India-US Strategic News and Discussion

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jul 2010 11:38

Carl_T wrote:Ramayji -

According to you it is ok to explain away US actions towards India as "hatred for Hindus" as someone posted in page 6, but not ok to explain away US actions as "self interest". Why is that?

I never said it is "Hatred for Hindus" that drives US's actions.

It is fear that drives US's geopolitics. Now it is up to you to figure out where this fear stems from.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 29 Jul 2010 11:49

I've already pointed this out. The fear is that India will be a threat to the US in the future, and the US will attempt to snuff out any future challengers.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 Jul 2010 11:57

Barbarik wrote:
The root of USA's India containment policy is the intellectual contempt and disdain western intellectuals have for Hinduism.

here is an attempt to analyze this phenomenon

The Source of Bias against Hindus - Part I
By: George Thundiparambil, Germany

http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_030409.htm

Once the countries are colonized the colonizer always looks at the natives with disdain and contempt. They perpetuate this with concepts like oriental-ism and using education and media can continue to keep the rest of the world population under "image trap".

THis has been done brilliantly by the west on the rest of the world population in the last 100 years.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jul 2010 15:54

BRFITES,

The discussion that TSP is useful to the Khans in order to control SDREs. Cause Khantes cannot allow any future challangers to it. What bout PRC. Can the Chinies be controlled/ don't they represent a threat to the khan. If yes then they need a strong India. If India is strong enough for PRC. Then TSP however powerful, cannot be useful against India.

So what is the game?

As am not convinced by the agguments presented in favour of US hostility towards India. Moreover, it is presupposed by the posters that TSP will remain aviable entity over the next 50 to 60 years. The future of TSP is more in the lines of a larger Somalia.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 29 Jul 2010 16:43

Would the relation between India & China change if there is no Bakistan ?

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 29 Jul 2010 16:48

Pratyush wrote: So what is the game?

Probably use the non-state Paki actors to infiltrate uyghur region of china

in long term of course

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jul 2010 17:07

To achieve exactly what? That cannot be acheaved by an indipendent Tibet. The game has to be more then mearly letting TSP checkmate the SDREs.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 18:49

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 73811.aspx

Can it be treated as US attempts to undermine Indian influence on Maldives... Particularly after India is to install radars and Navy presence in Maldives as per recent agreements?

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 29 Jul 2010 18:52

RamaY wrote:
SwamyG wrote:^^^
You seriously think, the powers-would-be are thinking about religion and spirituality when making foreign policy decisions?
Why not? Religion and spirituality are the most potent weapon/shield (depending upon the usage) in human history.

Okay, the onus is on you to prove that now. Well I do not demand wikleaks-type-documents, but if you can construct good arguments I will buy some of it.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jul 2010 18:54

Pratyush wrote:BRFITES,

The discussion that TSP is useful to the Khans in order to control SDREs. Cause Khantes cannot allow any future challangers to it. What bout PRC. Can the Chinies be controlled/ don't they represent a threat to the khan. If yes then they need a strong India. If India is strong enough for PRC. Then TSP however powerful, cannot be useful against India.

So what is the game?

As am not convinced by the agguments presented in favour of US hostility towards India. Moreover, it is presupposed by the posters that TSP will remain aviable entity over the next 50 to 60 years. The future of TSP is more in the lines of a larger Somalia.

As far as India is concerned China is nothing but Pakistan 2.0.

1. Like Pakistan, Chana

also holds Indian lands illegally
2. Like Pakistan, China also undermines Indian interests in international arena
3. Like Pakistan, China also undermines/harasses Indic ethos in its influence areas
4. Like Pakistan, China also makes alliances with Indian enemies
5. Like Pakistan, China is propped up by the western-kabila
6. Like Pakistan, China's excesses are also tolerated by western-kabila
7. Like Pakistan, China is also (indirectly) funded by western-kabila.
8. Like Pakistan, China is also an army with a state

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jul 2010 19:04

SwamyG wrote: Okay, the onus is on you to prove that now. Well I do not demand wikleaks-type-documents, but if you can construct a good argument I will buy some of it.

SwamyG garu,

You are more read than I can ever be.

1. What did Islamic invaders use as the sword while attacking India? (Even if we agree their motivation to be India's wealth, wimmens, and lands)
2. What shield India used to contain the Islamic onslaught?
3. What sword did the early European colonizers use to establish permanent power centers in India? (Remember Goa, Pandicheri etc.,)
4. What was the primary tool of Europeans in getting complete control over China?
5. Why don't we see resurrections of native faiths in conquered lands be it in USA or South America or Europe or South Korea or Indonesia etc?
6. Why certain societies think concepts like Yoga are not in sync with their faiths?
...

If the definition of USA includes its people, environment, ideology, culture, social structures, government, armed forces and so on, then how can one undermine the importance of religion in such an imperial power, especially if it is of Abrahamic kind?

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 29 Jul 2010 19:55

Pratyush wrote:To achieve exactly what? That cannot be acheaved by an indipendent Tibet. The game has to be more then mearly letting TSP checkmate the SDREs.

Tibetans and their religion

...they are so peaceful...I actually think Tibet will never be independent....Uighurs if groomed properly and fanatically...it'll surely become Pakistan of China....and porkis can be of use to groom them...US may want to cut off SCO and divert China's attention from Japan and Taiwan to Uighur region...

Well thats my opinion...lots off guessing actually

Kamboja · Post by **Kamboja** » 29 Jul 2010 20:21

RamaY wrote:
SwamyG wrote: Okay, the onus is on you to prove that now. Well I do not demand wikleaks-type-documents, but if you can construct a good argument I will buy some of it.
SwamyG garu,

You are more read than I can ever be.

1. What did Islamic invaders use as the sword while attacking India? (Even if we agree their motivation to be India's wealth, wimmens, and lands)
2. What shield India used to contain the Islamic onslaught?
3. What sword did the early European colonizers use to establish permanent power centers in India? (Remember Goa, Pandicheri etc.,)
4. What was the primary tool of Europeans in getting complete control over China?
5. Why don't we see resurrections of native faiths in conquered lands be it in USA or South America or Europe or South Korea or Indonesia etc?
6. Why certain societies think concepts like Yoga are not in sync with their faiths?
...

If the definition of USA includes its people, environment, ideology, culture, social structures, government, armed forces and so on, then how can one undermine the importance of religion in such an imperial power, especially if it is of Abrahamic kind?

Just to add my humble 2 paisa--

If one were to make the statement that one of the major factors driving TSP's hatred of India is religion/ ideology/ spirituality, I doubt many of the gurus here would disagree. The religious interpretations of Fundamentalist Sunni Islam and the latter's utterly hostile attitude to paganism drives much of Pakistan's hatred of us.

If an Abrahamic religion that despises pagans can influence Pakistan's entire world view, why could it not equally affect Americans or Europeans? Maybe in different ways, maybe not to as great an extent given history of 'secularism' (sep. of church and state) in West vs. Islam as basis of Pakistan, but nonetheless there is no reason similar dynamics would not apply.

To assume that Packees are 'Eastern', therefore irrational and driven solely by religion, whereas Americans/Europeans are 'Western', therefore rational and driven solely by cost/benefit analysis, is to fall for Orientalism as peddled by the West itself.

We should not assume that Westerners are any less susceptible to irrational bias based on religious/civilizational prejudices. I am still not sure where I stand on whether the Americans who determine foreign policy are in fact hostile to Hinduism/Indian ethos, but there are strong arguments for that interpretation.

IMHO.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 29 Jul 2010 21:17

You are more read than I can ever be.

Rama garu, nane overestimate cheyakkandi.

The first four points & 6th are out-of-scope for the discussion and does not answer the issue.
#5: As far as Unkilbhoomi goes, the native population is far below a threshold value to make a resurrection.
Yes, we ought to take the whole package; and that is my point too. What you and others are saying, here, is that American leadership makes foreign policy decisions considering religion & spirituality.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 29 Jul 2010 22:48

History in California is a Painful Subject

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 Jul 2010 00:27

x-post.

CRamS wrote:The root of USA's India containment policy is the intellectual contempt and disdain western intellectuals have for Hinduism. Rajiv Malhotra had some brilliant narratives to make this argument.

Ram: Can you point me to those? Any links?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 Jul 2010 00:52

SwamyG wrote:x-post.
CRamS wrote:The root of USA's India containment policy is the intellectual contempt and disdain western intellectuals have for Hinduism. Rajiv Malhotra had some brilliant narratives to make this argument.
Ram: Can you point me to those? Any links?

I don't have precise links, but start here and follow the trail

http://rajivmalhotra.sulekha.com/

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 30 Jul 2010 02:20

CRamS/SwamyG,
I don't know if it is on purpose or it is just an accident. The books about India that my 3rd grade daughter brings are attrocious. (liberal references to Poverty, photos of slums and weird rituals etc). I won't call them lies, but it certainly was written by people (Indians/Americans) with boatload of contempt for India. No one can walk away with anything but a negative impression of India. The young ones will certainly grow up with contempt if this is what you see in other shool districts/states in the US. (I have no way of knowing if this is the case). Also, for the "Heros" project they had 2 Indian choices. MKG and Ms. Medha Patkar.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jul 2010 04:02

Wait till she is in 6th grade World history! Its so atrocious that Cal text books campaign was started.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 Jul 2010 05:20

CRamS: I do not see the trail from contempt towards India/Hinduism to a foreign policy decision that seeks to contain India.

Kamboja: I am not giving credit to anybody here, I understand humans have the irrational side and no culture is safe from that. I also acknowledge there is racism, discrimination, contempt ityadi among humans.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 30 Jul 2010 06:48

shravan wrote:Would the relation between India & China change if there is no Bakistan ?

Yes, I think so. The dynamics will become more favorable to India. India will have more realistic chance of getting its territory back. Also, it can place more pressure on China regarding abuse of Tibetans.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 30 Jul 2010 07:28

Let us put facts on table.

- US is a very deeply religious society. They say Islam is a genuine religion, which is a polite way of saying Dharma (both Hindu and Boudh) is not a genuine religion.

- Pakistan brings to the table 50 warheads and 1.5 million armed men, who have never won a war. Can anyone in his right mind count on Pakistanis if serious hostilities break out?

- The restraint India displays has nothing to do with Pakistan's nukes or their martial race. It is born out of practicality, which dictates that we consolidate little more and wait for the right time.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 Jul 2010 07:58

Deeply religious? The National Average, per Pew research, is 56% based on worship attendance, frequency of prayer and belief in god. So what if they don't consider Dharmic traditions as "genuine religion" ?

link: http://pewforum.org/How-Religious-Is-Your-State-.aspx

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 30 Jul 2010 08:11

One pursuing realistic geo-political goals will not shy from using Religion as a tool.
It is naive to confuse that as one who is pursing realistic Religious or Spiritual goals.
Lets make sure the horse and the cart are identified correctly!

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 30 Jul 2010 09:54

In US, elections are fought over religious issues such as gay marriage vs straight marriage, evolution vs creationism, etc. Air wave both on radio and TV are filled with religious preachers. You do not have to go to the church to be religious. The poison is in your mind.

If you do not think Dharma is a genuine religion then you will be biased against the country where it flourishes. Anyway, this my last post on this subject.

---

On a separate note, it is only a matter of time before US will pull out of Afghanistan. And, that will bring an end to whatever little credibility the war on terror had because that will still leave US in Iraq, a country which had nothing to do with terror. The reasoning that is being applied here is Iraq can pay for the cost of the war due to its oil resources but Afghanistan can't. So at the end of the day, it does not matter that more than 3K Americans were killed by Taliban \ Al Queda; all that matters is money.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 Jul 2010 18:56

Karan: I think we already discussed in this very same thread if Dharmic traditions are religion or not. I do not think Dharmic traditions are in the same category as "Abrahamic religions".

Pulikeshi: Agreed, religion can become a tool to achieve a goal; but citing it as a reason to institute policy and decide the goal?

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 30 Jul 2010 19:35

Regarding the Friedman comment on Khan helping TSP to balance out India. I have lost track of which thread is now where it is discussed, so I might x-post in others also:

+ Some have said that this Khanate desire to keep India tied is due to its hatred for Hinduism or paganism etc. This has nothing to with that.

+ Khan, like poodle before, has learnt the art of dominating the world. No power, however great it may be, can rule the world and fight everyone. IF it does, it will quickly fritter away its energy. US fighting Iraq & A'stan is an excellent example. So to control the world, you balance out all powers and keep them locked in conflicts and check their growth. This essentially is Balance of Power, or also its cousin Divide and Rule.

+ UK did that excellently for 5 centuries. One of the main reasons of its rise was that it kept the European Continental powers balanced by each other,while it remained free to pursue colonizaton of the whole world.

+ UK's declince eventually came because France & Germany decided to not fight it out. This unity undermined UK's power more than anything elese. UK could no longer balance European powers and while they were busy, be the winner.

+ UK avoided direct fight, although it did fight when there was a need. But mostly it kept proppong up the weaker power to balance the stronger. When A & B were fighting, and A was weak, then UK found moral reasons to support A. When the fight tilted and A became stronger, it abandoned A and supported B. The fight hence continued (almost) ad infinitum. This is the essence of BOP. TSP is weaker, support it. That is all there is to it.

+ UK supported at various times (using financial muscle and its control of India) practically all powers at one point or the other, eg. Portugal, Brazil, French, Germans, Dutch, Greek, etc.

+ US has inherited the same idea. It has sought to balance out each power it thinks is a competitor. India certainly qualifies.

+ I have posted on BRF many times essentially what Friedman said. Khan's conduct of war in A'stan is perplexing that it is allowing its own soldiers to die by not checking TSP. This because Khan is optimizing not the A'stan war, but it is optimizing its overall power. That dictates that TSP must not go under. India is one power it balances, but it also provides a lot fo dirty services and access to Muslim world in different ways. Friedman did nto mention that.

+ State department and Pentagon conduct foriegn policy by analysis which tries to find solutions to problems both at the local level, and also at global levels. Sometimes sacricing one for the other.

+ In A'stan Khan has already accepted that nothing more can be achieved. Why destablizie TSp over a war which is practically over. Now the problem is that poor kids from small town are enlisted in the Army. Those 21 year olds die, and that is just too bad. But the SD & Pentagon cannot go public that in A'stan it is not just conducting a war, but also taking care of other power projection capabilities. It is just too bad for those kids. But that has been the way in Anglo wars, fighting wars in the name of high principles (which suckers in small towns fall for) but the real objective is only gaining world domination.

+ This Balance of Power does have limits. There are ways in whcih the chakraviye can be broken. We should discuss this.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 30 Jul 2010 20:04

http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/

Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference visiting India

The U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Rashad Hussain is visiting India from July 31 to August 9, 2010. He will travel through the cities of New Delhi, Aligarh, Mumbai, Hyderabad and Patna to engage in dialogues with individuals and organizations and enhance people-to-people contact between the U.S. and India.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 Jul 2010 20:20

Surinder ji: A great post.

This Balance of Power does have limits. There are ways in whcih the chakraviye can be broken. We should discuss this.

A requisite is that India first comes to the conclusion that it needs to be broken.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jul 2010 20:27

surinder wrote: + I have posted on BRF many times essentially what Friedman said. Khan's conduct of war in A'stan is perplexing that it is allowing its own soldiers to die by not checking TSP. This because Khan is optimizing not the A'stan war, but it is optimizing its overall power. That dictates that TSP must not go under. India is one power it balances, but it also provides a lot fo dirty services and access to Muslim world in different ways. Friedman did nto mention that.

It might have been in the early years. However TSP reputation in the Arab/Turkic world or the Asian(Malaysia or Indonesia) world is the pits. They have no reputation at all. You can confirm tht with people from ther or the Indian MEA ground envoys in those regions.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 30 Jul 2010 21:03

^ Good post Surinder and SwamyG agreed with what you said.

Ironically, if you see the number of leaders visiting India this year the chakravuyah is all in the Indian mind.

India has more options today than ever before and it seems will have even more options in the future.
What is missing is the vision for what India wants to be when she grows up!
It could very well be Dharmic exceptionalism ©

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 30 Jul 2010 21:50

RamaY wrote:
Pratyush wrote:BRFITES,

The discussion that TSP is useful to the Khans in order to control SDREs. Cause Khantes cannot allow any future challangers to it. What bout PRC. Can the Chinies be controlled/ don't they represent a threat to the khan. If yes then they need a strong India. If India is strong enough for PRC. Then TSP however powerful, cannot be useful against India.

So what is the game?

As am not convinced by the agguments presented in favour of US hostility towards India. Moreover, it is presupposed by the posters that TSP will remain aviable entity over the next 50 to 60 years. The future of TSP is more in the lines of a larger Somalia.
As far as India is concerned China is nothing but Pakistan 2.0.

1. Like Pakistan, Chana also holds Indian lands illegally
2. Like Pakistan, China also undermines Indian interests in international arena
3. Like Pakistan, China also undermines/harasses Indic ethos in its influence areas
4. Like Pakistan, China also makes alliances with Indian enemies
5. Like Pakistan, China is propped up by the western-kabila
6. Like Pakistan, China's excesses are also tolerated by western-kabila
7. Like Pakistan, China is also (indirectly) funded by western-kabila.
8. Like Pakistan, China is also an army with a state

Ramayji

1. Illegally? They hold it by virtue of force, the same applies for just about every country in the world.
2. Do we need them to do that? (S-e-S), AFAIK, we supported each other in Copenhagen.
3. Quantify please
4. So, China allying with Pakistan, makes them an enemy. Pakistan allying with China, makes them an enemy. Circular logic.
5. How so? China is where it's at, through it's visionary leaders and hard working population, the West is hardly propping it up, in fact a strong argument can be made that it is trying to drag it down. They could say the same about us as well.
6. See no5.
7. See no5.
8. Quantify please.

I realise you're a respected member and I'm a newbie. But I'm seeing a lot of the Paki sense of entitlement vis a vis China. Why should they give us Aksai Chin? According to them Arunachal Pradesh belongs to them.

Many people are seeing China through the same lens as Pakistan. China is big country, it is India's national interest to be on as good relations with it as possible, with it. China is never going to be a superpower with India as its enemy and vice versa.

We need to make a decision, hostility with China or Aksai Chin. Think of the enormous benefits of being friends. There is no logical reason for them to support Pakistan, other than to attempt to counter us.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 30 Jul 2010 22:21

China is propped up by the West?

With all due respect, it ignores the fact that China is a strategic rival and threat to the US and its allies in the region and a competitor for influence and natural resources globally. Poisons milk and baby food and takes jobs away from hardworking Yamirkhans too!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 31 Jul 2010 00:55

Obama to address joint session of Indian parliament
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 238668.cms

NEW DELHI: India will show Barack Obama he's special. When the US president comes here in November, he will address both Houses of Parliament on November 9. As both countries struggle to dress up the presidential visit scheduled for the first week of November, one of the easiest decisions was to let Obama speak to Indian parliamentarians.
Obama is not India's favourite US president thus far, but there's no getting away from the fact that his life tells a compelling and eloquent story. To that extent, Obama the persona is a huge attraction, hence a speech in Parliament should set the tone for a new relationship

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 31 Jul 2010 01:07

biswas wrote: Many people are seeing China through the same lens as Pakistan. China is big country, it is India's national interest to be on as good relations with it as possible, with it. China is never going to be a superpower with India as its enemy and vice versa.

We need to make a decision, hostility with China or Aksai Chin. Think of the enormous benefits of being friends. There is no logical reason for them to support Pakistan, other than to attempt to counter us.

Biswas,

What is friend/enemy is Geo-Politics? There is only interests....

1. Why is China claiming AP and sitting in Aksai Chin? To show friendly intentions?
Did it provide Pakistan with Nuclear know how to show its friendliness?

2. If India becomes China's friend, then will they stop supporting Pakistan?
Is there any historical evidence from Bhai, Bhai episode?

3. India is a big country, so is China (how about without Tibet?)

4. India and China has different regions of Interest in Asia, where they collide something will have to be worked out....

Finally, this perhaps should be in India-PRC-US thread anyway....

lsunil · Post by **lsunil** » 31 Jul 2010 01:55

Surinder-ji,
Good post. Glad you went detailed on something that sounds like a CT but it is very much true. Im confident that india will emerge out of south asia. It will take more than a decade but the gravity of the situation will be felt building up before it hits china and US. It already is.

Notice how australia, then canada have made a u-turn on nuclear trade with us.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 31 Jul 2010 02:04

surinder wrote:
+ State department and Pentagon conduct foriegn policy by analysis which tries to find solutions to problems both at the local level, and also at global levels. Sometimes sacricing one for the other.

+ In A'stan Khan has already accepted that nothing more can be achieved. Why destablizie TSp over a war which is practically over. Now the problem is that poor kids from small town are enlisted in the Army. Those 21 year olds die, and that is just too bad. But the SD & Pentagon cannot go public that in A'stan it is not just conducting a war, but also taking care of other power projection capabilities. It is just too bad for those kids. But that has been the way in Anglo wars, fighting wars in the name of high principles (which suckers in small towns fall for) but the real objective is only gaining world domination.

+ This Balance of Power does have limits. There are ways in whcih the chakraviye can be broken. We should discuss this.

Very good post and is also a keeper.

I want to add few things which should be be part of your post.
Geopgraphy plays an important part of the history of these powers. So Middle east and Indian ocean are always a focus for the last 150 years but now with these conflicts and balance of power this has become the focus of the international powers.

Another reason for the khan troops in AfpAk is the location to other fault line. LOC and Indo Chinese borders are close by and around this region we have almost all the troops from the major 10 militaries in the world.

China - PRC
Russia
India
US
NATO
Pakistan

Never in the history at any time such large powers have reached one region and stayed for a long time.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 31 Jul 2010 02:31

Press Release on signing the Agreement on Arrangements and Procedures for Reprocessing.

http://www.indianembassy.org/prdetail15 ... rocessing.

Washington, DC

The Ambassador of India H.E. Ms. Meera Shankar and the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs of the United States H.E. Mr. William Burns, today signed the Agreement on Arrangements and Procedures for Reprocessing. This is pursuant to Article 6(iii) of the "Agreement for Cooperation concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy" between India and the United States and carries forward the commitment made by the Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh and the President of the United States Mr. Barack Obama, to fully implement the India-U.S. Civil Nuclear Agreement.

The signing of the Agreement is a significant step which highlights the strong relationship and growing cooperation between India and the United States. It enables reprocessing by India of U.S.-obligated nuclear material under IAEA safeguards and will facilitate participation by U.S. firms in India’s rapidly expanding civil nuclear energy sector.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 31 Jul 2010 02:47

Carl_T wrote:China is propped up by the West?

With all due respect, it ignores the fact that China is a strategic rival and threat to the US and its allies in the region and a competitor for influence and natural resources globally. Poisons milk and baby food and takes jobs away from hardworking Yamirkhans too!

Please read on how/why PRC was approached by Nixon administration. How PRC is propped Vs some of the ASEAN countries. How PRC is allowed to do whatever it did with NK, TSP etc (I am talking about 1980s not now). You will get half the picture.

Then think about why west has defense agreement with Taiwan, but not Tibet.

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 31 Jul 2010 03:07

biswas wrote:
We need to make a decision, hostility with China or Aksai Chin. Think of the enormous benefits of being friends. There is no logical reason for them to support Pakistan, other than to attempt to counter us.

We do not have to make any decisions.In fact the Chinese have to decide whether they want peace with India/Tibet/End of sodomious relationship with pakistan or not.Kindly refrain from calling of ceding of my country's territory for whatever reasons.Not only is it uncalled for but also illegal.
TIA.
P.S If you want to debate this , be my guest.