road for your enemy, nor can you do it in a economical way. Unless you are building pillboxes every 100 meters to safe guard the road in each and all section, your enemy can have access the road, and Access does not mean they need to travel the whole length in it, access mean they have the access to plant stuff (Mine and IED) that can ambush you in any given stretch of the road. If your enemy can plant IED and Mine the road, then the road WILL BECOME STRATEGIC BURDEN to you, because you either take the lost and continue using the road, assign troop to guard the convoy, or not use the road altogether.

There are no other Strategic Objective can a road achieve beside going from A to B, and as I said, you can go from A to B without that road (by chopper or ASR or any other mean) that mean the importance of the road is zero. And guarding it would be a Strategic Burden.

That's bring to your ridiculous point, how exactly controlling the road would have control the area?

And yes, this is Infantry Tactics, and yes, you know shit about it.

 

[Majet Raha]

You see any roads going through that steep valley genius? I suggest you take a look at the 3D map before going I AM A PROFESSIONAL INFANTRY again. Roads are 'strategic burden'? With no roads, how are you gonna bring up the weapons genius? Damn, are you arguing for the sake of arguing? If there are a burden, wtf the Indians are still building it, genius?


But they are still there and you ran btw...

you keep on laughing hard for no reason, chini troops went off like rats. our troops still there guarding our closest friend. we always stand by our friends like Bhutan and Myanmar (Burma). But you stab pakisan in the back by naming them in the BRICS declaration,

chini buckle under little pressure from Modi government.

 

[yantong1980]

you keep on laughing hard for no reason, chini troops went off like rats. our troops still there guarding our closest friend. we always stand by our friends like Bhutan and Myanmar (Burma). But you stab pakisan in the back by naming them in the BRICS declaration,

chini buckle under little pressure from Modi government.

Went off like rats? Who the last fool lift it's foot? Who the one that came like macho guy, and then retreated? Indian logic... Your King Modi and your masses media fool you and distract you from domestic issues using Doklam, If India DO care about Bhutan as allies, emperor Modi will do diplomatic support in Bhutan favor rather playing firecracker with gasoline in Doklam by provoking China, and drag entire area into WAR! India just lucky China show restraint, not act careless because China doesn't interest in conflict. As Trump with Syrian Shayrat attack, your Modi not different case, he do this for domestic political support. Seems Chinese leadership understand this, as long strategic values still in hand, they give a f*** with Modi and his Indian media style chest thumping.

 

[Majet Raha]

Went off like rats? Who the last fool lift it's foot? Who the one that came like macho guy, and then retreated? Indian logic... Your King Modi and your masses media fool you and distract you from domestic issues using Doklam, If India DO care about Bhutan as allies, emperor Modi will do diplomatic support in Bhutan favor rather playing firecracker with gasoline in Doklam by provoking China, and drag entire area into WAR! India just lucky China show restraint, not act careless because China doesn't interest in conflict. As Trump with Syrian Shayrat attack, your Modi not different case, he do this for domestic political support. Seems Chinese leadership understand this, as long strategic values still in hand, they give a f*** with Modi and his Indian media style chest thumping.

simple logic,
1. china start building road.
2. Bhutan call its friend
3. Bhutan's friend goes to help
4. Road building stops with military action
5. 73 days passed, Bhutan's friend still standing firm with him
6. china with no option calls Bhutan's friend for discussion
7. Bhutan's friend agrees and china both agree to withdraw and go back to Jun 15th Position
8. chini cheerleader have their lungs out claiming victory without logic

So what we learn? ignore chini cheerleaders and focus on pressuring chini. they will give up eventually.

 

[Majet Raha]

You will lose all your friends in few years, you will lose pakistan with the BRICS declaration and North Korea as well.

hahaa, super power without any friends. one child policy not helping, how about zero child policy? no china no problems

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Indians are normally controlled well if you hit them hard on their Aircraft carrier , once that Fat slow Aircraft carrier is destroyed their moral will suck and they will lose as they always do.

 

[Han Patriot]

I never said it was a burden, I said Road are a strategic burden (Hence, I wonder what do you actually know about Strategic Value)

Road are of TACTICAL advantage (As said on my last post), simply because both side needed it and both side can access to it, and it offer tactical advantage to whoever use it (It could be the Chinese, it could be the Indian) it does not make it strategically important for an general area, because if one side did not have the access to the road, that does not mean it does not have the access to the area.

To be "STRATEGICALLY" valued, AS YOU SAID, Would mean the occupation of the road more valuable than the need to devote troop for that particular road. Meaning, you need to be

A.) Able to denied access the other party on that same road.
B.) The resource you devoted is worth that objective (Denied the Enemy Access)

For a road, you can neither effectively denied a road for your enemy, nor can you do it in a economical way. Unless you are building pillboxes every 100 meters to safe guard the road in each and all section, your enemy can have access the road, and Access does not mean they need to travel the whole length in it, access mean they have the access to plant stuff (Mine and IED) that can ambush you in any given stretch of the road. If your enemy can plant IED and Mine the road, then the road WILL BECOME STRATEGIC BURDEN to you, because you either take the lost and continue using the road, assign troop to guard the convoy, or not use the road altogether.

There are no other Strategic Objective can a road achieve beside going from A to B, and as I said, you can go from A to B without that road (by chopper or ASR or any other mean) that mean the importance of the road is zero. And guarding it would be a Strategic Burden.

That's bring to your ridiculous point, how exactly controlling the road would have control the area?

And yes, this is Infantry Tactics, and yes, you know shit about it.

Damn...you and your essays, put it in points..stop flooding to debate...you are not debating, you are overwhelming someone so he couldn't respond. I give up.....YOU WIN again, ROADS ARE A STRATEGIC BURDEN....we all shouldn't build roads. Right genius infantry + strategist + technologist, I am starting to think you are Indian and not Viet.

 

[jhungary]

Damn...you and your essays, put it in points..stop flooding to debate...you are not debating, you are overwhelming someone so he couldn't respond. I give up.....YOU WIN again, ROADS ARE A STRATEGIC BURDEN....we all shouldn't build roads. Right genius infantry + strategist + technologist, I am starting to think you are Indian and not Viet.

Or, in another word, you cannot response to my post because you are wrong. I don't care whether or not I am Indian or Vietnamese, as long as you are speechless and you are wrong, and at the end of the day, you cannot counter my point and you are wrong.

And yes, you know shit about Infantry Tactics, if I were you, I will not ever post something like what you just said again, and couple with the fact that you cannot read a couple of paragraph, you probably should not be posting here at all.

Do you want me to break it down in a 5 years old term so you will understand?

Road = No Good? Why
Road = Chinese can get Ambush
Chinese need Protect Road
If Road no Protect, Chinese Die
So, Road no good.

There, is it simple enough for you to understand??

 

[yantong1980]

simple logic,
1. china start building road.
2. Bhutan call its friend
3. Bhutan's friend goes to help
4. Road building stops with military action
5. 73 days passed, Bhutan's friend still standing firm with him
6. china with no option calls Bhutan's friend for discussion
7. Bhutan's friend agrees and china both agree to withdraw and go back to Jun 15th Position
8. chini cheerleader have their lungs out claiming victory without logic

So what we learn? ignore chini cheerleaders and focus on pressuring chini. they will give up eventually.

Can't read my previous comment? Who you? 6 yr old child? This simple fact for you : China still in Doklam, Indian trespasser retreated back home.

You will lose all your friends in few years, you will lose pakistan with the BRICS declaration and North Korea as well.

hahaa, super power without any friends. one child policy not helping, how about zero child policy? no china no problems

You comment like drunk hobo, why don't you deal with thrash 'mountain' back home. Seems it more life threatening than Doklam stand-off, if thousand like it exist, even UN will declare it as WMD, LoL.

 

[lmjiao]

With 1,000 Chinese Troops Near Doklam Standoff Area, China Widens Existing Road

http://www.india.com/news/india/chi...in-doklam-with-500-soldiers-on-guard-2517082/

Doklam, Oct 6: More than a month after the Chinese and Indian armies stepped back from a standoff at Doklam, China is back to expanding the motorable road on the Doklam Plateau with nearly 500 soldiers on guard. China has nearly 1,000 Chinese troops stationed just 10 kilometres from the faceoff site. However, India says that it doesn’t expect a “flashpoint” at the same site between the two countries.

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been using the construction material and bulldozers to expand and improve the road which it built some years ago. The material and bulldozers were brought during the standoff at Doklam, a source told TOI. He added that by expanding the road construction, China is reinforcing its claim on the Doklam.

The Chinese shifted the unused road construction material North and East of the site of the previous conflict, a media report said. The report also says that the activity began shortly after India and China announced de-escalation of tensions on August 28. “But one PLA battalion remains on the plateau,” said sources, speaking with Indian Express. It has also been reported that a few bunkers have reportedly been detected in the locality.

“It is not status quo ante. Ideally, they should withdraw the troops and equipment,” an official was quoted as saying by The Hindu.

Defence Ministry officials, on the other hand, have claimed that only 300 soldiers are present in the area. A senior Army officer said that there has been “no change in the levels of deployment since the end of the standoff”. He also claimed that since the end of Doklam standoff, the Chinese troops have pulled back only 300-400 metres. (

Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa too acknowledged and indicated the presence of Chinese soldiers in the Chumbi Valley during his Thursday annual press conference. “The two sides are not in a physical face-off as we speak. However, their forces in Chumbi Valley are still deployed and I expect them to withdraw as their exercise in the area gets over”, Dhanoa said.

The Indian and Chinese troops engaged in a 73-day-long standoff in Doklam soon after India stopped the construction of the roads in Doklam, disputed between Beijing and Thimphu, by the Chinese Army.

A biannual Army Commanders conference is scheduled to be held from October 9 to 14 which, according to the reports, would be discussing the preparedness of the military along the border.

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/916006719003619328

 

[Figaro]

https://twitter.com/x/status/916006719003619328

So much for the Indian nationalist claiming victory in Doklam ... they'll do just about anything to make themselves feel better