Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates

rockstarIN said:
He summered up nicely in Mathrubhumi news malayalam article. He was the CO for three years there.
Click to expand...
Chinese have adopted a new methodology after doklam. Now they will press against 4-5 points and as part of settlement, withdraw from all others but the one which they want. In this case it is finger 4. They dont want India to patrol beyond finger4 so while they have shown willingness to withdraw from all other sectors, they will not withdraw from finger4. Slowly and slowly they will usurp up all the so called grey zones and than create new grey zones. We have to deal with them effectively to put a full and final end to this game. Even if means throwing them out militarily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker and Sulla84
vstol Jockey said:
Chinese have adopted a new methodology after doklam. Now they will press against 4-5 points and as part of settlement, withdraw from all others but the one which they want. In this case it is finger 4. They dont want India to patrol beyond finger4 so while they have shown willingness to withdraw from all other sectors, they will not withdraw from finger4. Slowly and slowly they will usurp up all the so called grey zones and than create new grey zones. We have to deal with them effectively to put a full and final end to this game. Even if means throwing them out militarily.
Click to expand...

Why can't we do the same at any other sector by moving in and have tents over there and use the same as a bargaining chip?
 
vstol Jockey said:
Chinese have adopted a new methodology after doklam. Now they will press against 4-5 points and as part of settlement, withdraw from all others but the one which they want. In this case it is finger 4. They dont want India to patrol beyond finger4 so while they have shown willingness to withdraw from all other sectors, they will not withdraw from finger4. Slowly and slowly they will usurp up all the so called grey zones and than create new grey zones. We have to deal with them effectively to put a full and final end to this game. Even if means throwing them out militarily.
Click to expand...
One solution would be to grant them their wish unless it adversely affects our position & later anytime during this year or the next do unto the Chinese what they've been doing unto us particularly when the Indian PM is visiting China . This game can be played both ways . The reason why China is behaving the way it is is coz 1.) They've been getting what they want. 2.) There's no penalty for such behavior.

After all there's no agreement of where the LAC exists & China has been shifting it's claim to the east, there's nothing preventing us from replicating Chinese action.
 
Falcon said:
No difference of opinion over here. Agreed with 100%
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong but you were of the opinion that there's been no change in the Chinese position w.r.t the area where they had intruded into & were challenged by the IA.

What this video states is that whereas previously the Chinese weren't regular vistors to the Doklam plateau, ever since this incident they've become a permanent presence there with permanent structures for their troops, helipads, etc all across the plateau except the area where they were challenged in with the result that they've practically surrounded our position from 3 sides.

This clearly indicates that the next time they'd come there in full force like they've done so now in Ladakh & refuse to budge , forcing us either into an armed confrontation failing which we'd have to accept their intrusion there as a fait accompli & move on after intensive negotiations like we've done so many times in the past two decades.

This in turn means the final outcome of the Doklam crisis has gone against us even if as of now they've not initiated what is logically their end move described in the previous paragraph.
 
EandkHFUcAItvL7.jpeg


Official Statement
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nikhil, RISING SUN and Chain Smoker
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom