Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates
- Thread starter Shashank
- Start date
I am sure if someone make a nice video he will RT it with CKMKB.
Dont make fun of me
I was a Soldier in my past life ie previous birth
___________________________________________________
US is very keen to intervene
Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh speaks with US Defence Secretary over phone;
Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh had a telephonic conversation with US Secretary of Defence Dr Mark
pib.gov.in
If iaf is performing CAPs there, we will soon see PLAAF doing the same on their side.
Worth noting, there has been no official word from IAF regarding this.
We all know the unpredictability of Donald Trump's twitter politics, however, India's response seems interesting -
We said that we didn't speak with D. Trump.
Now, I wonder, what's the reason behind it's response (z)-
a) India definitely doesn't want USA to intervene, we didn't allow at the time of Pakistan & we shouldn't now.
b) Showing China, that we are not aligned with US against China.
In a hypothetical scenario, if China decides to attack, & US asks India if India wants US to intervene, what should India's response be then?
It seems US is raring to go for a shooting game with China, question is, if the reason for the response (z) is (b), does our leadership believe that
China will leave India alone if it can prove to them that we are not aligned with US?
Also, this -
and
Any idea on this road? I doubt anything will come out regarding this from any official sources.
We said that we didn't speak with D. Trump.
Now, I wonder, what's the reason behind it's response (z)-
a) India definitely doesn't want USA to intervene, we didn't allow at the time of Pakistan & we shouldn't now.
b) Showing China, that we are not aligned with US against China.
In a hypothetical scenario, if China decides to attack, & US asks India if India wants US to intervene, what should India's response be then?
It seems US is raring to go for a shooting game with China, question is, if the reason for the response (z) is (b), does our leadership believe that
China will leave India alone if it can prove to them that we are not aligned with US?
Also, this -
and
Any idea on this road? I doubt anything will come out regarding this from any official sources.
We now have better connectivity all along LAC compared to China. Please always remember that connectivity is not just about roads but also thru air. Our Helicopters can carry much bigger load into areas along LAC compared to PLA. We can achieve with Helicopters what we lack on surface. PLA does not have such helicopters nor do they have airbases which are at a lower height than India. The problem with aircraft including helicopters is that you need to take off from denser air to be able to lift a large payload but you can land on a much higher ground with such a load as you will burn off fuel in the flight which will make you light or you can do a rolling landing.
IMHO, the main reason for this standoff is to prevent IA from punishing PA along LOC and to make permanent defence fortifications along LAC to prevent IA from over running the LAC in case of any future war. India Dominates the ingress points along LAC in Aksai Chin and once we get in, than it will become a fight in the plateau of Tibet where PLA stands no chance of winning against IA. I will once again mention the expedition of Dogra General Zorawar Singh into Tibet. He had to withdraw as he could not get any help from HP and UK as those areas were under British control. The situation now is very different.
1)We respect your spirit.Dont make fun of me
I was a Soldier in my past life ie previous birth
___________________________________________________
US is very keen to intervene
Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh speaks with US Defence Secretary over phone;
Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh had a telephonic conversation with US Secretary of Defence Dr Markpib.gov.in
2) Regarding the pib post , you are right. It's written clearly that it was on the latter's request. This clearly shows the USA willingness, but i am confused what was the need to mention it. Maybe we don't want to further antagonise china by involving USA, but in my opinion USA is our biggest guarantor to keep pak at bay and against china as well at this moment. This is the time for tighter embrace with USA.
Indian Navy chief says no need to give military angle to ‘the Quad’
‘The quad’, a proposed alliance among the United States, India, Japan and Australia to counter a rising Chinese presence in the Indo-Pacific, does not have a military dimension, says Admiral Sunil Lamba
I have never understand our pussyfooting attitude, appeasement never works, it hadn't worked in the past nor will it work in the future.
Sooner or later but surely china will come for india, the more india will start to emerge the more threat will be from china. It will do all it can to control our rise.
So what is the problem of having a military alliance like quad, granted nobody will come for our help, but still it will be better in creating capabilities in India. So that we will be better prepared.
Why this overtly defensive mindset?
Agreed. From north east. MAny people missed the scarstic element of the posts. I can give a introduction if reqired.But maybe in the proper introduction threed i saw somewhere.
Yes. They genrally don't say anything about their own military unless a press document is released by the govt, which is more or less accurate
Western sources = Zero. Unless they are quoting the press document. Generally only a few think tanks are quite correct, but media reports are absolute sh!t.
Tech specs for aircraft are far more complex.
It's actually the opposite. It's pussyfooting and appeasement only if the US sucks us into a militarized Quad, which is their plan.
Remember all those quotes by senior US politicians and military personnel claiming India is an ally, only for India to refute such claims? They are doing their best to suck us into a military alliance and then force us into wars we have no capability or interest in fighting.
Chinese have become a game for western countries by challenging India along LAC. What we did not have in 1962, will now be available to us. If we have any chinese member on this forum, I will advise him to back off. You have no chance. You will lose everything including your investment in US bonds and investments all across the globe. Your econimy will collapse like a pack of cards.
Indians never lost a war for want of valour or manpower. We lost as we had inferior weapons or strife within. Now we are united as a nation and not divided among small kingdoms which fought against eachother or plotted with invaders to defeat our own. As far as 2.5 front war is concerned, we Hindus will take care of 0.5 front and very very strongly. That is why we have RSS and Bajrang Dal.
Indians never lost a war for want of valour or manpower. We lost as we had inferior weapons or strife within. Now we are united as a nation and not divided among small kingdoms which fought against eachother or plotted with invaders to defeat our own. As far as 2.5 front war is concerned, we Hindus will take care of 0.5 front and very very strongly. That is why we have RSS and Bajrang Dal.
Recently , I saw a video Maj Gaurav Arya
He said and I quote "
We Indians might not be interested in Wars ,BUT Wars are Interested in us
Wars.will come to India whether we like
It or Not "
This is what is happening
A Two Front War is Our Fate and Destiny
____________________________________________________
Always Ready Sir
We Civilians cannot become soldiers overnight But we can sort out these internal enemies easily
All we need is permission
Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) Tweeted: Indian & American read outs of Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh & US Defence Secretary Mark Esper talks. Sidhant Sibal on Twitter
Good point Sir. I think that loose talk from some netas about taking over Aksai Chin has prompted the Chinese leadership to take this step. If we have lost about 50 sq km then the joke's on us. We should have kept more quiet till we can think of taking on China in an offensive manner.