Latest Chinese boast: should we shiver or die laughing?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jan 2017 10:35

chola wrote: A victory over the PRC will vault us into number two slot of global powers.

A desire to be number 2 is IMO a totally worthless desire - so I disagree with the premise of your post

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 16 Jan 2017 10:49

shivering at the thought of elite "Hammerhead Wang" brigade of moto-hans in Dilli

And their onward march towards tiger reserves

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 Jan 2017 11:40

The problem for India is that the Indian heartland including the capital, New Delhi is 400 kms from the border with Tibet. A Tier 1 Chinese city such as Shanghai is 4000 kms from New Delhi, but 3600 kms from the Indian border, Beijing is further away. How much loss of face is there for India with Chinese paratroopers landing around New Delhi vs loss of face for China with India grabbing a chunk of land in Tibet? For the Chinese to really lose face in a war with India, there has to be an Indian attack on the Chinese coastal heartland. And to fortify itself against the movement of ships to be positioned for such an attack, China is building the artificial islands on the shoals in the South China sea to act as a tripwire. A short sharp skirmish is as much about war fighting as about prestige and loss of face, something China is very big on. The point is that India has to be prepared not just to refight 1962 i.e. border war with China, but be prepared to do something dramatic on the Chinese coast off the South China sea and the Taiwan straits.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2017 12:05

Once they hit our wonderful roads,sorry,potholes connected by ribbons of tar,and their armour and vehicles breaking down "as per usual" in India,they'll realise the futility of the enterprise and high tail it back to Tibet! They'll have a better chance of getting to India by sea.That is by sending their troops/personnel in batches to Sri Lanka,Gwadar,etc. It is the maritime dimension that is the most worrying with Chinese N-subs now on regular IOR patriols,using Paki ports as bases.

The PLAN's new SSBN variant.Ck the link for more details and pics of the class,etc.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news ... se-9609304
China's new secret 'humpback' stealth submarine which carries 12 nukes capable of reaching US mainland
The "Jin" Type 094A rear can carry 12 ballistic missiles hidden in its "hump" rear

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 16 Jan 2017 12:33

I spoke to some low level party guys. For them, Tibet is already in their pocket, Taiwan is the unresolved issue. If anyone grows balls in Indian government and makes a statement that Tibet is not China, then only they will consider India as any challenge at all.

NDA 1 did a lot of damage by declaring that Tibet is China. NDA2 did a lot of damage by increasing trade with China 3 times in 2.5years.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Jan 2017 13:09

TKiran wrote:NDA 1 did a lot of damage by declaring that Tibet is China. NDA2 did a lot of damage by increasing trade with China 3 times in 2.5years.

I am very curious about this last claim. Would be great if you could link us up to some data.

Also, you assertion is not clear and can be read in multiple ways. Which one of the below is the proper reading?
1. Total (2 way) trade increase by 3 times.
2. Chinese exports to India increase by 3 times.
3. India's trade deficit with China increase by 3 times.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Jan 2017 13:17

Py the way .... China is now facing a ‘Masculinity Crisis' .... I kid you not. I came across this piece of news a few days back ... will link soon. That has got the Chinese government very worried.

Here you go ... There are others but anyone interested can google for them.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/china ... ys-n703461
China Tackles ‘Masculinity Crisis,’ Tries to Stop ‘Effeminate’ Boys

At home, however, some believe the nation's over-protected young boys are becoming physically and emotionally weak — leaving China facing what is being called a "crisis of masculinity."

<snip>

A new school textbook that aims to teach boys how to be "masculine" men has been released. Called "Little Men," the book covers the differences between boys and girls, the importance of the father-son relationship as well as the importance of interacting with nature and managing money.

The colorfully illustrated book was first published in December 2016 by Shanghai Educational Publishing House and has been approved for fourth and fifth grade classes across the country, after a trial period in selected schools.

"This course is necessary for boys," Miao Li, 36, a businessman, told NBC News while waiting to pick up his daughter recently outside a Beijing primary school. "They are so over-protected by the family they don't do physical activities anymore."

"Nowadays, girls are becoming more like boys while the boys are becoming more like girls, introvert and shy," echoed another parent called Huang, a hotel employee.

vina · Post by **vina** » 16 Jan 2017 14:21

TKiran wrote: NDA 1 did a lot of damage by declaring that Tibet is China

The "credit" for that should go to Bharat Ke Bhoot Poorva Pradhan Mantri, Swargiya, Shreeman Rajiv Gandhi, who declared that "Tibet is an autonomous region within China" during his "path breaking" visit to the PRC.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2017 14:41

Why cant be we change the policy of Tibet part of China to Tibet is disputed area ?

Like how DT is questioning Taiwan one china policy ?

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 16 Jan 2017 14:58

On our part, we should device methods to do propaganda on Chinese Little Emperors, i.e. to say that if a solider is KIA'd, your govt will give a fukk about your family, i.e. 8 Great Grand parents, 4 Grand parents, 2 Parents (may be they have some productive yeas, but it will be be psychological blow), his kid will become rudderless, and they know Chinese social security umbrella is not enough for his family pyramid.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 16 Jan 2017 15:29

India is not reiterating the One-China policy for last 3-4 years (from UPA-II time) in joint statements till China reciprocates on One-India including J&K etc.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/i ... 733709.ece

http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/new-delh ... one-india/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jan 2017 15:32

putnanja wrote:India is not reiterating the One-China policy for last 3-4 years (from UPA-II time) in joint statements till China reciprocates on One-India including J&K etc.

We dont offically consider Taiwan and Tibet to be disputed but part of China right ?

The only issue is with AP ?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 16 Jan 2017 15:35

Austin wrote:
putnanja wrote:India is not reiterating the One-China policy for last 3-4 years (from UPA-II time) in joint statements till China reciprocates on One-India including J&K etc.
We dont offically consider Taiwan and Tibet to be disputed but part of China right ?

The only issue is with AP ?

Well, India is now not taking any public stand on that it seems

Check out the links above

Trump Should Read India’s Playbook for Taunting China

...
New Delhi’s reaction was uncharacteristically swift and punitive, suspending all forms of bilateral military ties and joint exercises. When Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited New Delhi in December 2010, for the first time India refused to acknowledge the One-China policy in a joint statement with China. Beijing, New Delhi signaled, would have to recognize Indian sovereignty over Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh if it wanted India’s consent on the One-China policy. “The ball is in their court. There is no doubt about that,” explained Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao at the time.

Joint statements in the years to follow continued to omit the One-China policy, a position adopted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi when he assumed office in 2014. “For India to agree on a one-China policy, China should reaffirm a one-India policy,” External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj declared before Chinese President Xi Jinping’s first trip to New Delhi in September 2014. “When they raised the issue of Tibet and Taiwan with us, we shared their sensitivities.… They should understand and appreciate our sensitivities regarding Arunachal Pradesh.”
...

It’s notable, then, that beyond its broad refusal to endorse the One-China policy, New Delhi has given no indication that it plans to walk back its repeated reaffirmations of Chinese sovereignty over Tibet (much less Taiwan). On the other hand, Prime Minister Modi has adopted several initiatives short of that threshold to signal a more defiant posture on Tibet and the border dispute. Early in his tenure, for instance, Modi fast-tracked military and civilian infrastructure upgrades along the disputed Sino-Indian border, where Beijing has enjoyed a large and widening advantage.
...

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 16 Jan 2017 15:38

Rahul Gandhi only postponed his China trip.
He will go there, and defeat the Chinese windmills. It is his coming of age adventure trip

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 16 Jan 2017 16:00

A victory over the PRC will vault us into number two slot of global powers. My heart quickens at the thought!

BR can help by starting a grass root campaign to fight the PRC.

Wonder if anyone has watched the performance of the actor playing as a Soviet Jarnail at the start of some James Bonda film, explaining why the time was ripe for a 1-week overrun of western Oirope. Sort-of dampens the feeling of originality in making these sorts of claims.
Let me dhoti-shiver. Somewhere I saw a page listing those who have died in Siachen. Mostly without any Pakis firing anything. Perhaps that should be mandatory viewing on the PeeAref MIL Forum.

In general, an attacking force sweeping UP a slope gets massacred. As happened to the majority of the Chinese Army in 1962, trying to take this hilltop guarded by Shivaji Ganesan in "Rakta Tilakam". Not the 1988 film, but the original 1963 film. The (same) Chinese troops, wrapped in their Mao winter couture, looked like bowling pins, and rolled frictionless down the ice slopes as they were shot (many many times). After the herrowine fa*ted in Nathu La, the remaining Chinese simply died of asphyxiation.
The land may be flat(ter) up on the Tibetan Plateau, but it does slope downward towards Beijing, so those Arjun tanks will gather up speed as they roll, and perhaps have great difficulty slowing down after overrunning Beijing and going on to Shanghai. So we should also carry some flotation devices to survive the plunge into the South China Sea. RaGa should do fine as a flotation device.

If there is a massive air defence umbrella a la S400 or Advanced Akash covering the Himalayas, perhaps air superiority can be denied. But China mass-manufactures missiles - or will if they decide to invade. I see no hope of Dephenj Manufacturing plants in India turning out those kinds of numbers of autonomous or guided missiles. Sticking to 1962 thinking (which of course won us the war, the Chinese ran back uphill as fast they could from Tejpur before India's massive air force bombed the bridges on their supply lines and retreat route) is rather dangerous. Missiles can turn corners and come through canyons, pinpointing ground assets. The story of why the Chinese knew where the Indian Major was buried, may be instructive if you think about it.
The part of the story which I did **not** post before, was the really traumatic part: The Chinese also gave the precise coordinates to the local Indian commander leading the search. Six months after the incident, mind you. The Indian forces then got permission and went in an dug under the ice and retrieved the body. Then they blared out that THEY had found the body, all on their own. Unfortunately the MoD had received the same Chinese memo at the same time that they gave it to the local commander. THAT was the punchline of the story that the veteran told me.

Why did he say it? Because an Indian Taap Jarnail had just gone on TV/newspaper and bragged that India could now fight and win a 2-front war with BOTH Pakistan and China, no problem at all. He was fishing for my comments on that. I sort-of looked at him, and before my mouth was hindered by fear/decency because I knew he was a veteran of the China front, I said:

I think Pakistan has no hope, but China is a very different animal, I don't think we have the infrastructure or number of weapons to do this: the general should avoid making such statements.

That brought out the flood of memories: apparently he was surprised that I was not a 400% idiot jingo.

So perhaps you see why the Chinese are shaking their mijjiles. It is in response to a (claimed) brag by a very senior Indian Jarnail, quite recently. So I won't look up "which general". Not on BRF.

You can.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 16 Jan 2017 16:20

OTOH, being an idiot jingo in reality, I do believe that China **CAN** lose a new war with India in a massive disaster. The scenario for a war is more like 1962: Chinese insecurity because Tibet and Xinjiang look like the pine tree in my backyard where I have already made 2 deep cuts, but am not quite sure which way it will fall, or whether my saw will get caught as it buckles. A logical result of systematic (and FASTER!!!) infrastructure improvement on the Indian side would be some sort of force parity. China is still looking at, what? 1000 km of logistics transit through hostile Northern Arunachal (aka Tibet) and Northern Ladakh aka Xinjiang. If the locals start inflating vacuum bulbs on a more organized basis in both N.A. and N.L., the logistics trail becomes unstable and unsustainable. The divisions on the border must then depend on aerial supply - or invade downhill to more sustainable climes and localities. Or die. That would trigger an invasion, I think.

In which case, a massive air defense plus a massive air bombardment of the Chinese transports, airfields and supply lines would cause takleef. If coordinated with a cutoff of the Karakoram Hwy, a wipeout of the seaport in the Pakistani Ocean, letting loose a few Indus dams, and a swift takeover of the chinese bases in Myanmar before they take over the Andamans. China will presumably open the Brahmaputra dams and cause a disaster in the NE.

A stable Indian border would then have to be established north of Manasarovar, but will take a truly massive force to defend. So, first, massive expansion of defence manufacturing to enable sustaining a war beyond 1 week. Until then, zzzzzzzzzzz

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jan 2017 18:18

Philip wrote:Once they hit our wonderful roads,sorry,potholes connected by ribbons of tar,and their armour and vehicles breaking down "as per usual" in India,they'll realise the futility of the enterprise and high tail it back to Tibet! They'll have a better chance of getting to India by sea.That is by sending their troops/personnel in batches to Sri Lanka,Gwadar,etc. It is the maritime dimension that is the most worrying with Chinese N-subs now on regular IOR patriols,using Paki ports as bases.

The PLAN's new SSBN variant.Ck the link for more details and pics of the class,etc.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news ... se-9609304
China's new secret 'humpback' stealth submarine which carries 12 nukes capable of reaching US mainland
The "Jin" Type 094A rear can carry 12 ballistic missiles hidden in its "hump" rear

Their naval dimension against India is pretty much all propaganda they make from their peace-time "pirate" patrols. There is no substance. It is time we stop dhoti-shivering every time a PLAN ship sail through the Indian Ocean. They cannot fight the IN with a frigate and a replenishment vessel.

During times of war, and it doesn't matter who they are fighting, the near entirety of their naval assets must be on the chini eastern seaboard to defend against the USN, Japan and, probably more importantly for them, to deter Taiwan from declaring formal independence. Any thing they put in the IOR takes another asset from a theater that is critical to their survival. The 094A doesn't figure into the Indian equation at all. It is US specific.

Nope, war with cheen when it comes, and we should initiate war if they are not coming, will be on land and in the mountains.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2017 18:32

Well if you don't "shiver" at least you will stir in your seat with an acute feeling of unease and ask the Q,how did India let this happen? Indian creativity in diplomacy by our MEA ranks perhaps amongst the lowest of the low and the sheer indifference to events over the last few decades right in our own backyard by MEA babus is simply incomprehensible. We have allowed the Chinese to now encircle us in the IOR itself,using Hambantotat in SL,Gawdar in Pak,with Chinese subs sold to BDesh-as if we couldn't have provided them with older Ru KIlos for a start,or even our Foxtrots earlier,and now PLAN sub visits to Malaysia,which will become regular visits according to this PRC mouthpiece.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/catego ... -malaysia/
‘More China submarines will visit Malaysia’
FMT Reporters | January 15, 2017

http://www.afr.com/news/world/asia/how- ... 114-gtrmxf

How China is building up its naval and shipbuilding capability to rule the waves

A woman walks past a billboard featuring an image of an island in South China Sea on display with Chinese words that read: "South China Sea, our beautiful motherland, we won't let go an inch" in Weifang in east China's Shandong province. AP
by James Kynge, Amy Kazmin and Farhan Bokhari,
Pakistan's Arabian Sea port of Gwadar is perched on the world's energy jugular. Nearby sea lanes carry most of China's oil imports; any disruption could choke the world's second-largest economy.

Owned, financed and built by China, Gwadar occupies a strategic location. Yet Islamabad and Beijing for years denied any military plans for the harbour, insisting it was a purely commercial project. Now the mask is slipping.

"As Gwadar becomes more active as a port, Chinese traffic both commercial and naval will grow to this region," says a senior foreign ministry official in Islamabad. "There are no plans for a permanent Chinese naval base. But the relationship is stretching out to the sea."

Gwadar is part of a bigger ambition, driven by President Xi Jinping, for China to become a maritime superpower. A Financial Times investigation reveals how far Beijing has come in achieving that objective in the past six years.

A Pakistan Navy soldier stands guard while a loaded Chinese ship prepares to depart, at Gwadar port in Pakistan in November 2016. AP
Investments in a vast network of harbours have made China's port operators the world leaders. Its shipping companies carry more cargo than those of any other nation – five of the top 10 container ports in the world are in mainland China with another in Hong Kong. Its coastguard has the largest maritime law enforcement fleet, its navy is the fastest growing among major powers and its fishing armada numbers some 200,000 seagoing vessels.

The emergence of China as a maritime superpower is set to challenge a US command of the seas that has underwritten a crucial element of Pax Americana, the relative period of peace enjoyed in the west since the second world war. As US president-elect Donald Trump prepares to take power, strategic tensions between China and the US are already evident in the South China Sea, where Beijing has pledged to enforce its claim to disputed islands and atolls.

China understands maritime influence in the same way as Alfred Thayer Mahan, the 19th-century American strategist. "Control of the sea," Mahan wrote, "by maritime commerce and naval supremacy, means predominant influence in the world; because, however great the wealth of the land, nothing facilitates the necessary exchanges as does the sea."

Drummed into military service

The Gwadar template, where Beijing used its commercial know-how and financial muscle to secure ownership over a strategic trading base, only to enlist it later into military service, has been used in other key locations.

China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, is anchored in the northern port in Qingdao, east China's Shandong Province. AP
In Sri Lanka, Greece and Djibouti, Chinese investment in civilian ports has been followed by deployments or visits of People's Liberation Army Navy vessels and in some cases announcements of longer term military contingencies.

"There is an inherent duality in the facilities that China is establishing in foreign ports, which are ostensibly commercial but quickly upgradeable to carry out essential military missions," says Abhijit Singh, from the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi.

Data compiled or commissioned by the FT from third-party sources show the extent of China's dominance in most maritime domains. Beijing's shipping lines deliver more containers than those from any other country, according to data from Drewry, the shipping consultancy. The five big Chinese carriers together controlled 18 per cent of all container shipping handled by the world's top 20 companies in 2015.

In terms of container ports, China already rules the waves. Nearly two-thirds of the world's top 50 had some degree of Chinese investment by 2015, up from about one-fifth in 2010, according to FT research. And those ports handled 67 per cent of global container volumes, up from 41 per cent in 2010, according to Lloyd's List Intelligence, the maritime and trade data specialists. The dominance is reduced but still emphatic if only containers directly handled by Chinese port operators are measured. Of the top 10 port operators, Chinese companies handled 39 per cent of all volumes, almost double the second largest nation, according to Drewry.

A Chinese navy submarine. Guang Niu
It is not only the world's biggest ports that have attracted Chinese investments. Key strategic locations such as Djibouti or Hambantota in Sri Lanka and proposed ports on the Atlantic Ocean islands of São Tomé and Principe – have also drawn investments or promises of Chinese port construction.

The total spend is difficult to calculate because of sketchy disclosure. But since 2010, Chinese and Hong Kong companies have completed or announced deals involving at least 40 ports worth a total of about $US45.6 billion, according to a study by Sam Beatson and Jim Coke at the Lau China Institute, King's College London, in co-operation with the FT.

Rounding out a picture of China's merchant navy dominance is the country's fishing fleet, which is by far the largest in the world, according to Michael McDevitt, a former rear admiral in the US navy and a senior fellow at CNA Strategic Studies, a US think-tank.

"[China's] maritime power equation includes a large and effective coastguard, a world-class merchant marine and fishing fleet, a globally recognised shipbuilding capacity and an ability to harvest or extract maritime resources, especially fish," he wrote.

China's behaviour in the South China Sea is aggressive. Bloomberg
For thousands of years, Chinese emperors focused on defending the middle kingdom against land-based invasions. But in 2015 an official white paper on military strategy decreed a big shift that offers a glimpse of China's changing objectives. "The traditional mentality that land outweighs sea must be abandoned, and great importance has to be attached to managing the seas and oceans and protecting maritime rights and interests," it said.

Analysts say China's strategy is aimed primarily at denying US aircraft carrier battle groups access to a string of archipelagos from Russia's peninsula of Kamchatka to the Malay Peninsula, a natural maritime barrier called the "first island chain" within which China identifies its strategic sphere of influence.

Another focus is a string of artificial islands that Beijing has created out of coral reefs and rocks to help reinforce its claim to most of the South China Sea, putting it on a collision course with its neighbours as well as the US. The artificial islands have been equipped with landing strips and a US think-tank recently said, after analysis of satellite images, that Beijing appeared to have installed anti-aircraft guns, anti-missile systems and radar facilities.

Although Beijing plays down such sweeping strategic objectives, the drive to step up naval security is regularly emphasised in official Chinese circles.

A merging of agendas

The political justification often used for port investments is "One Belt One Road", a grand design advocated by Mr Xi to revive the ancient Silk Road trading routes and boost commerce in more than 60 countries in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Europe. Gwadar port, for example, is described as the core element in a $54bn China-Pakistan economic corridor. At its inception, Chinese involvement of the port was limited to financing and construction but in 2015 Islamabad handed ownership to the state-owned China Overseas Port Holding Company on a lease until 2059.

To the west of Gwadar at Djibouti – on the Horn of Africa's maritime chokepoint – a similar story has unfolded. China's initial embrace seemed purely commercial, with the state-owned China Merchants Group taking a stake in the port's container terminal in 2012, paving the way for a $US9 billion investment.

But in 2016, Beijing acknowledged that its plans for Djibouti had an additional dimension - the construction of the country's

first overseas naval base, ensuring China's military presence in the region until at least 2026.

In Greece too, the 2015 acquisition of a $US420 million controlling stake in Piraeus, one of Europe's largest ports, signalled a merging of commercial and strategic agendas. At the time Chinese officials recalled how Beijing was embarrassed in 2011 when it needed to evacuate 36,000 Chinese workers from Libya as violence broke out, forcing it at short notice to enlist the help of Greek merchant ships for rescue missions.

"If that was to happen again," says a Chinese official. "We would be much better prepared. We could use the Chinese navy and take the evacuees to our own port at Piraeus."

Financial Times

Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/world/asia/how- ... z4VvdNS6Oh

Farooq · Post by **Farooq** » 16 Jan 2017 18:40

UlanBatori wrote:OTOH, being an idiot jingo in reality, I do believe that China **CAN** lose a new war with India in a massive disaster. The scenario for a war is more like 1962: Chinese insecurity because Tibet and Xinjiang look like the pine tree in my backyard where I have already made 2 deep cuts, but am not quite sure which way it will fall, or whether my saw will get caught as it buckles. A logical result of systematic (and FASTER!!!) infrastructure improvement on the Indian side would be some sort of force parity. China is still looking at, what? 1000 km of logistics transit through hostile Northern Arunachal (aka Tibet) and Northern Ladakh aka Xinjiang. If the locals start inflating vacuum bulbs on a more organized basis in both N.A. and N.L., the logistics trail becomes unstable and unsustainable. The divisions on the border must then depend on aerial supply - or invade downhill to more sustainable climes and localities. Or die. That would trigger an invasion, I think.

In which case, a massive air defense plus a massive air bombardment of the Chinese transports, airfields and supply lines would cause takleef. If coordinated with a cutoff of the Karakoram Hwy, a wipeout of the seaport in the Pakistani Ocean, letting loose a few Indus dams, and a swift takeover of the chinese bases in Myanmar before they take over the Andamans. China will presumably open the Brahmaputra dams and cause a disaster in the NE.

A stable Indian border would then have to be established north of Manasarovar, but will take a truly massive force to defend. So, first, massive expansion of defence manufacturing to enable sustaining a war beyond 1 week. Until then, zzzzzzzzzzz

Not to disagree with your line of thought, but Chinese adventurism may not succeed as in '62. There is some prep work that has gone into that.

Indian aggression into Tibet - we are not equipped for that. 5 yrs from now, we can start some conversations, but not now. Critical path is being laid today (though planned in 1996) in form of infrastructure, Mountain Strike Corp, Air Arm in the area and arty guns. We are short on radars for the NE front and strategic airlift. Based on present acquisition plans, we will continue to be short in these areas.

MSC is a "Strike" corp.

venug · Post by **venug** » 16 Jan 2017 18:46

Many are laughing:
China claimed its troops can reach New Delhi in 48 hours and everyone cracked the same joke

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jan 2017 18:54

Philip wrote:We have allowed the Chinese to now encircle us in the IOR itself,using Hambantotat in SL,Gawdar in Pak,with Chinese subs sold to BDesh-as if we couldn't have provided them with older Ru KIlos for a start,or even our Foxtrots earlier,and now PLAN sub visits to Malaysia,which will become regular visits according to this PRC mouthpiece.

This is dhoti-shivering at its worst.

How the hell do they "encircle" us with these ports? Where are the the warships and personel needed to make a base work? There are none. Propaganda is shit in the real world of kinetic energy.

The Bangi subs belongs to Bangladesh not cheen and they are garbage designed in the 1950s.

The 093B that docked in Karachi was accompanied by a 10,000-ton supply ship! It couldn't even rely on resupply in SL with its port at Hambantotat.

No, a real encirclement is what the US has around China with real military bases backed by real heavy metal in the form of carriers and hundreds of aircraft and warships and tens of thousands of Marines. A Los Angeles class would not need a supply ship trailing it and lighting it up like a beacon because they are real naval ports all around it can run to if needed.

Tire of this dhoti-shivering "String of Pearl" BS. I truly hope for war with cheen. We should take this video as a gauntlet they threw down and call their bluff. Instead of worrying about their naval dimension we should take it as an opportunity. We should sink the next chini sub trangressing the IO and see how they react. I bet their response with be on land or not at all. Their maritime situation is their weakness not their strength.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Jan 2017 18:56

This is probably the Cheeni equivalent of some vernacular news media, that deals with jingoism and nationalism and is directed towards goat hearding and dog loving chinese rural folk.

Does it deserve a BRF page for it?

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jan 2017 19:08

Gagan wrote:This is probably the Cheeni equivalent of some vernacular news media, that deals with jingoism and nationalism and is directed towards goat hearding and dog loving chinese rural folk.

Does it deserve a BRF page for it?

This is propaganda and if we ignore it then their propaganda manages a win because it will be interpreted as scaring the Indians into silence.

No, BR should call their bluff and I hope begin a movement in India and its diaspora that will result in a real war with the chinis so we can prick their balloon.

I hope we go to war the next time they cross the LAC or send a sub near our waters. Tire of shivering.

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 16 Jan 2017 19:17

pankajs wrote:
TKiran wrote:NDA 1 did a lot of damage by declaring that Tibet is China. NDA2 did a lot of damage by increasing trade with China 3 times in 2.5years.
I am very curious about this last claim. Would be great if you could link us up to some data.

Also, you assertion is not clear and can be read in multiple ways. Which one of the below is the proper reading?
1. Total (2 way) trade increase by 3 times.
2. Chinese exports to India increase by 3 times.
3. India's trade deficit with China increase by 3 times.

Pankaj sir, these figures didn't come out of my Musharraf, I am still searching for the data, I need more time. It's very strange that googuleswara is not throwing that data instantly. Or maybe that data is sensored now, I am certainly finding it difficult to fetch it.

In the meantime, you can refer to one of the tweets of a Chinese expert.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Chellaney/st ... 6299912192

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jan 2017 19:21

Gagan wrote:This is probably the Cheeni equivalent of some vernacular news media, that deals with jingoism and nationalism and is directed towards goat hearding and dog loving chinese rural folk.

Does it deserve a BRF page for it?

Oh absolutely - it is probably a grade C news outlet - but I have a little disagreement on the thread part. I think BRF should not place itself "above" the hoi polloi news outlets and pretend that we are serious "strategeric" anal-ysts like some bigbig Indian defence think tank. We are just another internet forum with open membership for anyone who cares. We are hardly above trashy Chinese news channels. If you take note of the Paki trash we have cross posted and given publicity to over the past 15-20 years then I see no reason why China should not get the same honour.

The fact is I sincerely believe that Chinese media react to Indian public reactions and what we write here will be picked up and noticed by some trashy outlet or the other, If we write sense that will get picked up. If we write nonsense that will also get picked up, and if it does not get picked up we are not that important anyway - our own self image notwithstanding. After all our majority membership come for the love and nukkad threads and strategery and thackthicks are a secondary timepass

That aside - there is so much provocation from Chinese officaldom that we simply do not react to even if we pretend that we are a great thinking forum. We seem to show a strange "personality" on this forum where we are confident that America will kick Chinese ass but we go all silent and sulky when we have to talk about India versus China. No need for that. I have often complained on the China mil thread that it is not a place for whining and crying about India. Now here is a whole thread for crying, shivering and being scared if that is the opinion we hold about our own preparedness. Why throw away the chance while it is there? Here is a thread where BRFites can boast, laugh or cry out in fear and I am not going to fight with them for sharing their views on this latest Chinese threat. Trashy or not that channel has access to a lot of military footage

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Jan 2017 19:27

The Chinese have their foot in the door,more than a foot,actual rights to use H'tota and Gwadar and will have for years their "experts" training the B'Desh navy to operate their subs. Their mil personnel are on our doorstep.This is the fist phase of encirclement,obtaining squatting rights in key ports and the right to use these ports by their navy.do we have anything remotely similar in the Indo-China Sea despite the last decade of clear Chinese intent to do so in the IOR? So much for our "look east" policy! The sad truth is that instead of carving out our own interests and strat./maritime policy,we're taking our cue from Uncle Sam instead of enhancing bi-lateral maritime ties for an "India first" attitude.The Indian offer to train BD personnel in subs is an afterthought as how on earth will we train them to operate Chinese subs to which we will never be allowed access? Training the Viets on their Kilos is understandable .
It is going to be v.interesting to see what happens now to the Indo-Viet mil relationship after the just concluded talks in Beijing where the two nations have resolved to work together to establish a peaceful status in the CS.china is doing everything to sabotage the growing Indo-Viet relationship which India cannot allow to fail. The PRC always speak with a forked tongue and the Viets know that well from history.They too ned to keep all their options open.

Some better news on the Burmese front though.India should "seize the day" and replace China s Burma's best pal in the regiuon with a closer diplomatic and mil relationship with the Burmese state.

https://www.strategypage.com/qnd/myanma ... 70113.aspx

Myanmar: The Disobedient Generals Anger China

January 13, 2017: In the north neighboring Bangladesh has at least persuaded the Burmese government to begin (this month) high-level talks about their border control problems. Burma is the cause of this mess by not controlling ethnic violence up there that has sent over half a million Burmese fleeing, mostly to Bangladesh. In response Bangladesh has already reinforced border security to try and stem the illegal migration. Bangladesh wants Burma to take back some or all of the more than 400,000 Burmese Rohingya Moslems who have fled across the border, usually as illegal migrants, since 2011. The situation got worse in late 2016 and over 40,000 Burmese Moslems have fled to Bangladesh since then. Bangladesh borders Burma’s Rakhine State which contains most of the Burmese Rohingya Burma insists the Rohingya are Bangladeshis who are in Burma illegally. Burma also fears the Rohingya will be a source of Islamic terrorists. While Bangladesh has arrested a few Pakistan trained Rohingya Islamic terrorists the Rohingya have largely avoided Islamic terrorism. But in Burma the Rohingya, who trace their origin to Bangladesh, have suffered increased persecution in Burma since the 1980s, and especially since the 2011 elections that restored democracy and got lot of anti-Moslem Buddhist nationalists elected. Most Rohingyas are Bengalis, or people from Bengal (now Bangladesh) who began migrating to Burma during the 19th century. At that time the British colonial government ran Bangladesh and Burma, and allowed this movement, even though the Buddhist Burmese opposed it. Britain recognized the problem too late, and the Bengali Moslems were still in Burma when Britain gave up its South Asian colonies after World War II (1939-45). Any kind of peace deal with the Rohingya is unlikely as far as most Burmese are concerned. There is growing popular anger among Burmese towards Moslems in general and the Rohingya in particular. This is fed by the continuing reports of Islamic terrorism word-wide and especially in the region (Thailand, India, Bangladesh and China).

Not everyone in Burma is convinced that the Rohingya are any kind of threat, Islamic or otherwise and the no one has not produced much proof yet. Many Buddhist and Christian Burmese oppose the treatment of the Rohingya and have been held protests in major cities against the decision to deny the Rohingya citizenship and classify them as Bengalis. But this is a minority attitude as most of the voters will not back any pro-Rohingya moves.

Despite that senior government officials called for a proper investigation to find out exactly what is happening up there especially since the army bans journalists from the conflict area. One thing most Burmese can agree on is that the army can’t be trusted to give an accurate account of anything going on in the north. The military has long seen the tribal areas, mainly in the north and along the eastern borders, to be their territory and to do what they want. That usually involves illegal activities, most of them involved with making money using corrupt practices. This has caused more problems with the locals (mostly non-ethnic Burmese tribes) and China.

While a lesser number of Burmese refugees are fleeing to China the Chinese government is getting angry and no longer waiting for the Burmese government to act. For the last month Chinese soldiers and police have been either stopping Burmese refugees at the border or finding them inside China and forcing them to leave. China complains that the latest outbreak of tribal rebel violence in Shan and Kachin States had driven over 30,000 Burmese into China and interfered with trade and movement across the border.

China wants the Burmese government to do something about it or face reduced Chinese investment. That threat has largely been ignored (or promises made and not kept) so now China is going to act without regard to Burmese promises or wishes. This means forcing refugees to return to areas where Burmese troops frequently fire on civilians or the refugee camps built inside Burma near the Chinese border. Burma can’t really afford bad relations with China, mainly because China has become a (if not the) major source of foreign investment. The Chinese want to continue doing business in Burma, but it has to be safe for those investments as well as the Chinese and Burmese working for Chinese firms in Burma. The problem is that the government has still not been able to gain control of the military, which has had a free hand in the tribal areas (especially Shan and Kachin) for over half a century. The Burmese government is having more success negotiating peace deals with the tribes but these deals often fail because the Burmese military won’t cooperate.

January 8, 2017: In the north (Kachin state) troops spent several hours fighting the KIA (Kachin Independence Army) tribal rebels before the KIA retreated from four outposts. There were at least ten dead, most of them KIA, and many more wounded. The army has been fighting the KIA again for nearly a year. A new Burmese president, backed by the new parliament, was expected to change that eventually but so far the army is misbehaving with impunity as it always has. Since early 2016 this violence has been concentrated in the northern states of Kachin and Shan. Tribal rebels have been again violently resisting advancing soldiers but the army keeps the media out so news of what is actually going on there takes weeks to get out. The army says it is defending itself against tribal aggression and by the time the facts get out (if they do at all) it is old news and thus no news. The troops are using their usual tactics of attacking (with gunfire, air strikes and artillery) villages believed to be pro-rebel (or at least anti-army). Troops are apparently under orders to burn the bodies of any civilians found in the villages (along with burning everything down). The fighting here is with tribal rebel groups that the military won’t negotiate with for various reasons.

December 27, 2016: In the north (Kachin state) troops attacked several KIA (Kachin Independence Army) tribal rebel outposts and took them before the end of the day.

December 26, 2016: In the north (Shan State) fighting between soldiers and TNLA (Tang National Liberation Army) left three civilians dead and eight wounded. Since late November 2106 renewed fighting with the “northern alliance” of MNDAA (Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army), TNLA, KIA and AA (Arakan Army) has left over a hundred dead, about half of them security forces (including some pro-government tribal militiamen) and civilians. Despite agreements for these rebel groups to join the current peace talks (which resume in February 2017), the rebel tribes all have serious territorial and economic disputes with the army. In Shan state, for example, the army and tribes are fighting over lucrative coal mining operations. In Kachin state the army violence is connected with the illegal gold mining and the tribal fear that the army cannot be trusted to observe the terms of any peace deal. Along the west coast (Arakan and Chin states) it’s about the army effort to control (tax) illegal logging by tribesmen. The tribes have been mistreated by the military for so long it is difficult to generate a lot of trust for a new peace agreement.

December 17, 2016: In the north (Kachin state) troops finally captured a major KIA base (Gidon) after four months of effort (mainly against roadblocks and outposts).

December 16, 2016: In the north (Shan State) tribal rebels (mainly KIA and TNLA) battled soldiers in several places over the last few days. There appear to have been over twenty dead and wounded. This fighting is not appreciated in nearby China, where civilians fleeing the violence illegally cross the border.

December 14, 2016: China again warned Burma to do something about the fighting along the border. This has been particularly intense since late 2016 in Shan State. There fighting between rebellious tribes and the Burmese army has increasingly seen stray bullets and mortar shells land on Chinese territory. In November a Chinese citizen inside China was wounded by some of the gunfire. China told Burma to restore order to the border which has been unruly for centuries. To emphasize the point China put army units near the Burma border on high alert and publicized the order. Aside from the violence China is unhappy with how all this violent interferes with trade moving across the border in both directions.

December 13, 2016: In the north (Kachin State) four more jade miners died in work related landslides. Since late 2015 (when a landslide killed over 200 miners) the government has threatened to suspend jade mining until acceptable environmental and safety procedures could be agreed on and implemented. Some work has been done on that but these new rules did not apply to the freelance jade miners who work illegally and are taking advantage of any mining bans to keep working. All the recent jade miner fatalities have been freelancers, usually inexperienced scavengers working in unstable areas that have already been scoured by professionals for nearly all the jade that was there. The main reason the government wants to reduce miner deaths is to halt all the bad publicity, which has forced the government to at least pretend to do something about what had been going on illegally in the north for decades. Efforts to enforce existing laws banning such activities and more forceful efforts to curb illegal jade mining did not work. Until now government threats caused unease among many of those involved in the largely illegal jade industry but had not slowed down production much. If anything jade mining has increased during 2106 with some 300,000 workers, mostly manual laborers (and often illegal migrants) working in a 700 square kilometer area that, from the air, looks like a wasteland with dozens of hills leveled and the debris left in unstable heaps that cause most of the landslides. This was believed to be a good time for the government to try and reform the jade business. Demand and prices are way down in China and the jade producers have to increase production to make any money at all. That means the jade mining is more visible from the air (which the government controls) and space (where even commercial satellite photos show the jade operations). The tribes involved in the jade trade would normally fight hard to oppose any government crackdown but because many of the people killed in the jade mining incidents are from the north there is less justifications for the tribal militias to get involved. Most jade mining activity is 650 kilometers north of the Burmese capital. The fatal landslides occur because the jade mining often involves removing most of the vegetation on a hillside. With the trees and shrubs gone there is nothing to hold soil together when there are heavy rains. All this has brought a lot of unwanted publicity to the jade trade. Burma is the main source of jade on the planet and is a $30 billion a year operation in Burma. Yet only about one percent of that is taxed and half of the jade is found by illegal mining operations and is quietly sold to Chinese traders. Most of the illegal jade trade is controlled by Burmese military officers who have connections inside China. The rest is controlled by tribal rebels, mainly the Wa of the UWSA (United Wa State Army). Most of the jade is in the northern tribal territories and the army is constantly fighting with tribal rebels who are seeking to make some money in the jade producing areas. The corrupt Burmese generals and businessmen and their Chinese counterparts are not eager to give up the jade profits but they are now in a weak position. A lot of the current fighting in Kachin State is a continuation of this decades old “Jade War.” Local tribes have long complained that all the illegal jade and gold mining ruins many water supplies (streams and lakes) but since outsiders (military and tribal warlords) dominate and protect the illegal mining, no one cares about some bad water except a few locals. But that has changed since 2011 because all the publicity has forced the Chinese government to at least recognize that the problem exists, mainly because of Chinese demand for jade and Chinese providing the cash and access to Chinese made earth moving equipment and corrupt border guards who let the illegal cash and equipment into Burma and the valuable (and untaxed on either side of the border) jade out. The Chinese are now willing to help crack down on the jade and other smuggling because it involves items popular with many corrupt Chinese officials.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 16 Jan 2017 19:32

all of this is red dawn fantasy.

a border area? yeah, maybe.

but new delhi?

give me a break.....

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Jan 2017 19:56

What are the compulsions that led to the Chinese boast - IMO, that is what we need to understand.
E.g., did they hire a Pakistani in one of their news divisions?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Jan 2017 20:15

1. The youtube from which Shiv has made a screen grab is from October 2016.
2. The twitter account "International Spectator" (@spectatorindex) has no linked website.
3. "The International Spectator" is the name of a journal from Italy: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rspe20?c ... n=0#vol_51

Currently known as:

The International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs (1983 - current)

Formerly known as

Lo Spettatore Internazionale (1966 - 1982)

4. I'm unable to establish that the twitter account is related to this journal.
5. I'm unable to establish that the account @spectatorindex is related to the UK magazine, "The Spectator".
http://www.spectator.co.uk

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Jan 2017 20:33

The videos posted by "Zmn U", the source of Shiv's youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1teiC ... /playlists

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Jan 2017 20:34

Philip wrote: It is going to be v.interesting to see what happens now to the Indo-Viet mil relationship after the just concluded talks in Beijing where the two nations have resolved to work together to establish a peaceful status in the CS.china is doing everything to sabotage the growing Indo-Viet relationship which India cannot allow to fail. The PRC always speak with a forked tongue and the Viets know that well from history.They too ned to keep all their options open.

The Vietnamese owe their independence to the Champa but for whom they would have been assimilated by the Hans. Much later, the pro-Soviet Vietnamese fought both the Chinese and the Americans to emerge victorious. They also rid Cambodia of the Chinese-backed and savage Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot, something that the Chinese never forgot. The proud Vietnamese had defeated decisively the French in the 50s. Thus, they had overcome three powerful militaristic hegemons, the US, France & the Chinese. The US-Chinese Unholy alliance imposed sanctions on the Vietnamese in the 70s. They came together to ensnare the USSR in a Bear Trap only to fall apart very soon thereafter. The US lifted sanctions on Vietnam in mid-90s. Such are the vagaries of geopolitics that the two bitter adversaries, the US & Vietnam are coming together against China with Russia placed uncomfortably on the Chinese side. Amidst all these is the benign presence of India which once helped the Vietnamese resist Chinese subjugation continueing to play the same influence. The Vietnamese are well aware of not only their old history but also 1979 and thereafter!

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 16 Jan 2017 21:25

shiv wrote:
sudeepj wrote: We should neither shiver, nor die laughing but take Chinese threats seriously. My personal favorite is to pull a Paki on the Chinese and deploy nuclear armed Prahaars with Division commanders in the NE. If the Chinese think they can annihilate a division, they should be prepared to face the prospect of tactical nukes.

A second idea is mahabums, but doing that will have serious repercussions and must be done in consultation with the west.
One of the problems of perception that I see (on BRF) is this constant refrain of Chinese ability to do things to us. Why are we obsessed with the idea that we will always be on the defensive in a border war. As I see it we could well end up grabbing chunks of Tibet.

The point I am making is that our inherent Indian need to dhoti shiver makes us rule out any Indian gain or advance whatsoever. The Chinese do not do that. For all their bluster they know damn well that they could take a licking in a border war and if they do it is the escalation that causes problems. Can they back down from a war they start and lose face or escalate and face Agony?

What will the Chinese do if we kick their butt and grabs huge chunks of Tibet? Dick waving will not cut it.

No obsession, just seeing things the way they exist on the ground. If Indian intent was to grab stuff on land, we would have built the infrastructure needed to sustain a force in Tibet. We dont have that, ergo
this intent and capability does not exist, except in the minds of some. If the mountain strike corps comes to be, that will change things.

Added later: If one looks at the expenditures and capability building, it appears that our strategy is defensive in the mountains while being offensive on the oceans.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 16 Jan 2017 21:27

TSJones wrote:all of this is red dawn fantasy.

a border area? yeah, maybe.

but new delhi?

give me a break.....

Yes, having nukes ensures that you will never have enemy tanks rolling down your capitals promenade, the true threat is in the border areas.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 16 Jan 2017 21:31

Here is a thread where BRFites can boast, laugh or cry out in fear and I am not going to fight with them for sharing their views on this latest Chinese threat. Trashy or not that channel has access to a lot of military footage

Oh! My kind of thread!! Let me dig out those photos I took, of Mt. Appunni, east of the Kuruvila Ridge in Northern Arunachal on the way to ShangunniLa.

LokeshC · Post by **LokeshC** » 16 Jan 2017 22:36

venug wrote:Many are laughing:
China claimed its troops can reach New Delhi in 48 hours and everyone cracked the same joke

Those who are quoted cracking the joke are sikular sycophants who see Mooodi everywhere. No wonder they are cracking the same stale jokes.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 16 Jan 2017 22:37

Some folks here at BRF are taking the chini chest-thumping way too seriously.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGs_dcXt-3k (10 Signs China's Military Is Weaker Than You Think)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAXTAv8eqzM (The One Thing Chinese Soldiers Can't Hide)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMTZMdWVG1Q (5 Chinese Military Fails)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIxE5kZXjsY (China's Shocking Military Secret REVEALED)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKK7iCa3Bh0 (Chinese Leaders Fear Military Revolt)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PMq1Dk3mUI (China's Poverty Lie)

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 16 Jan 2017 22:50

How trained and capable are the current Chinese military forces? Also how sophisticated is their equipment?

https://www.quora.com/How-trained-and-c ... -equipment

the Chinese soldier is still vastly under equipped compared to its western counterpart.

Most Chinese soldiers are still issued WWII era steel helmet.

Chinese command see’s Chinese soldiers as cannon fodder. They are designed to not think for themselves and adapt to situations. Soldiers and officers who break that mold are considered political liabilities. As a matter of fact the average PLA soldiers spends and upwards of 30–50% of their training doing something called “Party Training” essentially political brainwashing to support the communist party of China.

The Chinese military is all about top down control and without a commanding officer essentially Chinese units become completely aimless.

a well placed sniper bullet to the commanding officer or damage to one of the radios in the company will render the entire force useless

It’s generals and leaders are often political appointees and not career soldiers and corruption is rife in their ranks.

In history time and time again ill equipped highly motivated and trained soldier will always beat poorly trained, poorly motivated soldiers with fancy gadgets. (Let’s not even begin to talk about how corruption has seriously handicapped the quality of China’s domestic arms industry).

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Jan 2017 22:58

Cross posting from Tracking India's Admission into International Groups thread in the SIIR Forum.

India’s NSG membership can’t be farewell gift
http://indianexpress.com/article/world/ ... s-4476997/

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Jan 2017 23:49

Can China’s Army Really Capture New Delhi in 2 Days?
http://defenceupdate.in/can-chinas-army ... in-2-days/

Experts and retired army officers were quick to rubbish this as illogical rhetoric, and questioned the logistics of the provocative claim. The ill-thought-out remark shows the level of understanding of the people who’ve made it, says retired colonel Rohit Agarwal. Speaking to The Quint, he breaks the comment down and analyses its impracticality. For motorised troops to infiltrate the mountainous terrain of the north-eastern border of India and advance further inside is not possible, he says.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jan 2017 00:44

UB and Farooq, In mid 80s IAF used to fly over Lhasa on recce flights. Plans were to establish air superiority in 72 hours. Recall the magazine cover with Jaguar bombing a PLA convoy? Shiv might recall it.
Gen. Sunder ji had Operation Checkerboard and Rajivji developed cold feet. Brasstacks for TSP, Checkerboard for China and another one for overall.
Then the 1990 financial crisis hit and meanwhile China got the upper hand.
Still India will give a bloody nose and that could trigger a coup in Beijing. The Han will get liberated from the Communists and truly be free.