Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

[DavidD]

Darshhan, I know about the Mumbai attacks, though I'm not knowledgeable enough regarding Pakistan's involvement. But it doesn't matter anyway, all it matters is what India believes. It's kind of like how it doesn't matter whether NK sank the Cheonan, it only matters what SK and the U.S. believe, because that's what will shape the course of future events.

Now, with that said, I agree that India shouldn't just do nothing if it believes that Pakistan was behind it. However, I do not believe that destroying Pakistan is the right course of action. No, Indian lives are not cheap, but 300 lives is cheaper than 1 billion, and that's how many India will lose if it engages in a nuclear war against Pakistan and China. To me, India does not have a choice but to pursue alternative means to solve the problem. By alternative, I mean economic and political means. Either India has to become more powerful than China and dictate the terms, or India will become a lower-tier power than China and be small enough of a threat for China to guarantee its security in exchange for Indian cooperation.

The only way for India to have avoided this problem WAS to modernize its economy before China did, when China was embroiled in internal conflicts during the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution years. That way, India would be ahead of China and could have dictated the terms. However, India let that window of opportunity pass, and now has to deal with the consequences and take many decades longer to achieve its objective. It's similar to how China let the window of opportunity for retaking Taiwan pass when it entered the Korean War. 60 years later, Taiwan is still essentially independent. Just like how a hasty attack on Taiwan hasn't been and won't in the near future be an option for China, a hasty attempt to eliminate the Pakistani threat is similarly foolish.

[darshhan]

Dingyibvs, For us even one individual that we lose is very expensive.You see we are a democracy where the individual is empowered.So the talk of 300 lives being cheaper than 1 billion of our citizens is irrelevant.Important thing in our society is the concept of justice.

I will give you an example.A criminal gets sentenced to death for killing 10 people.Now the rest of his gang which is still at large threatens the society that if this criminal is hanged they will kill 100 more.If we follow your opinion we should not carry out the sentence and compromise with the gang.This is not what is justice.While carrying out justice you cannot be afraid.And Justice is always worth pursuing no matter what the cost is.

On the other hand 300 lives of our citizens might indeed be cheaper than lives of 1.5 billion(combined population of pakistan and China).

[shiv]

I don't think you read the article, because it states that China would WIN that war. So yes, it assumes that China will take those losses, but it doesn't assume that China would just sit back. In fact, it predicts that China would keep throwing more at the conflict and eventually win it without going nuclear.

Sir. This is called astrology. Not analysis

The article you posted is worthless because it makes one predicition without taking into account a whole lot of other things.

What is worse is that you are applying the same arguments to an area thousands of km away where Chinese aircraft will have to be talking of half laden from mountain air bases. Chinese tanks and ships will be worthless in that area. I still think that scenario is trash. If you are prepared to apply some thought that is fine. If you are making predictions - no need for an article.

[darshhan]

Dingyibvs, you also gave the example of Cheonan incident.You see that is the problem with China.China has cultivated friendship with all sorts of criminal and terrorist states such as Pakistan,N Korea or sudan.If you want to know the character of someone just look at his choice of friends.Just observe his company.Mark my words China's close friendship with these criminal and oppressive states(most of which suppress their own citizens) will damage China in the long run.

[shiv]

I sometimes feel that many Indians are plain jealous of PRC and its achievements

Shaurya this is piskolgically 100% correct.

But the Indian relationship with PRC is just like that with Pakistan. Many Indians get affected by their boasting and both Chinese and Pakis hate it if their boasts are dismissed as trash. One set need to boast. The other set need to moan.

That is why such analyses get bogged down the minute we let a boasting, non moaning party in. Just a decade ago every Paki boast was believed leading to widespread moaning. Indians will not stop moaning about TSP until it vanishes and it won't. Same is true for China. Chinese boast. Indians moan.

[DavidD]

I don't think you read the article, because it states that China would WIN that war. So yes, it assumes that China will take those losses, but it doesn't assume that China would just sit back. In fact, it predicts that China would keep throwing more at the conflict and eventually win it without going nuclear.

Sir. This is called astrology. Not analysis

The article you posted is worthless because it makes one predicition without taking into account a whole lot of other things.

What is worse is that you are applying the same arguments to an area thousands of km away where Chinese aircraft will have to be talking of half laden from mountain air bases. Chinese tanks and ships will be worthless in that area. I still think that scenario is trash. If you are prepared to apply some thought that is fine. If you are making predictions - no need for an article.

First, RAND is not an institution known for its astrology prowess, so I assume they've done some analysis which are far deeper than either you and I can conduct. That article in itself is irrelevant, what is relevant is the results of RAND's analysis which it quoted. Second, taking off from high altitude does not necessarily mean reduced payload, as the lower atmospheric pressure may be compensated by a longer runway. This would of course expose more areas for denial attacks, but I think we can both agree that it is unlikely to bridge the gap between the Indian and American aerial power. In any case, those numbers aren't meant to be simply transported to a conflict in the Himalayas, they were simply used to illustrate that such a conflict will be of high intensity involving a high number of losses on both sides.

[DavidD]

Dingyibvs, For us even one individual that we lose is very expensive.You see we are a democracy where the individual is empowered.So the talk of 300 lives being cheaper than 1 billion of our citizens is irrelevant.Important thing in our society is the concept of justice.

I will give you an example.A criminal gets sentenced to death for killing 10 people.Now the rest of his gang which is still at large threatens the society that if this criminal is hanged they will kill 100 more.If we follow your opinion we should not carry out the sentence and compromise with the gang.This is not what is justice.While carrying out justice you cannot be afraid.And Justice is always worth pursuing no matter what the cost is.

On the other hand 300 lives of our citizens might indeed be cheaper than lives of 1.5 billion(combined population of pakistan and China).

That's a very naive point of view. The difference between 300 and 1 billion is not irrelevant, no matter what concept of justice you have. Your analogy with the criminal gang is entirely inappropriate because the difference isn't 10-fold, but 3 MILLION fold. If apprehending the remainder of the gang means losing 30 million more people, then yes, you should not carry out the sentence and compromise with the gang. That's the power of...power. In that scenario, the gang has it, and you don't.

[shiv]

but I cannot foresee a day when a nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India may be justified.

Astrology not working here?

Well Pakistan has threatened India with nuclear war and China has threatened anyone with nuclear war. You sit in America and predict what Chinese and Pakistanis will do at some future hypothetical date and expect this trash to be believed?

Do you think the Chinese who have a finger on the nuclear button will take that finger off the button because of what you think? Do you believe that the development of China specific missiles in India are aimed at allowing China to win a war without going nuclear and that those Chinese fingers on the button are going to relax?

Oh but we all know the Chinese are going to be prodding India and supporting Pakistan. So what does the crystal ball say about an Indian who may become mad enough to nuke both countries. The crystal ball and BRF do not tell you that India which may be trying to play catch up with Chin may still fail and become a nuclear armed Pakistan X 10. We would rather develop and not do that. But China does not want that. So the correct thing for India to do is what Pakistan is doing, if we go down we take you down with us. Its that simple actually.

And I have not even started talking about the turmoil that China may go through which every Chinese will dismiss because he will lose face. But a crystal ball is required there and you may be better equipped.

Have a Charminar.

[darshhan]

That's a very naive point of view.

Yes that might be a naive point of view according to you.But you know what.Giving nuclear weapons and sponsoring terrorist states like Pakistan is even more naive.Something that China has done in past and continues to do so actively in the vain hope of destroying India.

You said in your earlier posts that China has become a greater power than India.Well you are right because currently China is ahead on almost all the economic parameters.No arguments on that.Chinese people have worked hard for it and they deserve the fruits of their labor.But there is a saying that with great power comes great responsibility which China seems to have completely forgotten.

In the most immoral and unethical manner China has distributed nuclear knowhow to terrorist countries like Pakistan and North Korea.Can you tell me what should the world do when any terrorist group or a homicidal general manages to get hold of some of these weapons.? Or worse if the pakistani leadership suffering from grand delusions start using these nukes.

[shiv]

First, RAND is not an institution known for its astrology prowess, so I assume they've done some analysis which are far deeper than either you and I can conduct. That article in itself is irrelevant, what is relevant is the results of RAND's analysis which it quoted.

I think that "analysis" is rubbish. RAND have been known to say a lot of stupid things to suit particular world views.

And yes the article is completely irrelevant - so quit quoting and posting irrelevant trash.

[vivekmehta]

weather its one front or two front war. i believe we lack ideology to be a nation . wars can be only fought and won once you have a ideology and this ideology needs to be part of every once life from president to common man on road. We say a lot of things about our political class that they are week decision makers or they lack vision . problem with them is that they also actually part of a nation who lacks a ideology.
Today we bolster to world that we will be new economic power and will overtake china some where in 2030 + as the world largest economy . we make these claim on bases that we have largest youth force in the world to work .during that time and china will be going Japans way .
but does this largest youth force in world understand what is there duty is towards there nation . no I don’t thing they have any clue of that . I cant pinpoint why its so but again its very easy to put all blame on out leadership.
We may win wars today but it may become another 1971 . a job half done . we need a ideology first , once we know what we want we can face war on n number of fronts .

[krishna_krishna]

From long time back someone wrote this, "One country, One language, One Flag" that should be the motto promoted from top down. The idea is belief in our nation as we are not nation based on religion or ideology, that is what makes us different and special we have to build an idea around india first before punjabi, marathi, tamil and so on.It is really important to have strong social fabric. It doesn't matter then if it is two front or all front. Think world war II when countries were attacked from every front the strong ones will prevail no matter what its about the strong will and allegiance to ones country.I think more discussion should be done on troubles in north and north east, that is more harmful low poison and think the impact of that on grand design on two front attack on us.One can defeat armies not communities that is the essence of low intensity conflict that those guys do not have to loose they just make sure we do not win.

For discussion on this topic currently we are not prepared if we have to today. And it would will not be two front if we fought it would be three fronts the ocean will be the third.

[RamaY]

Yes, a nuclear war can easily spread to more than just two countries, which is why everyone will ensure that it will never be used. Having nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them means you will not face existential threat from at least the areas as far as you can deliver them. Pakistan has no reason to conduct a kamikaze attack. If they, or India for that matter, ever come under external existential threat, all powers around the world will apply pressure, and force if necessary to alleviate such threat so that they would not be forced to use nuclear weapons.

Yes, China has been and will continue to try to hurt India in one way or another through Pakistan, but why would you expect otherwise? As stated before, power is a zero-sum game, and the rise of one power will inevitably ebb another power, and sometime that other power is India. As the person you quoted stated, China's goal is to attain more power, and I wouldn't necessarily limit to just all of Asia either. Really, that's pretty much all countries with enough land and resources want, more wealth and accordingly more power.

Dingyibvs,

Great insight! Let me explain it in your language so it is easier for you to understand...

Deng Xiaoping once said "it doesn't matter if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice". In this thread the white cat is terrorism-as-state-policy and black cat is JDAM. Now you/PRC are trying to differentiate between black and white cats, where as both strategies are equally irritating to India.

What I am recommending India to do is that it must not differentiate between the white/black cats. What would be the world's reaction if India announces that any future terror attack emanating from Pakistan will be considered as a black cat scenario deserving a nuke-punishment, and actually executes that threat?

Secondly, which Sun Tsu told you that power is a zero-sum game? India has great seers thousands of years before Sun Tsu was walking in his diapers. This ajnana (ignorance) is what leading PRC right now. That is why Communist Party thinks that giving power to Chinese will be a direct and equal loss of power to the party. This is not wisdom, it is paranoia. Today's PRC is following the foot-steps of Anglo-saxon ignorance in geopolitical matters while thinking that it is an ancient civilization. That ancient civilization, if China ever had, was rooted out by your great leader Mao Zedong. Today's china is nothing but a Colonized-Communist-Panda {I say this with deep sorrow for what happened to Buddhist China.}

Let me tell you a secret. India knows that power need not be a zero-sum game, and also knows how to achieve it. That is why Indian leadership doesn't fear when its citizens are empowered and demonstrate more creativity/freedom than the government. They in fact enjoy it because the see strength in it. This is the wisdom India has and can offer the ignorant China. {This is exactly what I meant when I said PRC need to mature to play Geopolitics in a Dharmic manner - hope Prad is reading this}.

[RamaY]

I sometimes feel that many Indians are plain jealous of PRC and its achievements and have built a crab in the well syndrome. We need to get out of it. Let PRC do, what it needs to, we should do what we have to. If some day, we shall confront, so be it but till then let us compete. India will not get her due respect, by shouting at world forums, and neither PRC not anyone is going to "realize" anything to give India her due. These dues have to be earned. Every other nation, has shed blood to get there. When India sheds blood to protect her interests, shall we get our dues. That is just the way it is.

ShauryaT garu,

There is no jealousy here for PRC's achievements. If PRC wins a lottery tomorrow and can afford gold plates for all its citizens, good for them. What India knows is that material pleasures can take a society only to some extent. No matter how rich PRC will get its citizens will eat the same rice, wheat, insects, and animal meat to survive. There is no difference to India. What India philosophically worried about is a billion+ population exploiting the nature to achieve something that they wouldn't cherish at the end. But the damage to the nature will be permanent.

As far as India is concerned, it prefers to have PRC (and the whole world) on its side; not a conqueror but as siblings in a Vasudhaika Kutumbakam. If that is not possible, India already prove that it has the intellectual and spiritual capacity to stand for dharma and face the consequences of another Mahabharata war.

For the purpose of this thread, my recommendation is that Indian leadership learns from Bhishma-pitamaha and preempt a future Bharata war by disciplining the young Kauravas immediately, instead of letting this nonsense grow leading to a world-war. Based on available material and its interim behavior no other world power US/PRC/USSR shows this wisdom. So it is India's duty to nip this TSP-nonsense in the bud.

If the grand-children of Sun Tsu are as wise as their grand-pa they will learn the lesson and lose the war without firing a single bullet.

JMHT.

[V_Raman]

Gauravs are pak? not right. i think it is china who are the gauravas.

[RamaY]

V_Raman garu,

This is all OT here...It doesn't matter who is who... but since you asked...

TSP is Duryodhana and his brothers born to Blind Dhrutarashtra and Gandhari. And various kuru-vruddhas such as Bhishma, Drona, Kripa, and even Karna are fighting on TSP's side thinking that they are the true Bharata inheritors. But people forget that Dhrutarashtra became king only after Pandu's death...

[DavidD]

but I cannot foresee a day when a nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India may be justified.

Astrology not working here?

Well Pakistan has threatened India with nuclear war and China has threatened anyone with nuclear war. You sit in America and predict what Chinese and Pakistanis will do at some future hypothetical date and expect this trash to be believed?

Do you think the Chinese who have a finger on the nuclear button will take that finger off the button because of what you think? Do you believe that the development of China specific missiles in India are aimed at allowing China to win a war without going nuclear and that those Chinese fingers on the button are going to relax?

Oh but we all know the Chinese are going to be prodding India and supporting Pakistan. So what does the crystal ball say about an Indian who may become mad enough to nuke both countries. The crystal ball and BRF do not tell you that India which may be trying to play catch up with Chin may still fail and become a nuclear armed Pakistan X 10. We would rather develop and not do that. But China does not want that. So the correct thing for India to do is what Pakistan is doing, if we go down we take you down with us. Its that simple actually.

And I have not even started talking about the turmoil that China may go through which every Chinese will dismiss because he will lose face. But a crystal ball is required there and you may be better equipped.

Have a Charminar.

Any type of analysis would include reasoning, assumptions, and ultimately predictions. If you reject any type of reasoning or prediction as "astrology" or "crystal ball", then this message board would be devoid of discussion. Do you have anything new to add to the discussion, or are you simply rejecting any of my analysis of the current and prediction of the future on the basis that...it hasn't happened yet?

I mean, other than your various attacks and insinuations, the only actual statement/prediction you made is that India should take everybody down with it should it go down, which I AGREE. So exactly what contrarian viewpoints are you offering? What are the differences between our viewpoints aside from your discussion-killing "let's not talk about the future since it'd take a crystal ball to see it" attitude?

[DavidD]

That's a very naive point of view.

Yes that might be a naive point of view according to you.But you know what.Giving nuclear weapons and sponsoring terrorist states like Pakistan is even more naive.Something that China has done in past and continues to do so actively in the vain hope of destroying India.

You said in your earlier posts that China has become a greater power than India.Well you are right because currently China is ahead on almost all the economic parameters.No arguments on that.Chinese people have worked hard for it and they deserve the fruits of their labor.But there is a saying that with great power comes great responsibility which China seems to have completely forgotten.

In the most immoral and unethical manner China has distributed nuclear knowhow to terrorist countries like Pakistan and North Korea.Can you tell me what should the world do when any terrorist group or a homicidal general manages to get hold of some of these weapons.? Or worse if the pakistani leadership suffering from grand delusions start using these nukes.

What would the world do when a terrorist group or homicidal general manages to get hold of some of these weapons? See Israel. I can see how you're worried about Pakistani leadership is crazy and start using these nukes, the Chinese feared similarly regarding the U.S. and the Soviets. However, you cannot let your actions be dictated by your fears, you need to realize that despite all the idealogical, cultural, and geopolitical differences between nations which hold nuclear weapons, they are still fundamentally human, and the fundamental driving force for humans is a sense of self-preservation. Nobody will start a nuclear war if it means that they will themselves be annihilated.

[DavidD]

Yes, a nuclear war can easily spread to more than just two countries, which is why everyone will ensure that it will never be used. Having nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them means you will not face existential threat from at least the areas as far as you can deliver them. Pakistan has no reason to conduct a kamikaze attack. If they, or India for that matter, ever come under external existential threat, all powers around the world will apply pressure, and force if necessary to alleviate such threat so that they would not be forced to use nuclear weapons.

Yes, China has been and will continue to try to hurt India in one way or another through Pakistan, but why would you expect otherwise? As stated before, power is a zero-sum game, and the rise of one power will inevitably ebb another power, and sometime that other power is India. As the person you quoted stated, China's goal is to attain more power, and I wouldn't necessarily limit to just all of Asia either. Really, that's pretty much all countries with enough land and resources want, more wealth and accordingly more power.

Dingyibvs,

Great insight! Let me explain it in your language so it is easier for you to understand...

Deng Xiaoping once said "it doesn't matter if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice". In this thread the white cat is terrorism-as-state-policy and black cat is JDAM. Now you/PRC are trying to differentiate between black and white cats, where as both strategies are equally irritating to India.

What I am recommending India to do is that it must not differentiate between the white/black cats. What would be the world's reaction if India announces that any future terror attack emanating from Pakistan will be considered as a black cat scenario deserving a nuke-punishment, and actually executes that threat?

Secondly, which Sun Tsu told you that power is a zero-sum game? India has great seers thousands of years before Sun Tsu was walking in his diapers. This ajnana (ignorance) is what leading PRC right now. That is why Communist Party thinks that giving power to Chinese will be a direct and equal loss of power to the party. This is not wisdom, it is paranoia. Today's PRC is following the foot-steps of Anglo-saxon ignorance in geopolitical matters while thinking that it is an ancient civilization. That ancient civilization, if China ever had, was rooted out by your great leader Mao Zedong. Today's china is nothing but a Colonized-Communist-Panda {I say this with deep sorrow for what happened to Buddhist China.}

Let me tell you a secret. India knows that power need not be a zero-sum game, and also knows how to achieve it. That is why Indian leadership doesn't fear when its citizens are empowered and demonstrate more creativity/freedom than the government. They in fact enjoy it because the see strength in it. This is the wisdom India has and can offer the ignorant China. {This is exactly what I meant when I said PRC need to mature to play Geopolitics in a Dharmic manner - hope Prad is reading this}.

1) I'll tell you what'll happens if India declares it would nuke Pakistan if it sponsors terrorism over India. Nobody would believe it. If such a thing worked America could've won the Vietnam War by declaring it would nuke the Soviet Union and China for supporting it, the Soviets would've won in Afghanistan by declaring it would nuke the U.S. and China for supporting the Afghans. I won't believe it, and I'm willing to bet that even the majority of this particularly nationalistic board wouldn't believe it.

2) I didn't learn from Sun-Tzu that power is a zero sum game, it's an absolute truth. I don't want to get off topic, but I have my own ideas regarding how effective it is to empower general populations that are too busy with their day jobs and possess too few resources to make smart decisions regarding national policies.

[RamaY]

First few facts - America invaded Vietnam and Soviets sent their army to Afghanistan. One example close to your ancestral home is PRC "invaded" Tibet. On the other hand Pakistan has been carved out by UK/USA from India to advance their geopolitical ambitions. Hope you get the point.

I empathize with your POV that power is a zero-sum game if that is what you believe and your faith that general populations (as if CPC came from Mars) cannot make "smart" decisions regarding national policies. But that would be betrayal of the values your adapted land professes.

Getting back to this thread -

If you claim that it is OK for PRC to support Pakistan even if it means in-directly supporting terror attacks on India, then PRC cannot be India's friend. Then it will be up to India if it want be part of the alliance that would not only undermine but also permanently destroy any/every dream that PRC has.

And then you "believe" that a direct armed conflict between PRC and India is near-impossible. Then what would be, in your opinion, PRC's action plan when India destroys Pakistan using conventional weapons (because you also believe that Pakistan will never use its nukes even in the worse case scenario)?

[Prem]

RamaYa
PRc at best is 9 years ahead of India in economic term and lets not forget their inherrent fear of Indians not onlee catching up but also shattering their dream of domination in Asia. All Indians need to do is wait ,watch and work on their own pace and way. The day of cheap manufaturing using 3 tier imported technology will soon be over and then essential difference between indians and Chinese will decide who will actually dominate with both soft an hard power. Chinese will need more than their Paki paws to compete past 2025. If they are that powerful as they claim then they wont hesitate to have direct confrontation . They tried in 80 and found out and did not dare to try at Kargil time when their pet Pak's Musharraf was teared apart right in front of their eyes. This betray their weakness. If they are that confident as they claim then they wont be asking every businessman about their link/ dealing in India which BTW none of the Indian business man will ever ask his foreign customer.

[DavidD]

First few facts - America invaded Vietnam and Soviets sent their army to Afghanistan. One example close to your ancestral home is PRC "invaded" Tibet. On the other hand Pakistan has been carved out by UK/USA from India to advance their geopolitical ambitions. Hope you get the point.

I empathize with your POV that power is a zero-sum game if that is what you believe and your faith that general populations (as if CPC came from Mars) cannot make "smart" decisions regarding national policies. But that would be betrayal of the values your adapted land professes.

Getting back to this thread -

If you claim that it is OK for PRC to support Pakistan even if it means in-directly supporting terror attacks on India, then PRC cannot be India's friend. Then it will be up to India if it want be part of the alliance that would not only undermine but also permanently destroy any/every dream that PRC has.

And then you "believe" that a direct armed conflict between PRC and India is near-impossible. Then what would be, in your opinion, PRC's action plan when India destroys Pakistan using conventional weapons (because you also believe that Pakistan will never use its nukes even in the worse case scenario)?

There are a few misunderstandings here, I'll get to them later. First, there is no fundamental difference between Vietnam, Afghanistan, and terrorist attacks on India. The point is that nuclear threat would not work because nobody believes that the US and the USSR are willing to start a nuclear war over Vietnam and Afghanistan respectively, and nobody believes that India would start a nuclear war due to a few hundred lives lost. Nuclear deterrence is about capability and intention, and India simply doesn't have the intention. You may bluff as hard as you can, but anybody would be able to see that it is just that, a bluff.

Now, for the misunderstandings. I suppose I should've used the word "informed" rather than "smart". The people are certainly smart enough to make policy decisions, but the population as a whole is too busy with other things to become knowledgeable enough to make informed decisions. Also, I did NOT say that Pakistan would never use its nukes even in the worst case scenario, I said that the world powers will not let the worst case scenario happen. If India tries to destroy Pakistan using conventional weapons, then the Chinese WILL become involved, and it won't just be the Chinese either, because NOBODY wants a nuclear conflict. This case goes for the reversed scenario as well should Pakistan ever comes close to succeeding in destroying India.

[harbans]

Come through a lot of debates on this 2 front war and discussed the same including with a General in the IA. There's a sort of feeling civilians cannot contribute majorly to a counter offensive..specially when caught off the back foot. Now where did i hear/ see Stalins' meeting with Russian top war commanders when the Nazi's had rolled across vast sections of Western USSR...there were the Generals all round a table..Stalin standing at the head behind him a map where a General explained the positions along some 1000 plus kms along which the Germans were and had thrust into Russian territory. Stalin calmly asks the military Top brass..how much time to mobilize and start the counter offensive to drive Germans off..the Top General says..minimum few weeks maybe a month or 2..using classic military logic. Stalin hears him out..and asks him for the baton where the General has explained the military position all along. Stalin asks for attention..takes the baton. Goes to the map and points the baton all along the border gently..it's here the Germans are..here..here and there a 100 km in..and so on. Then he turns around and breathes down the neck of the Generals.. and says he has a plan..and he starts looking each General in the eye..and says banging now the baton onto the map..yells and says I WANT THE COUNTER OFFENSIVE TO START TOMMORROW MORNING 4 AM!! You Generals have 12 hours. I want tomorrow morning the Germans facing the heat of Russian bullets here, here..hitting the baton violently on the map across the 1000's of km they represented of the invasion..he asks a General what does it take to eliminate a Nazi inside Mother Russia ? 10 bullets? 1 bullet? How difficult is it to fire that? what are the sons of Russia for? Activate every kid in the village..if needed teach them to fire..how much time does that take? So i want the counter offensive to begin tomorrow morning..and need reports on the progress coming in by evening. Mother Russia will defend itself with the full fury of it's ciotizens unleashed on it's invaders..

Russia suffered 20 m civilian and military casualities...but never again did anyone take Russians not seriously. And Russia will be remembered for ever for that.

To cut a long story short..whatever the odds, it's important the citizenry specially in a country like India be activated to supplement or complement the infantry in large numbers. War is certainly not just about the Army..it's also the civilian citizenry. Any union leader clamoring or raising the issue of prices of Onions rising under such circumstances must dissapear to the frontiers or Red Fort..Mother India has to be defended at all costs and it's citizenry must be motivated to produce that effort even if it means the ultimate one. And once the counter offensive gets going it must not stop at some Line of designated control..

Apologies..just wanted to get this off my chest. I hated it when i saw civilian citizenry clamoring give up Kashmir to get back their relatives in Kandahar. We need to change that...

[RamaY]

Harbans garu,

100 years to you. That is what I called Indira Gandhi Grameena Rojgaar Yojana in earlier pages. If PRC will not settle for anything less than people's revolution, then that is what it shall get Let the Tibetan peasants raise against Hun feudals.

[shiv]

Any type of analysis would include reasoning, assumptions, and ultimately predictions. If you reject any type of reasoning or prediction as "astrology" or "crystal ball", then this message board would be devoid of discussion. Do you have anything new to add to the discussion, or are you simply rejecting any of my analysis of the current and prediction of the future on the basis that...it hasn't happened yet?

I mean, other than your various attacks and insinuations, the only actual statement/prediction you made is that India should take everybody down with it should it go down, which I AGREE. So exactly what contrarian viewpoints are you offering? What are the differences between our viewpoints aside from your discussion-killing "let's not talk about the future since it'd take a crystal ball to see it" attitude?

Sir are you actually reading this thread or are you just spitting out of your window as you drive through rural India?

Here are (some of)the posts I have made to support what I am talking about
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 23#p890923
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 67#p890967
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 36#p891136
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 53#p891353
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 46#p891446
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 50#p891850
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 10#p892410
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 69#p892469
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 95#p892995

[DavidD]

Any type of analysis would include reasoning, assumptions, and ultimately predictions. If you reject any type of reasoning or prediction as "astrology" or "crystal ball", then this message board would be devoid of discussion. Do you have anything new to add to the discussion, or are you simply rejecting any of my analysis of the current and prediction of the future on the basis that...it hasn't happened yet?

I mean, other than your various attacks and insinuations, the only actual statement/prediction you made is that India should take everybody down with it should it go down, which I AGREE. So exactly what contrarian viewpoints are you offering? What are the differences between our viewpoints aside from your discussion-killing "let's not talk about the future since it'd take a crystal ball to see it" attitude?

Sir are you actually reading this thread or are you just spitting out of your window as you drive through rural India?

Here are (some of)the posts I have made to support what I am talking about
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 23#p890923
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 67#p890967
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 36#p891136
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 53#p891353
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 46#p891446
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 50#p891850
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 10#p892410
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 69#p892469
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 95#p892995

I've read your posts, and none of them address the point I made, which is that losses would be incurred on both sides, losses that need to be replaced. You can call it astrology, I call it reality.

[shiv]

I've read your posts, and none of them address the point I made, which is that losses would be incurred on both sides, losses that need to be replaced. You can call it astrology, I call it reality.

If you have really read them, you have not understood them. How far can you predict losses before a war turns nuclear?

Your astrology has spoken of winning conventional war by ramping up production. What does your crystal ball say about nuclear war? Does victory still come to China with its amazing ability to ramp up production to fight conventional war?

Does the crystal ball say that prodding India continuously will result in long lasting peace and prosperity for China? Does it say that China will avoid war but keep prodding India and India will sit back forever?

You say China will not fight war with India. How can India be sure about that? If China is arming itself and prodding and provoking India do you think your opinion about no war carries any more chance of surviving than a fart in a hurricane?

How can you know (minus crystal ball) that China will not provoke a border incident (as it has done in the past) that gets punished badly by India (as has happened) and some desperate Chicom escalates the war because he loses face in Beijing?

[ajit_tr]

I'm not sure if India will end up fighting two front war with china and Pakistan directly.But India sure can expect two front war from their Proxies i.e. Maoist in the east and Taliban/Al-Qaeda and other assorted groups in the west.With Afghanistan under its thumb Pakistan will be free to divert substantiative jehadi forces of suicide bombers into India from west and Chinese supported Maoist will join hands with Nepalese Maoist will keep pressure from east and north.Such a scenario will be more frightful then fighting Chinese and Pakistanis on two frontal war.

[DavidD]

I've read your posts, and none of them address the point I made, which is that losses would be incurred on both sides, losses that need to be replaced. You can call it astrology, I call it reality.

If you have really read them, you have not understood them. How far can you predict losses before a war turns nuclear?

Your astrology has spoken of winning conventional war by ramping up production. What does your crystal ball say about nuclear war? Does victory still come to China with its amazing ability to ramp up production to fight conventional war?

Does the crystal ball say that prodding India continuously will result in long lasting peace and prosperity for China? Does it say that China will avoid war but keep prodding India and India will sit back forever?

You say China will not fight war with India. How can India be sure about that? If China is arming itself and prodding and provoking India do you think your opinion about no war carries any more chance of surviving than a fart in a hurricane?

How can you know (minus crystal ball) that China will not provoke a border incident (as it has done in the past) that gets punished badly by India (as has happened) and some desperate Chicom escalates the war because he loses face in Beijing?

I see, so your argument is that the war would go nuclear first. That's just jingoistic bravado. You don't have the guts to go nuclear, nobody does. The only way for that to happen is in case of existential threat, and neither side is willing to go that far.

I don't know what border incident you speak of, there have been many minor skirmishes along the border over the past 50 years, and none is relevant enough to be mentioned. You did pose an interesting question. Can China keep prodding India and will India sit back forever? The very fact that you're asking this question indicates that you have a very narrow-sighted view of the situation. India won't sit back forever because it is NOT sitting back RIGHT NOW.

There are more ways to fight back than with simply the military. As/if India gets stronger vis-a-vis China, then the prodding will reduce, until(if that day comes) India is strong enough to make China entirely reliant on India. That's when the prodding will stop entirely. The situation is exactly the same for China. The India prodding, from the sheltering of Dalai Lama to claims of Askai Chin, will stop entirely when China makes India a second-tier power relative to China, and that's the goal they're working toward.

Also, regarding supposed Chinese intrusions, is there any proof? I saw a blurry video/picture of a supposedly Chinese truck in a supposedly Indian region, and some red paint Chinese characters on supposedly Indian rocks. Are there actually proof for any of these things? The red paint thing looks especially RIDICULOUS. I can GUARANTEE you that 99% of the 3rd graders have handwriting better than those red paint on the rock. It looks more like a foreigner trying to copy Chinese characters for the first time(hint hint).

[ShauryaT]

Apologies..just wanted to get this off my chest. I hated it when i saw civilian citizenry clamoring give up Kashmir to get back their relatives in Kandahar. We need to change that...

What a few relatives did out of desperation, amplified by a DDM, should not be considered to be reflective of most civilians. The sons of India have always fought her invaders. It is the reason, why we still have a sizable nation, after 1400+ years of continuous external aggression. So, one should not have any doubts on this matter. The record is not perfect but it is not that depressing either.

[sawant]

I think one of the reasons why we doubt... or say civilian/politico junta fears a 2 front war is simply because we do not have strong institutions to deal with its fallout... Countless terrorist attacks have proved that... I think if we would have proper de-centralized and disciplined institutions that can survive and function effectively in any war NBC or otherwise, then thats a force multiplier to reckon with... TSP can get away with bluffs because they feel ek bum yahan aur ek bum wahan to hindoostan tittar bittar.. we need to put the fear of God that we will survive and strike back ... in a overt manner wherever possible... psyops may be but we need that

[shiv]

I see, so your argument is that the war would go nuclear first. That's just jingoistic bravado.

<snip>

Also, regarding supposed Chinese intrusions, is there any proof?

Well these two sentences speak for themselves.

Crossed fingers and and stonewalling when confronted.

Do you think a people who are willing to tell lies about "border intrusions" will not be mad enough to escalate the situation into a war?

While you claim expertise in pointing out the Chinese viewpoint (as evident from the above rhetoric) you have no clue about what's going on in India. It hardly matters whether Chinese intrusions are really occurring or not as long as Indians think they are occurring. And if that breaks out into a skirmish that a weak Chinese leader - having mowed down some Chinese civilians wants to prove a point we may have war.

Would a Chinese leader be able to take conventional defeat and still not use a nuclear threat?

"We aim to win conventional war" is planning

"We will inevitably win conventional war" is astrology of the type you posted. No?

[Pratyush]

Shiv,

Drone alert. Pls to excuse.

Regards

[DavidD]

I see, so your argument is that the war would go nuclear first. That's just jingoistic bravado.

<snip>

Also, regarding supposed Chinese intrusions, is there any proof?

Well these two sentences speak for themselves.

Crossed fingers and and stonewalling when confronted.

Do you think a people who are willing to tell lies about "border intrusions" will not be mad enough to escalate the situation into a war?

While you claim expertise in pointing out the Chinese viewpoint (as evident from the above rhetoric) you have no clue about what's going on in India. It hardly matters whether Chinese intrusions are really occurring or not as long as Indians think they are occurring. And if that breaks out into a skirmish that a weak Chinese leader - having mowed down some Chinese civilians wants to prove a point we may have war.

Would a Chinese leader be able to take conventional defeat and still not use a nuclear threat?

"We aim to win conventional war" is planning

"We will inevitably win conventional war" is astrology of the type you posted. No?

You're right regarding the border intrusions, it only matters what the Indians believe.

As for your question regarding China's limit. Yes, Chinese leaders will be able to take conventional defeats and still not go nuclear. You know what'll drive them out of power quicker than losing a border conflict? Beijing getting nuked. They've proven to be very adept at this self-preservation thing, so once again, yes, they will be able to keep it from going nuclear. However, don't expect them to be so quick in admitting conventional defeat. If the situation is indeed as you stated, which I think is ludicrous BTW given current day Chinese attitudes, that a weak Chinese leader managed to piss off the people and lose a significant border conflict with India, then you can expect a conventional escalation. Just as you had assumed, he will have no room to back down, so expect something just short of total war from China to take back any lost territory. That is the only way for the CCP to preserve itself since either admitting defeat or going nuclear means self-destruction. Manufacturing capabilities will be important then, as well as wealth. So once again, I ask, is India up to the task?

[shiv]

[

As for your question regarding China's limit. Yes, Chinese leaders will be able to take conventional defeats and still not go nuclear. You know what'll drive them out of power quicker than losing a border conflict? Beijing getting nuked.

Thank you for this interesting post. In terms of this thread ("two front war") - a China willing to countenance a conventional conflict with India (for whatever reason, even if India starts it) would fulfill one requirement of a thought I posted earlier, which basically goes as follows:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 46#p891446

War starts (between India and China) and Pakistan joins that war opportunistically.

That would be one possibility for India to face a two front war. I think it is unlikely - for various reasons, but I think we have had to be creative on this thread and see how such a two front war might start because the thread started with the premise that a two front war would suddenly break out and the unanswered questions were "Why on earth would a to front war just break out?" and "What specific circumstances could lead to the breaking out of a two front war?"

I think a lot of interesting inputs have come in on the question asked at the beginning of this thread, but the most difficult question to my mind was how the hell will this two front war start? If a realistic sounding excuse can be cooked up to predict the start of such a war, then the possible course of that war can be looked at in detail.

[RamaY]

To summarize...

- PRC will not initiate a war with India. Its strategy is to dominate the world with its cheap labor and economic interests.
- PRC strategy is to limit India to a second rate power, thru its proxy Pakistan. It accepts terrorism as state policy to achieve this goal.
- PRC cannot take a nuke-bloom in Beijing but it might be able to take a conventional defeat. It will not go nuclear even at the worst provocation (Delhi - are you listening?)
- PRC will stop prodding India once India achieves enough economic clout.


So India's strategy vis-a-vis can be -
- Deny economic space for China in India and its tributaries
- Build proper nuclear-deterrence against Beijing
- Openly support Tibet, Uigher, Tiwan, and other freedom movements in China
- Initiate harsh punishment against its mad dog - Pakistan

[shiv]

So India's strategy vis-a-vis can be -
- Deny economic space for China in India and its tributaries
- Build proper nuclear-deterrence against Beijing
- Openly support Tibet, Uigher, Tiwan, and other freedom movements in China
- Initiate harsh punishment against its mad dog - Pakistan

RamaY - all this is OT. This thread is about a 2 front war and how India will fight that two front war. But we seem to have got bogged down with a conclusion that a two front war is unlikely...

[ShauryaT]

But we seem to have got bogged down with a conclusion that a two front war is unlikely...

There are a few scenarios for a two front war, both for traditional and non traditional areas.

One traditional area where, such a two front war will make strategic sense for TSP and PRC, is Kashmir and Ladakh.

PRC could seek to control the Karakoram pass to link with the ceded Shaksgam valley and Aksai Chin and seek control of Siachen glacier, along with a deep thrust, to occupy the entire rain shadow region of Ladakh, upto Zoji La.

Meanwhile TSP, focuses on the valley.

PRC and TSP could manage to keep the US and Russia at bay, where they essentially do not interfere, beyond advise for restraint.

All of the battle is in officially "disputed" territory.

There is no guarantee that India will go nuclear. Let us leave the nuclear option out for it changes the risk profile dramatically.

However, there is no guarantee, that India will loose such a battle.

The only guarantee is that this will be a bloody and protracted one, that will indeed test Indian strength.

The stakes are high enough for all three. PRC and TSP could bring in enough forces and fire power, to overwhelm the Indian assets in this area.

One can argue that the stakes are not high enough for PRC, but if PRC continues to grow the way they have been and if India challenges PRC's Asian dominance agenda, say in Central Asia, West Asia or the Asian-Pacific, then this could be an interesting option to teach India a lesson.

IF PRC and TSP, are able to pull this off then India gets reduced to a regional player, for the long term.

India will be firmly out of the Tibetan Plateau. TSP gets its cherished goal. US/West, hopes that with India's defeat, this region will finally come to peace and it is better that China has hegemony in Asia.

[DavidD]

Yes, Chinese leaders will be able to take conventional defeats and still not go nuclear. You know what'll drive them out of power quicker than losing a border conflict? Beijing getting nuked. They've proven to be very adept at this self-preservation thing, so once again, yes, they will be able to keep it from going nuclear.

You see your arguments project that the Chinese leadership have no stomach for a direct confrontation. Regardless of the numbers claimed and the supposed ability to churn out instruments of war by the hundreds, there seems to be the mindset of a coward who believes he is carrying a large stick (or so many of them) that he can scare away his neighbours and annex their farm/crops. Unfortunately, the coward also thinks the neighbor is better equipped and unafraid to kick a$$. The coward therefore relies on the local dwarf to threaten to kill himself and blame the neighbour.

PS: One realizes you are probably a US citizen and therefore probably more sympathetic to the US viewpoint (as opposed to the world view of a Chinese citizen). Apologies if it seems like I'm imposing the mindset of a different nation onto you. No offense intended to you as a person.

Hey no problem man, I'd say that I can understand both countries' citizens' viewpoints.

As for your argument, I'd be cautious about using words such as coward, weak, strong, and such. There is a fine line between being courageous and being foolhardy, it all depends on how accurately a country's leadership understands its own capabilities vs. its adversary's. As Sun Tzu said, if you know yourself and you know your enemy, then you will win 100 battles out of 100. It's not about whether or not they have the "stomach" for a direct confrontation, it's about what can they gain vs. what can they lose in such a confrontation. From as far as I can gather, both India and China would lose more than they gain in a direct conflict.

This is kind of off topic, but I don't think it's right to attribute too much emotions to any nation's leadership, since by and large they came to power and hold onto power by being logical, pragmatic, and cunning. For example, I've read many on here who criticize GOI's "weakness" compared to say Pakistan and China. What I see isn't weakness, as India has behaved strongly on many occasions, what I see is a lack of direction and focus relative to its hostile neighbors. Whatever criticism you may have of your two neighbors, their objectives are very overtly clear and their behaviors are very consistent. India, on the other hand, seems to oscillate between being aggressive and passive, and sometimes both at the same time.

[DavidD]

So India's strategy vis-a-vis can be -
- Deny economic space for China in India and its tributaries
- Build proper nuclear-deterrence against Beijing
- Openly support Tibet, Uigher, Tiwan, and other freedom movements in China
- Initiate harsh punishment against its mad dog - Pakistan

RamaY - all this is OT. This thread is about a 2 front war and how India will fight that two front war. But we seem to have got bogged down with a conclusion that a two front war is unlikely...

How about this backdrop, along the lines of what some of us were talking about before. Pakistan provokes a border conflict, which fails but in the process causing enough collateral damage so that India would not be satisfied with simply resetting at the LOC and advances into Pakistan proper. China, fearing that Pakistan would resort to nuclear weapons and initiate a nuclear war that may very well involve itself, decides to intervene conventionally on Pakistan's behalf. The U.S. and Russia do not want a nuclear war either, but they'd love for China and India to weaken themselves in the conflict, so they decide to stay out of it at least overtly for the time being.

It's kind of a complicated scenario involving a lot of variables, but I just can't see a two pronged attack by China and Pakistan or India provoking both countries at the same time, so I suppose this one front war evolving into a two front war is the only thing I can think of.