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

Saaho said:
Leaving India, rest all are willing to let China capture their territory or have accepted it.

India would have done well if we had fashioned a military coalition against China. We knew this issue since 60s. Its a shame we did nothing.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are not at all aware of US Policies Post 1991, ie at the end of Cold War

US was keen to Dis member Russia
Once and for All
and get India to Sign NPT , ie give up our Nuclear deterrent

So in order to Weaken India and Russia
US supported the Rise of China and Chinese economy

That is why US and China strongly opposed India' s Nuclear Tests and in 1999 , US attacked Serbia just to Humiliate Russia.

But 9 / 11 happened, and US spent TRILLIONS in Fighting so.called Radical Islam

While US was wasting its Treasury in Afghanistan and Iraq , China became a superpower and since 2010 it has entered into an Alliance with Russia

And thus having Secured its Western Flank it then started its Aggressive
Expansion in Asia and South China Sea

And today in 2021 , We have this QUAD and all this superficial coalitions
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Perhaps you are not at all aware of US Policies Post 1991, ie at the end of Cold War

US was keen to Dis member Russia
Once and for All
and get India to Sign NPT , ie give up our Nuclear deterrent

So in order to Weaken India and Russia
US supported the Rise of China and Chinese economy
Click to expand...
Honestly, India's half arsing everything is the real reason why we mess up royally. Look at nuclear tests done by China. Numerous and quick. First a atomic test then a thermonuclear test (fastest A-Bomb to H-bomb transition). Then a miniaturization test. From 1964 to 1974 total 16 tests. We have done precious TWO god damn tests in all of our existence. All in all 45 odd tests to test ever single damn type of nuclear weapon on the face of the earth. This all was done BEFORE China had ANY economic success. We do not have a proper weaponized test of any of our nuclear wepaons.

Why I am telling all this? To establish the pattern of failures that we see with India : Half arsing and tokenism and incompetence in EVERY field possible. What India could have done?

One after another test nuclear weapons in a blitzkrieg speed like China did and reach to operational readiness of ALL weapons needed.
After nuclear ginne was once out of the bottle, US cann't do shit. They can build all the pressure they want but nothing will work to undo the weapon systems developed. At that point India can sign CTBT and it will mean nothing. Perhaps even NPT would have been modified to accomodate India. Because we half arsed our nuclear weapons program, US had and still has a hope to keep us in a half ready state. Its that simple.

Same is on diplomatic front. We half arsed the cold war. We got all the disadvantage of being out of being seen as a suspect by Russia and US with no advantage (in terms of weapons and tech) of aligned with either of the bloc. It was only in 71 when we actually half-arsed aligned with Russia that we started to get some advantage. We could have done this from the start.

Had we not half arsed our alignment with Russia OR US from the start, it would have been easier for us to switch allegiance later. After all no one remains aligned with weak. We could have jumped ship. Countries have done this. Countries like Pakistan.

In the end independent and non-aligned foreign policy got us nothing. Because it was not really an independent policy. It was a half *censored* attempt at an independent policy. We were not strong enough to have that. And we never did enough diplomatic leg-work to cover our posteriors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl
Saaho said:
Honestly, India's half arsing everything is the real reason why we mess up royally. Look at nuclear tests done by China. Numerous and quick. First a atomic test then a thermonuclear test (fastest A-Bomb to H-bomb transition). Then a miniaturization test. From 1964 to 1974 total 16 tests. We have done precious TWO god damn tests in all of our existence. All in all 45 odd tests to test ever single damn type of nuclear weapon on the face of the earth. This all was done BEFORE China had ANY economic success. We do not have a proper weaponized test of any of our nuclear wepaons.

Why I am telling all this? To establish the pattern of failures that we see with India : Half arsing and tokenism and incompetence in EVERY field possible. What India could have done?

One after another test nuclear weapons in a blitzkrieg speed like China did and reach to operational readiness of ALL weapons needed.
After nuclear ginne was once out of the bottle, US cann't do shit. They can build all the pressure they want but nothing will work to undo the weapon systems developed. At that point India can sign CTBT and it will mean nothing. Perhaps even NPT would have been modified to accomodate India. Because we half arsed our nuclear weapons program, US had and still has a hope to keep us in a half ready state. Its that simple.

Same is on diplomatic front. We half arsed the cold war. We got all the disadvantage of being out of being seen as a suspect by Russia and US with no advantage (in terms of weapons and tech) of aligned with either of the bloc. It was only in 71 when we actually half-arsed aligned with Russia that we started to get some advantage. We could have done this from the start.

Had we not half arsed our alignment with Russia OR US from the start, it would have been easier for us to switch allegiance later. After all no one remains aligned with weak. We could have jumped ship. Countries have done this. Countries like Pakistan.

In the end independent and non-aligned foreign policy got us nothing. Because it was not really an independent policy. It was a half *censored* attempt at an independent policy. We were not strong enough to have that. And we never did enough diplomatic leg-work to cover our posteriors.
Click to expand...
The whole issue stems from the fact that Nehru and his club of mediocrity aimed India as being a non aggressive banana republic rather than a fallen civilization starting anew to take back its rightful place like Mao viewed China with their century of humiliation. That is what drives China. We never left the commonwealth adopted a western style constitution without any indian input or customisation..
I just assume it's Indian attitude to things honestly. I have literally copied some projects and papers even assignments during my engineering. A lot of my colleagues did. I guess that thinking is endemic throughout the masses...No wonder even Gandhi did not want independence...
 
Saaho said:
Honestly, India's half arsing everything is the real reason why we mess up royally. Look at nuclear tests done by China. Numerous and quick. First a atomic test then a thermonuclear test (fastest A-Bomb to H-bomb transition). Then a miniaturization test. From 1964 to 1974 total 16 tests. We have done precious TWO god damn tests in all of our existence. All in all 45 odd tests to test ever single damn type of nuclear weapon on the face of the earth. This all was done BEFORE China had ANY economic success. We do not have a proper weaponized test of any of our nuclear wepaons.

Why I am telling all this? To establish the pattern of failures that we see with India : Half arsing and tokenism and incompetence in EVERY field possible. What India could have done?

One after another test nuclear weapons in a blitzkrieg speed like China did and reach to operational readiness of ALL weapons needed.
After nuclear ginne was once out of the bottle, US cann't do shit. They can build all the pressure they want but nothing will work to undo the weapon systems developed. At that point India can sign CTBT and it will mean nothing. Perhaps even NPT would have been modified to accomodate India. Because we half arsed our nuclear weapons program, US had and still has a hope to keep us in a half ready state. Its that simple.

Same is on diplomatic front. We half arsed the cold war. We got all the disadvantage of being out of being seen as a suspect by Russia and US with no advantage (in terms of weapons and tech) of aligned with either of the bloc. It was only in 71 when we actually half-arsed aligned with Russia that we started to get some advantage. We could have done this from the start.

Had we not half arsed our alignment with Russia OR US from the start, it would have been easier for us to switch allegiance later. After all no one remains aligned with weak. We could have jumped ship. Countries have done this. Countries like Pakistan.

In the end independent and non-aligned foreign policy got us nothing. Because it was not really an independent policy. It was a half *censored* attempt at an independent policy. We were not strong enough to have that. And we never did enough diplomatic leg-work to cover our posteriors.
Click to expand...
you need to have balls to do what is right , and we havent had that for last 10 centuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra
Saaho said:
Honestly, India's half arsing everything is the real reason why we mess up royally. Look at nuclear tests done by China. Numerous and quick. First a atomic test then a thermonuclear test (fastest A-Bomb to H-bomb transition). Then a miniaturization test. From 1964 to 1974 total 16 tests. We have done precious TWO god damn tests in all of our existence. All in all 45 odd tests to test ever single damn type of nuclear weapon on the face of the earth. This all was done BEFORE China had ANY economic success. We do not have a proper weaponized test of any of our nuclear wepaons.

Why I am telling all this? To establish the pattern of failures that we see with India : Half arsing and tokenism and incompetence in EVERY field possible. What India could have done?

One after another test nuclear weapons in a blitzkrieg speed like China did and reach to operational readiness of ALL weapons needed.
After nuclear ginne was once out of the bottle, US cann't do shit. They can build all the pressure they want but nothing will work to undo the weapon systems developed. At that point India can sign CTBT and it will mean nothing. Perhaps even NPT would have been modified to accomodate India. Because we half arsed our nuclear weapons program, US had and still has a hope to keep us in a half ready state. Its that simple.

Same is on diplomatic front. We half arsed the cold war. We got all the disadvantage of being out of being seen as a suspect by Russia and US with no advantage (in terms of weapons and tech) of aligned with either of the bloc. It was only in 71 when we actually half-arsed aligned with Russia that we started to get some advantage. We could have done this from the start.

Had we not half arsed our alignment with Russia OR US from the start, it would have been easier for us to switch allegiance later. After all no one remains aligned with weak. We could have jumped ship. Countries have done this. Countries like Pakistan.

In the end independent and non-aligned foreign policy got us nothing. Because it was not really an independent policy. It was a half *censored* attempt at an independent policy. We were not strong enough to have that. And we never did enough diplomatic leg-work to cover our posteriors.
Click to expand...

Sir , what ever you have pointed out needs a Totally new thread titled India's Geopolitical choices and consequences

You would be surprised at the complexities that we have been facing Both Internally and Externally and how they have brought us to where we are

Everything is connected and our biggest weakness has been the Economy

I will start one next week , am busy for next Two or Three days
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Sir , what ever you have pointed out needs a Totally new thread titled India's Geopolitical choices and consequences

You would be surprised at the complexities that we have been facing Both Internally and Externally and how they have brought us to where we are

Everything is connected and our biggest weakness has been the Economy

I will start one next week , am busy for next Two or Three days
Click to expand...
Complexities are just excuses. So does economy. China had bigger complexities. Their economy was shittier than ours. They had a cultural revolution that killed 60 million people due to starvation. And yet they were not only able reach a strategic equilibrium with US in early 70s but also prospered by leveraging US Red Scare of cold war.
We on the other hand, half arsed every last thing. At the core, it is always incompetence and half *censored* effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra
Lolwa said:
The whole issue stems from the fact that Nehru and his club of mediocrity aimed India as being a non aggressive banana republic rather than a fallen civilization starting anew to take back its rightful place like Mao viewed China with their century of humiliation. That is what drives China. We never left the commonwealth adopted a western style constitution without any indian input or customisation..
I just assume it's Indian attitude to things honestly. I have literally copied some projects and papers even assignments during my engineering. A lot of my colleagues did. I guess that thinking is endemic throughout the masses...No wonder even Gandhi did not want independence...
Click to expand...
Nehru was just one person. The problem is much deeper I guess. I mean, Indira Gandhi was the apogee of our foreign policy and everything and YET after giving a total and absolute defeat to Pakistan we signed a pathetic Shimla agreement where we let them have strategic piece of land like Karakoram pass which connects them to China. These have nothing to do with Nehru per say, it runs deeper. We are *censored*ing up something else somewhere really deep and fundamental. It reminds me of mythology of Prithviraj Chauhan and Ghurids. We as a civilization do not have the required killer instinct to survive and to be decisive. Sooner or later someone will do us in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra and screambowl
Saaho said:
Nehru was just one person. The problem is much deeper I guess. I mean, Indira Gandhi was the apogee of our foreign policy and everything and YET after giving a total and absolute defeat to Pakistan we signed a pathetic Shimla agreement where we let them have strategic piece of land like Karakoram pass which connects them to China. These have nothing to do with Nehru per say, it runs deeper. We are *censored*ing up something else somewhere really deep and fundamental. It reminds me of mythology of Prithviraj Chauhan and Ghurids. We as a civilization do not have the required killer instinct to survive and to be decisive. Sooner or later someone will do us in.
Click to expand...
If you read my entire post. The end literally says that. The type of chalta hain attitude is not just limited to the top but to the masses as well...
 
_Anonymous_ said:
www.news18.com

Xi Jinping’s Tibet Visit Signals Hardened Chinese Position on Border Issue with India - News18

If Xi had visited Tibet after a resolution of the crisis and a restoration of the ground positions that existed in April 2020, the political nuance would be less troubling.
www.news18.com www.news18.com
Click to expand...

They are sitting pretty. The way they see things, they can choose where to cause the next problem. India will be reactionary. Their positions are much safer post the Kailash range decision. Why will they go soft now?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: _Anonymous_
  • Agree
Reactions: Hydra and SammyBoi
Ashwin said:
theprint.in

To deal with China on LAC, India must downsize and restructure the armed forces

Converting the LAC into LoC will only drain India’s resources and stymie modernisation.
theprint.in theprint.in
Click to expand...
Fielding small hi-tech armies is expensive. Given our needs (Kashmir, LoC, LAC, IB (East West) we need the numbers.

Not to mention our entire warfighting scheme is based on the existing setup. Fielding hi-tech smaller sized armies will need changes to doctrine and reforms at every level. And we all know how well we take to the R word.

Edit - I do understand that spending most of the budget on salary/pension isnt working but just pointing out that the idea though valid at all fronts is going to be a tough nut to crack.
 
Last edited:
Jaymax said:
Fielding small hi-tech armies is expensive. Given our needs (Kashmir, LoC, LAC, IB (East West) we need the numbers.

Not to mention our entire warfighting scheme is based on the existing setup. Fielding hi-tech smaller sized armies will need changes to doctrine and reforms at every level. And we all know how well we take to the R word.

Edit - I do understand that spending most of the budget on salary/pension isnt working but just pointing out that the idea though valid at all fronts is going to be a tough nut to crack.
Click to expand...
To add to what you've written , present day technologies can't substitute for infantry on mountains . It can augment them .You will definitely need troops to guard the terrain & fight there if necessary. Lots of them . There's no escaping that . And all this for mounting a defence or defensive offence as the doctrine of our NSA goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaymax
Jaymax said:
Fielding small hi-tech armies is expensive. Given our needs (Kashmir, LoC, LAC, IB (East West) we need the numbers.

Not to mention our entire warfighting scheme is based on the existing setup. Fielding hi-tech smaller sized armies will need changes to doctrine and reforms at every level. And we all know how well we take to the R word.

Edit - I do understand that spending most of the budget on salary/pension isnt working but just pointing out that the idea though valid at all fronts is going to be a tough nut to crack.
Click to expand...

He's not referring to a downsizing of the teeth, but the tail. Converting to IBGs will increase the teeth to tail ratio, and the teeth also gets sharper in the process. But this is a pretty expensive process, which is why he recommends starting with the Strike Corps and some important sectors first.
 
Saaho said:
Honestly, India's half arsing everything is the real reason why we mess up royally. Look at nuclear tests done by China. Numerous and quick. First a atomic test then a thermonuclear test (fastest A-Bomb to H-bomb transition).
Click to expand...

Japanese believe Indians talk a lot and drink a lot of tea.
randomradio said:
Just doubling of our own defence budget from our current levels over the next 5 years will allow us to have localised conventional parity with the Chinese in a very short time.
Click to expand...

Only if spent timely and wisely.

----

hello fellas I am back :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom