This Indian Land Is Chinese Land

[navtrek]

Negotiation first

No one wants a war

We do not reject any challenge to......:coffee

well said my friend but i just wanted to know something India and China both claim these regions i told u India's part of the story does any Chinese member know why China claims ? this region

Apart for these being a part of Tibet which i have proved it to be completely untrue

 

[navtrek]

boring, it's a open secret that western media like to magnify every incident happened in china even though there is internet and a open china can expose their hypocrisy nowdays。Tiananmen incident is not that simple as you thought，you are just a fool can't see the struggle between powers in the cold war time.US will creat another "tiananmen incident" in india when india is useless to them someday

hi can u pls use this Internet & open china to tell us why China claims Arunachal & Aksai chin

 

[aimarraul]

hi can u pls use this Internet & open china to tell us why China claims Arunachal & Aksai chin

china don't claims Aksai chin........it's india claim it......

 

[navtrek]

china don't claims Aksai chin........it's india claim it......

he he well we have to coz u guys took it as ur share even before the border war (building roads which we didn't even know existed)

But can u tell me why did China withdraw after winning ? i don't know why ?

Even as they did why didnt they give back Aksai Chin ?
Is it because of a road ?

 

[navtrek]

In these Thread at least We have practically proved that Tibet (China) has nothing to do with Aksai Chin or Arunachal Pradesh

Defense of Chinese claims are very weak, Frankly no defense at all apart from a few statements of using force

The topic is still open to dispute my claim

Till then Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin are parts of The Indian Union Jai Hind

 

[xiaolong]

This is our internal affair. Sovereignty can not be interference. Our Government do not blame the problem in your country. I hate those people who like to provoke a war. Do most Indians prefer to use war to solve the problem？ 就事论事（to confine the discussion to the matter at issue），Do not involve the issue not linked to.Example taiwan or Caste system. I am so sorry，my english is rather poor. think you！

 

[xiaolong]

thank you ！（it is mistake）

 

[navtrek]

This is our internal affair. Sovereignty can not be interference. Our Government do not blame the problem in your country. I hate those people who like to provoke a war. Do most Indians prefer to use war to solve the problem？ 就事论事（to confine the discussion to the matter at issue），Do not involve the issue not linked to.Example taiwan or Caste system. I am so sorry，my english is rather poor. think you！

No buddy your English is fine as long as it can be understood

Yes i agree Tienanmen square incident was an internal affair & even Taiwan it somehow has come up in the wrong thread don't mind

& No we don't provoke war Look at the previous posts its the Chinese members who are threatening to use force

 

[navtrek]

thank you ！（it is mistake）

Its alright man who cares about English. Language is only to put your thoughts across

So why do you think Chinese claim Arunachal And Aksai Chin ?

 

[gpit]

well said my friend but i just wanted to know something India and China both claim these regions i told u India's part of the story does any Chinese member know why China claims ? this region

Apart for these being a part of Tibet which i have proved it to be completely untrue

I’m currently too busy to write more, but let me point out your blatant flaws in your logical reasoning.

1) You claim that K&J is an India state, and Ladakh (Little Tibet) belongs to K&J, and therefore, Ladakh is India’s.

This argument is hugely flawed, since a) it is well known that K&J is a disputed region, on which UN has a well-known resolution. But a neo-imperialist claims it is India’s . Nobody will give it a sh!t, but only keep it for your own consumption. b) You claim Ladakh belongs to K&J, which is again a highly disputable statement. Little Tibet was a place initially being resided by various tribes. Authentic kings were established by Tibetan descendents and cultures are Tibetan as well. When Little Tibet was invaded by enemies, the people were less seeking help from India than from Tibet, as India, though historically strongly related with Buddhism, was hostile and callous to Buddhists, and was prosecuting Buddhists as well. Little Tibet sought help from K&J when it was in conflict with Tibet, otherwise sought help from Tibet when in conflict with K&J kingdoms.

2) You claim historical prefix Indo- implies current today’s India, such that “Ladakh was a part of the Kushana empire.” And that “the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi, also spelled Yueh-chi,[9] (Ch: 月&#27663, a loose confederation of Indo-European peoples”.

Nothing is more clownishly false like that! It reflects a serious lack of historical knowledge in your neo-imperialist brain. Yuezhi, an obvious pronunciation of Chinese language, was a Xiongnu Kingdom in west of ancient China, existing in Chinese literature for thousands of years. It has nothing to do with today’s India. The prefix Indo there was referring to a geographic meaning not a country.

3) You proclaimed that ” so in the 18th and 19th century India regained what belonged to it again”. Again, you made a fundamental error in history.

First, there was not a country called India before 1947. The continent was ruled by numerous states and eventually dominated by British (East India Company). Dogra region was a part of residence, and was a Sikh empire. EIC saw Dogra’s influence, and tried to utilize it.

In August 1834, Dogra, deemed self as a second-hand colonist master as some Indians do today, invaded Dalakh with 10,000 men, and forced the King to abdicate, established a puppet ruler and made Dalakh pay an annual ransom of 20,000 rupees before leaving.

By the end of 1840, under the excuses that Dalakh did not fulfill the agreement, Dogra invaded second time Dalakh with 7,000 men, and occupied it. As Opium war erupted in East China, Gogra prepared to coordinate with their British Master in an attempt to invade Tibet.

In 1841-42 battle In an attempt to capture Tibet proper, reckless Zorawar Singh himself was killed, and his army suffered a crushing defeat. The remnants of his army fled.

Now it seemed that some Ladakhis in prison saw the chance to seek independence by playing Tibet/China card. Tibetan forces with Chinese Emperor’s consent fought again Dogra's troops. History accounts diverges on this fight. From Dogra's and Landakh’s records, “Fighting raged indecisively for about ten days. The war was brought to an end only when the Dogra forces managed to dam up a stream and flood the Tibetan camp, after which the Tibetans surrendered. Dewan Hari Chand and Wazir Ratanu carried General Pi-hsi, the two Kalons, and some fifty other officers and men to Leh, where a peace was concluded.“

From a Tibetan to Chinese Emperor’s report, nonetheless, depicted a different picture: Writing on December 8, 1842, he began by quoting a report from Kalon Sur-khang, covering events from early September to the signing of the treaty on the lytk Nothing whatever is mentioned concerning the Tibetan army's foray into Ladakh, and the language used strongly implies that the Dogras were attempting to invade Tibet again only to avenge the death of Zorawar Singh. The flooding of the Tibetan camp is recounted, but in terms of a "retreat to a higher, more strategic spot, where it was possible to resist them/ 7 It continues that the Dogras then requested peace, "and when it was found that the Shenpas [Dogras] were actually afraid of us, a truce was agreed upon." On September 17, "the officers from the aboriginal tribes of Gulab Singh and Ranjit Singh and Kashmir repented, and came with statements of submission and also signed an agreement calling for permanent peace, and pledging never to start trouble again. Subsequently, all the enemy forces were disbanded by their chiefs."

I have presented the agreement before. If Dogra were winning, why it would submit and give up most, if not all, of its rights over Ladakh. This implies that perhaps Tibetans won big.

 

[mgmech]

I’m currently too busy to write more, but let me point out your blatant flaws in your logical reasoning.

1) You claim that K&J is an India state, and Ladakh (Little Tibet) belongs to K&J, and therefore, Ladakh is India’s.

This argument is hugely flawed, since a) it is well known that K&J is a disputed region, on which UN has a well-known resolution. But a neo-imperialist claims it is India’s . Nobody will give it a sh!t, but only keep it for your own consumption. b) You claim Ladakh belongs to K&J, which is again a highly disputable statement. Little Tibet was a place initially being resided by various tribes. Authentic kings were established by Tibetan descendents and cultures are Tibetan as well. When Little Tibet was invaded by enemies, the people were less seeking help from India than from Tibet, as India, though historically strongly related with Buddhism, was hostile and callous to Buddhists, and was prosecuting Buddhists as well. Little Tibet sought help from K&J when it was in conflict with Tibet, otherwise sought help from Tibet when in conflict with K&J kingdoms.

2) You claim historical prefix Indo- implies current today’s India, such that “Ladakh was a part of the Kushana empire.” And that “the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi, also spelled Yueh-chi,[9] (Ch: 月&#27663, a loose confederation of Indo-European peoples”.

Nothing is more clownishly false like that! It reflects a serious lack of historical knowledge in your neo-imperialist brain. Yuezhi, an obvious pronunciation of Chinese language, was a Xiongnu Kingdom in west of ancient China, existing in Chinese literature for thousands of years. It has nothing to do with today’s India. The prefix Indo there was referring to a geographic meaning not a country.

3) You proclaimed that ” so in the 18th and 19th century India regained what belonged to it again”. Again, you made a fundamental error in history.

First, there was not a country called India before 1947. The continent was ruled by numerous states and eventually dominated by British (East India Company). Dogra region was a part of residence, and was a Sikh empire. EIC saw Dogra’s influence, and tried to utilize it.

In August 1834, Dogra, deemed self as a second-hand colonist master as some Indians do today, invaded Dalakh with 10,000 men, and forced the King to abdicate, established a puppet ruler and made Dalakh pay an annual ransom of 20,000 rupees before leaving.

By the end of 1840, under the excuses that Dalakh did not fulfill the agreement, Dogra invaded second time Dalakh with 7,000 men, and occupied it. As Opium war erupted in East China, Gogra prepared to coordinate with their British Master in an attempt to invade Tibet.

In 1841-42 battle In an attempt to capture Tibet proper, reckless Zorawar Singh himself was killed, and his army suffered a crushing defeat. The remnants of his army fled.

Now it seemed that some Ladakhis in prison saw the chance to seek independence by playing Tibet/China card. Tibetan forces with Chinese Emperor’s consent fought again Dogra's troops. History accounts diverges on this fight. From Dogra's and Landakh’s records, “Fighting raged indecisively for about ten days. The war was brought to an end only when the Dogra forces managed to dam up a stream and flood the Tibetan camp, after which the Tibetans surrendered. Dewan Hari Chand and Wazir Ratanu carried General Pi-hsi, the two Kalons, and some fifty other officers and men to Leh, where a peace was concluded.“

From a Tibetan to Chinese Emperor’s report, nonetheless, depicted a different picture: Writing on December 8, 1842, he began by quoting a report from Kalon Sur-khang, covering events from early September to the signing of the treaty on the lytk Nothing whatever is mentioned concerning the Tibetan army's foray into Ladakh, and the language used strongly implies that the Dogras were attempting to invade Tibet again only to avenge the death of Zorawar Singh. The flooding of the Tibetan camp is recounted, but in terms of a "retreat to a higher, more strategic spot, where it was possible to resist them/ 7 It continues that the Dogras then requested peace, "and when it was found that the Shenpas [Dogras] were actually afraid of us, a truce was agreed upon." On September 17, "the officers from the aboriginal tribes of Gulab Singh and Ranjit Singh and Kashmir repented, and came with statements of submission and also signed an agreement calling for permanent peace, and pledging never to start trouble again. Subsequently, all the enemy forces were disbanded by their chiefs."

I have presented the agreement before. If Dogra were winning, why it would submit and give up most, if not all, of its rights over Ladakh. This implies that perhaps Tibetans won big.

India got it all wrong.... they should never have accepted Tibet as part of China.... i mean they should have taken the fight to the opposite camp.... and kept Tibet as a disputed territory...coz that is JUST WHAT the chinese have been doing all along... .raising their voice and making Indian territories as disputed ones...!!!!!!!...But above posts have established that the territories righly belong to India only... now if someone just closes the eye and refuses to see the reality you cant do much....

India should not just accept Tibet as part of China... than they will realise the fallout of excessive greed which has overcome the chinese govt.....than by keeping Tibet as the disputed area the chinese would have then said ok ok let us keep Tibet and it is our terrirory.. dont interfere...etc etc... that would have bated their greed........really... India just softly like a good neighbour accepted in good faith Tibet to be a part of China...Take the dispute inside Tibet and than there is no dispute for akshai chin and other related terrirories of India.....simple...

GREED has always killed or destroyed the person who seeks too much of everything....

 

[navtrek]

You claim historical prefix Indo- implies current today’s India, such that “Ladakh was a part of the Kushana empire.” And that “the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi, also spelled Yueh-chi,[9] (Ch: 月&#27663, a loose confederation of Indo-European peoples”.

Nothing is more clownishly false like that! It reflects a serious lack of historical knowledge in your neo-imperialist brain. Yuezhi, an obvious pronunciation of Chinese language, was a Xiongnu Kingdom in west of ancient China, existing in Chinese literature for thousands of years. It has nothing to do with today’s India. The prefix Indo there was referring to a geographic meaning not a country.

firstly This is an Indian empire

The Kushan Empire (c. 1st–3rd centuries CE) of Ancient India originally formed in the territories of ancient Bactria on either side of the middle course of the Oxus River or Amu Darya in what is now northern Afghanistan, and southern Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Kushan Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you are saying is rite the Kushans belong to a central asian tribe but they are not Chinese these are people of Indo-European origin

Secondly Indo-European people not just geography they were people.

Proto-Indo-Europeans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scheme of Indo-European migrations from ca. 4000 to 1000 BC according to the Kurgan hypothesis. The purple area corresponds to the assumed Urheimat (Samara culture, Sredny Stog culture). The red area corresponds to the area which may have been settled by Indo-European-speaking peoples up to ca. 2500 BC; the orange area to 1000 BC.

First, there was not a country called India before 1947.

"i agree but there was bharat or Hindustan"

The Constitution of India and common usage in various Indian languages also recognise Bharat (pronounced [ˈbʱɑːrʌt̪] ( listen)) as an official name of equal status

Hindustan ([hɪnd̪ʊˈstɑːn]( listen)), originally a Persian word for “Land of the Hindus” referring to northern India, is also occasionally used as a synonym for all of India

The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi (Ινδο&#943, the people of the Indus.
India did exist my friend

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India

In August 1834, Dogra, deemed self as a second-hand colonist master as some Indians do today, invaded Dalakh with 10,000 men, and forced the King to abdicate, established a puppet ruler and made Dalakh pay an annual ransom of 20,000 rupees before leaving.

By the end of 1840, under the excuses that Dalakh did not fulfill the agreement, Dogra invaded second time Dalakh with 7,000 men, and occupied it. As Opium war erupted in East China, Gogra prepared to coordinate with their British Master in an attempt to invade Tibet.

yes this is exactly what i said it was taken back by the Dogra's true. My point was that during this time Ladak was under Dogras now they can attack tibet or not is not the context.The point is control.

Now it seemed that some Ladakhis in prison saw the chance to seek independence by playing Tibet/China card. Tibetan forces with Chinese Emperor’s consent fought again Dogra's troops. History accounts diverges on this fight. From Dogra's and Landakh’s records, “Fighting raged indecisively for about ten days. The war was brought to an end only when the Dogra forces managed to dam up a stream and flood the Tibetan camp, after which the Tibetans surrendered. Dewan Hari Chand and Wazir Ratanu carried General Pi-hsi, the two Kalons, and some fifty other officers and men to Leh, where a peace was concluded.“

true so....

I see that this time u haven't posted the link, If u remember it was your last link which posted in your defence. Which i used to prove u completely wrong.

Pls post the link regarding the truce agreement ....

 

[Honor]

India got it all wrong.... they should never have accepted Tibet as part of China.... i mean they should have taken the fight to the opposite camp.... and kept Tibet as a disputed territory...coz that is JUST WHAT the chinese have been doing all along... .raising their voice and making Indian territories as disputed ones...!!!!!!!...But above posts have established that the territories righly belong to India only... now if someone just closes the eye and refuses to see the reality you cant do much....

India should not just accept Tibet as part of China... than they will realise the fallout of excessive greed which has overcome the chinese govt.....than by keeping Tibet as the disputed area the chinese would have then said ok ok let us keep Tibet and it is our terrirory.. dont interfere...etc etc... that would have bated their greed........really... India just softly like a good neighbour accepted in good faith Tibet to be a part of China...Take the dispute inside Tibet and than there is no dispute for akshai chin and other related terrirories of India.....simple...

GREED has always killed or destroyed the person who seeks too much of everything....

British made a mistake! She shouldn't create India as a nation. Damn British! India should be split into several states as it should be and China will not have any dispute India. This is a joke!

Joke aside! This is a forum where all expression are made. Do not get so upset about it.

Currently, AP which is claimed by China is hold by India and Akshai Chin which is hold by China is claimed by India. In term of territory size, India had won big!

 

[Honor]

firstly This is an Indian empire

The Kushan Empire (c. 1st–3rd centuries CE) of Ancient India originally formed in the territories of ancient Bactria on either side of the middle course of the Oxus River or Amu Darya in what is now northern Afghanistan, and southern Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Kushan Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Secondly Indo-European people not just geography they were people.

Proto-Indo-Europeans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scheme of Indo-European migrations from ca. 4000 to 1000 BC according to the Kurgan hypothesis. The purple area corresponds to the assumed Urheimat (Samara culture, Sredny Stog culture). The red area corresponds to the area which may have been settled by Indo-European-speaking peoples up to ca. 2500 BC; the orange area to 1000 BC.



"i agree but there was bharat or Hindustan"

The Constitution of India and common usage in various Indian languages also recognise Bharat (pronounced [ˈbʱɑːrʌt̪] ( listen)) as an official name of equal status

Hindustan ([hɪnd̪ʊˈstɑːn]( listen)), originally a Persian word for “Land of the Hindus” referring to northern India, is also occasionally used as a synonym for all of India

The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi (Ινδο&#943, the people of the Indus.

India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



yes this is exactly what i said it was taken back by the Dogra's true.

We told you before that there is no India before 1947! How can there be a Indian empire?

 

[navtrek]

We told you before that there is no India before 1947! How can there be a Indian empire?

Can you prove it my friend

The Constitution of India and common usage in various Indian languages also recognise Bharat (pronounced [ˈbʱɑːrʌt̪] ( listen)) as an official name of equal status

Hindustan ([hɪnd̪ʊˈstɑːn]( listen)), originally a Persian word for “Land of the Hindus” referring to northern India, is also occasionally used as a synonym for all of India

The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi (Ινδο&#943, the people of the Indus.
India did exist my friend

India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia