India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3869
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby nam » 07 Jun 2020 02:07

chola wrote:Cheen has NO chance to win now. Not with India holding a 10-1 troops advantage. Those weapon systems, if they come, won't improve odds for India. The odds are already overwhelmingly in our favor.

All waiting for those uber weapons does is allow Cheen to build up numbers to lower those odds.


We have to understand what the criteria of a "win" is for China & India. For us bombing cannon fodders on a hill top was a "win". Pak A2G hitting a tree and missing our HQ was enough to prevent escalation.

Just like the Paks, "win" for Chinis is a PR objective. They would want to carry out a shock & awe campaign, in a short window and announce that their objective is met and will call for ceasefire. No Han Chinese is going to come and look at the LAC if PLA is 10KM inside or outside.

Our problem is, politicians will accept such a ceasefire for "moral standing". Our forces will rather have a short window and needs to throw everything they got as a response. There will no drive up to Lhasa.

For that we need mass firepower. 155MM, MBRL, A2G, BM/CM, LCH with ATGM, long range SAM, in numbers. The numbers is what we miss.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 02:10

nam wrote:
chola wrote:Cheen has NO chance to win now. Not with India holding a 10-1 troops advantage. Those weapon systems, if they come, won't improve odds for India. The odds are already overwhelmingly in our favor.

All waiting for those uber weapons does is allow Cheen to build up numbers to lower those odds.


We have to understand what the criteria of a "win" is for China & India. For us bombing cannon fodders on a hill top was a "win". Pak A2G hitting a tree and missing our HQ was enough to prevent escalation.

Just like the Paks, "win" for Chinis is a PR objective. They would want to carry out a shock & awe campaign, in a short window and announce that their objective is met and will call for ceasefire. No Han Chinese is going to come and look at the LAC if PLA is 10KM inside or outside.

Our problem is, politicians will accept such a ceasefire for "moral standing". Our forces will rather have a short window and needs to throw everything they got as a response. There will no drive up to Lhasa.

For that we need mass firepower. 155MM, MBRL, A2G, BM/CM, LCH with ATGM, long range SAM, in numbers. The numbers is what we miss.


That’s why you attack first. You have the element of surprise and you control the pace. You define what winning means. Fortune favors the brave, not the meek.

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vijayk » 07 Jun 2020 03:20

What is the current situation? Are they inside Ladhak?

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby g.sarkar » 07 Jun 2020 03:36

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/l ... 2020-06-06
Ladakh standoff talks: India asks China to restore April status at LAC, China says stop roadwork
There were deliberations on road construction by India as the Chinese have been objecting to some of these that sparked the confrontation.
Manjeet Singh Negi Abhishek Bhalla, New Delhi, June 6, 2020

Military commanders of India and China held talks on Saturday in their first major attempt to resolve the month-long border standoff in Eastern Ladakh. The talks were held at the Border Personnel Meeting Point in Moldo on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC), opposite the Chushul sector of Eastern Ladakh.
According to sources, in the three-hour-long meeting, India sought restoration of status quo as on April 2020 end, before the faceoff at Pangong Lake triggered an escalation in Ladakh leading to a massive build-up by both sides in Ladakh. Sources said India also asked China to reduce their mobilisation near the Galwan valley and that the troops must be sent to their original location.
Meanwhile, the Chinese side headed by Major General Liu Lin, who is the commander of South Xinjiang Military Region of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), asked India to stop its road construction, sources said. However, India defended its stand saying that the construction is taking place inside the LAC, therefore there is no reason for China to object the roadwork.
......
Gautam

williams
BRFite
Posts: 520
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby williams » 07 Jun 2020 05:53

Sravan wrote:
nam wrote:
We have to understand what the criteria of a "win" is for China & India. For us bombing cannon fodders on a hill top was a "win". Pak A2G hitting a tree and missing our HQ was enough to prevent escalation.

Just like the Paks, "win" for Chinis is a PR objective. They would want to carry out a shock & awe campaign, in a short window and announce that their objective is met and will call for ceasefire. No Han Chinese is going to come and look at the LAC if PLA is 10KM inside or outside.

Our problem is, politicians will accept such a ceasefire for "moral standing". Our forces will rather have a short window and needs to throw everything they got as a response. There will no drive up to Lhasa.

For that we need mass firepower. 155MM, MBRL, A2G, BM/CM, LCH with ATGM, long range SAM, in numbers. The numbers is what we miss.


That’s why you attack first. You have the element of surprise and you control the pace. You define what winning means. Fortune favors the brave, not the meek.


The ground war in TAR will be one component of a full-fledged war of the Asian giants. This time IN and IAF will be involved. Strategic and Space assets need to be mobilized. There may be an escalation in the western front and IOR. Before that, there will be a series of steps in the escalation ladder. The element of surprise will only give us some advantage for the first 24-48 hours. After that, it will be a grind in cold Tibetan Plateau. Unlike the Pakis, the Chinese economy and their totalitarian psyche will fuel a war of attrition. Are we ready to stomach the casualties and the economic cost? I think there is a simpler solution here. How about selective change in sticks and stones policy Use real weapons for a change. We know the pattern of these patrols and standoffs in summer. Put some snipers in position and a few shots will put the fear of God in their spine. We play that game in LC all the time and we are good at it.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 07:40

williams wrote:
Sravan wrote:
That’s why you attack first. You have the element of surprise and you control the pace. You define what winning means. Fortune favors the brave, not the meek.


The ground war in TAR will be one component of a full-fledged war of the Asian giants. This time IN and IAF will be involved. Strategic and Space assets need to be mobilized. There may be an escalation in the western front and IOR. Before that, there will be a series of steps in the escalation ladder. The element of surprise will only give us some advantage for the first 24-48 hours. After that, it will be a grind in cold Tibetan Plateau. Unlike the Pakis, the Chinese economy and their totalitarian psyche will fuel a war of attrition. Are we ready to stomach the casualties and the economic cost? I think there is a simpler solution here. How about selective change in sticks and stones policy Use real weapons for a change. We know the pattern of these patrols and standoffs in summer. Put some snipers in position and a few shots will put the fear of God in their spine. We play that game in LC all the time and we are good at it.


How about we just initiate an attack? Picking off people doesn’t solve the problem. Every strategic location will require sniper deployment, spreading our resources thin. What’s wrong with a blitzkrieg style attack to capture Tibet and heavy fortification in Tibet. Sure let the war of attrition start, but the theater will be Tibet and not India. If the theater is in Tibet, then the supply chain will be hard to maintain for the Chinese. Right now a small number of roads and train lines are holding India hostage. My suggestion is to do a massive thrust and hold ground at the choke point. Those choke points are roads connecting the mainland Chinese civilization with the TAR region. Isn’t that much easier to defend than a 3000 km Himalayan mountain range? If the Chinese build the roads in Tibet, we should use that to rapidly Mobile our troops to a forward theater in Tibet.

Image

Look at the choke points on their road network. It is when you get past the TAR region. That should be where we hold our ground, not the Himalayas. What will China do if we have a massive surge into Tibet in the course of one week, after we take out these expressways. Will they build a new highway to get to Tibet?

In comparison, here is our road network

Image

We had no problems fighting for the British in numerous foreign theaters on wars that weren’t relevant for India. Why can’t we fight for our own nation’s sovereignty and stability? A Tibetan buffer state is hugely beneficial to India. It reinforces the Silliguri Corridor, potentially lead to absorption of Nepal and gets to the Chinese underbelly. Keeping Peace, buying time will lead to defeat long term. Annexing Tibet with everything we got will move the theater, protect the civilization long term, enable securing our water supply interests and creation of a dharmic sphere of influence. This is the natural order of Asia, and we should restore it.

Shoot for the stars, hit the moon.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24101
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby SSridhar » 07 Jun 2020 08:52

Ladakh stand-off: Talks between senior army officers of India and China end with ‘positive trajectory’
But sources said the meeting was “positive” and could eventually lead to restoration of status quo ante in eastern Ladakh, with both sides de-inducting soldiers and heavy weaponry from the confrontation sites at the northern bank of Pangong Tso (Tso means lake), Gogra-Hot Springs area and Galwan Valley region in a phased manner.

“It may require some more military as well as diplomatic meetings for the actual de-escalation to take place,” said a source. The meeting on Saturday came a day after joint secretary-level diplomatic talks between India and China

The earlier almost dozen meetings between the opposing commanders, including three at the Major-General level, had failed to break the deadlock with both the armies sticking to their respective positions.

The PLA, in particular, is upset over India’s attempt to construct a feeder road joining “Patrolling Point-14” in the Galwan Valley to the 255-km Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO) as well as a bridge in the region. The infrastructure upgrade will provide Indian troops with swifter and easier access to areas like the strategically-important Karakoram Pass, Depsang plains and Galwan Valley, among other areas, to challenge the PLA’s relatively uncontested dominance in the region till now.

“We are prepared for the long haul if it comes to that. We have enough acclimatised troops along the LAC in eastern Ladakh now,” said another source.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3880
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby arshyam » 07 Jun 2020 09:07

Sravan wrote:We had no problems fighting for the British in numerous foreign theaters on wars that weren’t relevant for India. Why can’t we fight for our own nation’s sovereignty and stability? A Tibetan buffer state is hugely beneficial to India. It reinforces the Silliguri Corridor, potentially lead to absorption of Nepal and gets to the Chinese underbelly. Keeping Peace, buying time will lead to defeat long term. Annexing Tibet with everything we got will move the theater, protect the civilization long term, enable securing our water supply interests and creation of a dharmic sphere of influence. This is the natural order of Asia, and we should restore it.

Shoot for the stars, hit the moon.

Logistics. Just like the Chinese cannot hope to supply their troops if they cross the Himalaya into India proper (which was what happened in '62), we cannot build reliable and stable supply lines that would be safe from interdiction. Even if there is not much threat of interdiction by air, weather is a factor - no road through the Himalaya stays open in the winter, despite best efforts. So we'll have to rely on supplies by air, which would be too expensive given the vast theatre. Plus, there are not many points of natural defense between Tibet and China proper (there is no Himalaya protecting Tibet from China), so we'll need an overwhelming amount of force and gear to properly defend Tibet. Also, Tibet's population is not that high to be able to defend their homeland in numbers. So this is easier said than done.

In short, all the disadvantages that prevent Beijing from stationing more troops in Tibet would apply to us, plus the need to cross the Himalaya for our troops to get there.

What we could do, though, is adopt an aggressive posture along the border and do what China does to us, so they are forced to station more and more people in Tibet. It's not easy for them, given the weather and altitude, making them spend more resources to defend from our threat. Having a conscript army would also make their position uncomfortable (single child problem, discontent, health issues, etc.). In the meantime, we should keep salami slicing wherever possible with the aim to interdict their lines of communication. This is not a strategy to take Tibet, but to make our border position unassailable, while making China uncomfortable enough to sue for peace. They are able to get away with a minimal presence now by needling us and forcing us to station more troops, let's turn the tables on them.

For a full solution for Tibet, we need to be much more powerful, militarily as well as economically, so as to force some concessions from them for Tibet. It's a long term project and won't be solved for a while, at least while the CCP is running the show. The best opportunity would be their next episode of collapse and civil war, which they tend to get into every few centuries. It's been a while since the last one, so let's see. The next best option is to go to war, but there is no political appetite for that in India as liberating Tibet is not the same as defending our home. That leaves the Chinese to start a war, but I find that unlikely as well, for their position in Tibet today is not challenged, and they are sitting pretty controlling their road routes and all water sources. So there is no reason for them to go to war with us.

nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 1201
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby nandakumar » 07 Jun 2020 09:20

nam wrote:
Vips wrote:Nope China does not do anything without a plan. If news about China sending a Major General to the meeting is true then it is to convey a message that Indian Lt general rank is not important enough to be met by a Chinese higher up and that the his rank is only equal to that of a Chinese Major General.

I know it is childish but that is what eating polk lice does to the limited grey matter in between the chinky eyes.


You are giving way too much IQ to the Chinese. If they were thinking, they would have expanded the Ngari airport before intruding. This is a regular bullying behavior.

The bullying is done because the Chinese know two things: We will not fire first and are too eager to call for a ceasefire if things escalate.
This is what Lt Gen Panag is also recommending. He calls it quid pro quo

This allows the Chinese a window to bully. What will the Chinese do if we decide to intrude in another place along the 3000KM LAC?

This is what Lt Gen Panag is saying. He calls it quid pro quo incursion.

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Suresh S » 07 Jun 2020 09:38

Sravan has it right. That is my thinking on Tibet. We are not just fighting for Tibet even though that is a dharmic goal but we are in fact also fighting for India by creating a buffer state as it always was in the past.Perfect time never comes . Now is the perfect time.By not doing anything and sitting on our haunches will lead to defeat in the long term. Fortune always favors the brave not the weak.If u look at it there are multiple choke points from chinese mainland plains into Tibet u have to climb almost 3 miles above sea level. There are multiple winding roads leading into tibet . I would rather defend there than all along the LAC.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 09:55

arshyam wrote:
Sravan wrote:We had no problems fighting for the British in numerous foreign theaters on wars that weren’t relevant for India. Why can’t we fight for our own nation’s sovereignty and stability? A Tibetan buffer state is hugely beneficial to India. It reinforces the Silliguri Corridor, potentially lead to absorption of Nepal and gets to the Chinese underbelly. Keeping Peace, buying time will lead to defeat long term. Annexing Tibet with everything we got will move the theater, protect the civilization long term, enable securing our water supply interests and creation of a dharmic sphere of influence. This is the natural order of Asia, and we should restore it.

Shoot for the stars, hit the moon.

Logistics. Just like the Chinese cannot hope to supply their troops if they cross the Himalaya into India proper (which was what happened in '62), we cannot build reliable and stable supply lines that would be safe from interdiction. Even if there is not much threat of interdiction by air, weather is a factor - no road through the Himalaya stays open in the winter, despite best efforts. So we'll have to rely on supplies by air, which would be too expensive given the vast theatre. Plus, there are not many points of natural defense between Tibet and China proper (there is no Himalaya protecting Tibet from China), so we'll need an overwhelming amount of force and gear to properly defend Tibet. Also, Tibet's population is not that high to be able to defend their homeland in numbers. So this is easier said than done.

In short, all the disadvantages that prevent Beijing from stationing more troops in Tibet would apply to us, plus the need to cross the Himalaya for our troops to get there.

What we could do, though, is adopt an aggressive posture along the border and do what China does to us, so they are forced to station more and more people in Tibet. It's not easy for them, given the weather and altitude, making them spend more resources to defend from our threat. Having a conscript army would also make their position uncomfortable (single child problem, discontent, health issues, etc.). In the meantime, we should keep salami slicing wherever possible with the aim to interdict their lines of communication. This is not a strategy to take Tibet, but to make our border position unassailable, while making China uncomfortable enough to sue for peace. They are able to get away with a minimal presence now by needling us and forcing us to station more troops, let's turn the tables on them.

For a full solution for Tibet, we need to be much more powerful, militarily as well as economically, so as to force some concessions from them for Tibet. It's a long term project and won't be solved for a while, at least while the CCP is running the show. The best opportunity would be their next episode of collapse and civil war, which they tend to get into every few centuries. It's been a while since the last one, so let's see. The next best option is to go to war, but there is no political appetite for that in India as liberating Tibet is not the same as defending our home. That leaves the Chinese to start a war, but I find that unlikely as well, for their position in Tibet today is not challenged, and they are sitting pretty controlling their road routes and all water sources. So there is no reason for them to go to war with us.


Crossing the Himalayas vs 2000km of desert. I would think the desert would require air support on China’s side too. If we have US support for resupplies, it’s a technically feasible strategy.

If the Quad countries did a surge and held ground and we increase US pressure from the Eastern front, we can take and hold Tibet. I suggest we pursue this strategy and create a democratic stronghold on the western border. If we get around Pakistan via a slice of Tibet, that has strong geopolitical benefits too. It also cuts China off from the Belt and Road initiative. We effectively control flow of goods in and out of China both on land and sea.
Last edited by Sravan on 07 Jun 2020 09:58, edited 1 time in total.

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2046
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby SriKumar » 07 Jun 2020 09:58

Suresh S wrote:Sravan has it right. That is my thinking on Tibet. We are not just fighting for Tibet even though that is a dharmic goal but we are in fact also fighting for India by creating a buffer state as it always was in the past.Perfect time never comes . Now is the perfect time.By not doing anything and sitting on our haunches will lead to defeat in the long term. Fortune always favors the brave not the weak.If u look at it there are multiple choke points from chinese mainland plains into Tibet u have to climb almost 3 miles above sea level. There are multiple winding roads leading into tibet . I would rather defend there than all along the LAC.

Reminds me of the saying 'the armchiar generals talk strategy, the professional soldiers talk logistics'. I am all for liberating Tibet, not only is it 'dharmo rakshati rakshitahah', it is a also a buffer state. Very good. Now the question is: how long does the IA need to stay there to hold TIbet, where will the MacModi line (take off from MacMahon line) be in Tibet, how many troops are needed to man the line, how will they be supplied (food, arms, everything) and for how long.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 10:01

SriKumar wrote:
Suresh S wrote:Sravan has it right. That is my thinking on Tibet. We are not just fighting for Tibet even though that is a dharmic goal but we are in fact also fighting for India by creating a buffer state as it always was in the past.Perfect time never comes . Now is the perfect time.By not doing anything and sitting on our haunches will lead to defeat in the long term. Fortune always favors the brave not the weak.If u look at it there are multiple choke points from chinese mainland plains into Tibet u have to climb almost 3 miles above sea level. There are multiple winding roads leading into tibet . I would rather defend there than all along the LAC.

Reminds me of the saying 'the armchiar generals talk strategy, the professionals talk logistics'. I am all for liberating Tibet, not only is it 'dharmo rakshati rakshitahah', it is a also a buffer state. Very good. Now the question is: how long does the IA need to stay there to hold TIbet, where will the MacModi line (take off from MacMahon line) be in Tibet, how many troops are needed to man the line, how will they be supplied (food, arms, everything) and for how long.


The invasion of TAR would include cutting off all road and rail supplies that connect TAR with mainland China.

Take out all of their road and rail infrastructure in the initial attack. That evens the playground. Both sides have to deploy air resources. How much of the Chinese Air Force will be diverted from the Eastern front to protect their Western border? I think it’s possible. We should present this at G7 and take pole position on this strategy.

They expect us to be timid and cower. But what about doing the exact opposite of what they expect. How prepared are they for a India invades China to free Tibet scenario? I don’t think they would seriously consider such a move. This is reflected in their deployment of road infrastructure. There is no redundancy for connectivity to TAR. Which is why I think focusing solely on this strategy will be most effective!

Even if we are forced to withdraw, we can agree to withdraw until LAC + 10km buffer. If there is any damage from the firefight, it will be on Tibetan soil, not India’s.

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2046
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby SriKumar » 07 Jun 2020 10:11

Your plan will work for a limited period of time. After that, what happens? How long does the air war continue. Do logistics exist for a 6 month period of interdiction.

THe concept of a limited war is a little tricky. I've seen a Pakistani general talk on TV about a limited short and sharp war against India, and my mental rejoinder was 'what makes you think India will keep it limited'.

Limited war is limited only when the stronger side decides (for whatever reason) to offer a cease fire.
The weaker side offering a cease-fire, especially with land occupied, may or may not be accepted. The weaker side has to be prepared for either possibility, essentially a fight to the finish (and see what that scenario looks like).
As for quad and G7, I see some level of support for India, (to what extent no one knows, it is not in public domain) but will they deploy troops if push come to a shove. If not, then one has to arrange troops from the Indian Army.

There is a bigger question: whether India is prepared for a total war (non-nuclear) and/or a total war (nuclear). This question needs to be decided and answered at the highest levels, and also at the lowest levels (the aam janata on the street).

Added later: The damage, in the evernt of war that goes into Tibet, will NOT be limited to the border for India. One can expect missiles to land in several cities and possibly the capital. Why- because I fully expect India to test Agni IV and Agni V with conventional warheards, sent north east insteand of south east.

My overall point is that even if a war ends up being limited, the country initiating the war has to look at all possible scenarios of the end-game, even if that means asking a third country to intervene (after declaring a cease-fire), or sending more troops to keep a war alive for months.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 10:27

SriKumar wrote:Your plan will work for a limited period of time. After that, what happens? How long does the air war continue. Do logistics exist for a 6 month period of interdiction.

THe concept of a limited war is a little tricky. I've seen a Pakistani general talk on TV about a limited short and sharp war against India, and my mental rejoinder was 'what makes you think India will keep it limited'.

Limited war is limited only when the stronger side decides (for whatever reason) to offer a cease fire.
The weaker side offering a cease-fire, especially with land occupied, may or may not be accepted. The weaker side has to be prepared for either possibility, essentially a fight to the finish (and see what that scenario looks like).
As for quad and G7, I see some level of support for India, (to what extent no one knows, it is not in public domain) but will they deploy troops if push come to a shove. If not, then one has to arrange troops from the Indian Army.

There is a bigger question: whether India is prepared for a total war (non-nuclear) and/or a total war (nuclear). This question needs to be decided and answered at the highest levels, and also at the lowest levels (the aam janata on the street).

Added later: The damage, in the evernt of war that goes into Tibet, will NOT be limited to the border for India. One can expect missiles to land in several cities and possibly the capital. Why- because I fully expect India to test Agni IV and Agni V with conventional warheards, sent north east insteand of south east.

My overall point is that even if a war ends up being limited, the country initiating the war has to look at all possible scenarios of the end-game, even if that means asking a third country to intervene (after declaring a cease-fire), or sending more troops to keep a war alive for months.


The goal would be to secure Tibet with a mix of India , US, Aus, UK soldiers. Create supply chain and logistics via India using the resources of all five armies. Spearhead the ops and hand over Tibet to the Tibetan government in exile with the Allied forces securing its Borders. Create a coalition base In PoK to resupply Tibet.

m_saini
BRFite
Posts: 231
Joined: 23 May 2020 20:25

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby m_saini » 07 Jun 2020 10:34

Why would US, UK and Aus help us with that? They don't even recognize Taiwan, an already independent country with a legitimate government, in fear of one china policy. And to think they would send us troops to help create an independent tibet. This is plain day-dreaming.

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2046
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby SriKumar » 07 Jun 2020 10:44

Sravan wrote:The goal would be to secure Tibet with a mix of India , US, Aus, UK soldiers. Create supply chain and logistics via India using the resources of all five armies. Spearhead the ops and hand over Tibet to the Tibetan government in exile with the Allied forces securing its Borders. Create a coalition base In PoK to resupply Tibet.

I think (and I have no basis for saying this other than India has prepared in earnest for a CHina conflict for 30+ years) that India is pretty close to being capable of doing the above with her own troops, and would not need outside troops. THe issue is one of war materiel/ordnance/weapons lasting a couple of months. ANd it is quite possible that US/Quad may provide some/limited support- but one cannot depend on it 100% (unless Modi has something from the US/Aus on this front).

One need not even go after all of Tibet, Lhasa the capital is less than 100 miles from Indian border. Securing Lhasa and some buffer region around that, by itself is a major victory. THat will solve the Arunachal border problem for the folks at google maps, once and for all. I think India can maitain supply lines that far for extended period of time around this area. The question though is how to keep the stalemate as a stalemate, and this is where political calculations will come into play. Xi knows his days are numbered if India gets to Lhasa. So what will he do, if anything, when things appear bleak for him. This government IMHO is the best one to handle this situation, especially with the current world situation being in its favor.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 10:57

SriKumar wrote:
Sravan wrote:The goal would be to secure Tibet with a mix of India , US, Aus, UK soldiers. Create supply chain and logistics via India using the resources of all five armies. Spearhead the ops and hand over Tibet to the Tibetan government in exile with the Allied forces securing its Borders. Create a coalition base In PoK to resupply Tibet.

I think (and I have no basis for saying this other than India has prepared in earnest for a CHina conflict for 30+ years) that India is pretty close to being capable of doing the above with her own troops, and would not need outside troops. THe issue is one of war materiel/ordnance/weapons lasting a couple of months. ANd it is quite possible that US/Quad may provide some/limited support- but one cannot depend on it because support comes with political conditions.

One need not even go after all of Tibet, Lhasa the capital is less than 100 miles from Indian border. Securing Lhasa and some buffer region around that, by itself is a major victory. THat will solve the Arunachal border problem for the folks at google maps, once and for all. I think India can maitain supply lines that far for extended period of time around this area. The question though is how to keep the stalemate as a stalemate, and this is where political calculations will come into play. Xi knows his days are numbered if India gets to Lhasa. So what will he do, if anything, when things appear bleak for him. This government IMHO is the best one to handle this situation, especially with the current world situation being in its favor.


Exactly, move the theater on our terms. Exert our presence in the global landscape. Create and expand the dharmic sphere of influence. Move the focus to defending Tibet vs attacking India. Either way with China we will lose precious lives in the future defending as they push us. My suggestion would at least start a fight on our terms and for our strategic goals.

vimal
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vimal » 07 Jun 2020 11:33

Some members here seem to consume too much Ganja for their own good. Stick to twitter or fb please.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 11:43

vimal wrote:Some members here seem to consume too much Ganja for their own good. Stick to twitter or fb please.


And hence ladies and gentlemen, this is what happens. Decision paralysis and lack of action. This thinking will let our neighbors salami slice India for the next 100 years.

The Chinese already built the roads for us in Tibet and Himalayas, we simply need to overrun and push a surge into Tibet with the infrastructure they have built. They did us a favor by paving all the way to the Himalayas

You can choose to fight it alone or get allies to help. There is no shame in taking other’s help. In WWII America brought huge numbers to the fight which helped jump the superior German ships. India should create and lead an alliance with this initiative.
Last edited by Sravan on 07 Jun 2020 12:40, edited 1 time in total.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vishvak » 07 Jun 2020 12:20

..The goal would be to secure Tibet with a mix of India , US, Aus, UK soldiers. Create supply chain and logistics via India using the resources of all five armies. Spearhead the ops and hand over Tibet to the Tibetan government in exile with the Allied forces securing its Borders. Create a coalition base In PoK to resupply Tibet.
..

And why would coalition troops leave Tibet after that. That's something that Tibetans can't deal with either.
..One need not even go after all of Tibet, Lhasa the capital is less than 100 miles from Indian border. Securing Lhasa and some buffer region around that, by itself is a major victory. THat will solve the Arunachal border problem for the folks at google maps, once and for all. I think India can maitain supply lines that far for extended period of time around this area. The question though is how to keep the stalemate as a stalemate

Will Chinese keep the occupation of Tibet semi resolved and not reinforce only to hit later. Such halfway attempts won't work with CCP and such big powers.

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2046
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby SriKumar » 07 Jun 2020 12:25

^^^ I had alluded to this possibility in a prior post.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 12:42

vishvak wrote:
..The goal would be to secure Tibet with a mix of India , US, Aus, UK soldiers. Create supply chain and logistics via India using the resources of all five armies. Spearhead the ops and hand over Tibet to the Tibetan government in exile with the Allied forces securing its Borders. Create a coalition base In PoK to resupply Tibet.
..

And why would coalition troops leave Tibet after that. That's something that Tibetans can't deal with either.
..One need not even go after all of Tibet, Lhasa the capital is less than 100 miles from Indian border. Securing Lhasa and some buffer region around that, by itself is a major victory. THat will solve the Arunachal border problem for the folks at google maps, once and for all. I think India can maitain supply lines that far for extended period of time around this area. The question though is how to keep the stalemate as a stalemate

Will Chinese keep the occupation of Tibet semi resolved and not reinforce only to hit later. Such halfway attempts won't work with CCP and such big powers.


What’s wrong with having them there? You will have freedom of navigation, a permanent counter check on China and secure passage to Asia. It would counter balance the huge uncertainty we face with great neighbors like a Pakistan and China. I would prefer a allied coalition country as a neighbor vs a communist fascist regime or an Islamic warmongering country

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3880
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby arshyam » 07 Jun 2020 13:11

Too much Tom Clancy-ish thinking going around here. BRF is better than this.

Sravan wrote:
arshyam wrote:Logistics. Just like the Chinese cannot hope to supply their troops if they cross the Himalaya into India proper (which was what happened in '62), we cannot build reliable and stable supply lines that would be safe from interdiction. Even if there is not much threat of interdiction by air, weather is a factor - no road through the Himalaya stays open in the winter, despite best efforts. So we'll have to rely on supplies by air, which would be too expensive given the vast theatre. Plus, there are not many points of natural defense between Tibet and China proper (there is no Himalaya protecting Tibet from China), so we'll need an overwhelming amount of force and gear to properly defend Tibet. Also, Tibet's population is not that high to be able to defend their homeland in numbers. So this is easier said than done.

In short, all the disadvantages that prevent Beijing from stationing more troops in Tibet would apply to us, plus the need to cross the Himalaya for our troops to get there.

What we could do, though, is adopt an aggressive posture along the border and do what China does to us, so they are forced to station more and more people in Tibet. It's not easy for them, given the weather and altitude, making them spend more resources to defend from our threat. Having a conscript army would also make their position uncomfortable (single child problem, discontent, health issues, etc.). In the meantime, we should keep salami slicing wherever possible with the aim to interdict their lines of communication. This is not a strategy to take Tibet, but to make our border position unassailable, while making China uncomfortable enough to sue for peace. They are able to get away with a minimal presence now by needling us and forcing us to station more troops, let's turn the tables on them.

For a full solution for Tibet, we need to be much more powerful, militarily as well as economically, so as to force some concessions from them for Tibet. It's a long term project and won't be solved for a while, at least while the CCP is running the show. The best opportunity would be their next episode of collapse and civil war, which they tend to get into every few centuries. It's been a while since the last one, so let's see. The next best option is to go to war, but there is no political appetite for that in India as liberating Tibet is not the same as defending our home. That leaves the Chinese to start a war, but I find that unlikely as well, for their position in Tibet today is not challenged, and they are sitting pretty controlling their road routes and all water sources. So there is no reason for them to go to war with us.


Crossing the Himalayas vs 2000km of desert. I would think the desert would require air support on China’s side too. If we have US support for resupplies, it’s a technically feasible strategy.

If the Quad countries did a surge and held ground and we increase US pressure from the Eastern front, we can take and hold Tibet. I suggest we pursue this strategy and create a democratic stronghold on the western border. If we get around Pakistan via a slice of Tibet, that has strong geopolitical benefits too. It also cuts China off from the Belt and Road initiative. We effectively control flow of goods in and out of China both on land and sea.

1. How would US "supplies" help change the geographical challenges to maintain logistical support? Kindly explain.
2. Why would the US expend money and manpower to support our need for strategic depth? If they had a problem with China that requires military intervention, won't it be easier to use their navy on the eastern seaboard? Why would they choose this difficult route instead?
3. How well has "US supplies" helped its own troops to sustain in Afghanistan? Isn't Tibet an order-of-magnitude increase in difficulty?
4. If it were that easy to deal with China via the Himalaya and Tibet, why didn't the allies with all their resources at their command, attack Japanese positions in China from Arunachal? Why did they resort to, at best, sustenance-level of supplies to Chiang Kai-shek's troops over the hump? Getting Japan off China would have been worth the cost, wouldn't it?
5. Conversely, why did the Japanese choose to attack India via Myanmar and not China? India was the key to the allied effort in Asia (and Europe too, if food supplies were considered), and would have been a humongous strategic prize for the Japanese, not to mention Bose's attempt to throw the Britshits out of desh. It would have ended the allied effort in Asia in short order. Given these obvious benefits, why didn't they think about it?

Lastly, as a thought exercise, kindly do some research into what it takes to supply 1 of our brigades stationed in, say Lhasa, and share your findings. Routes (road + air), requirements for 1 brigade worth of troops, time taken for a single convoy, amount of material to be sent daily, ammunition, manpower to secure the route, etc. For this theoretical exercise, you can dismiss any Chinese challenge to this supply route.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vishvak » 07 Jun 2020 13:14

What’s wrong with having them there?

And then get into the same church inspired movement of othering of divide and rule one way street of daleet and such. Why kick the can down the road on helpless Tibetans to resolve later what is made difficult in India. Why can't the above things be done by Indians with help of Tibetans. There are examples of ITBP police etc. Why can't we take help of ITBP to diminish, or nullify two front threat instead of kicking the can down the road.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 13:24

arshyam wrote:Too much Tom Clancy-ish thinking going around here. BRF is better than this.

Sravan wrote:
Crossing the Himalayas vs 2000km of desert. I would think the desert would require air support on China’s side too. If we have US support for resupplies, it’s a technically feasible strategy.

If the Quad countries did a surge and held ground and we increase US pressure from the Eastern front, we can take and hold Tibet. I suggest we pursue this strategy and create a democratic stronghold on the western border. If we get around Pakistan via a slice of Tibet, that has strong geopolitical benefits too. It also cuts China off from the Belt and Road initiative. We effectively control flow of goods in and out of China both on land and sea.

1. How would US "supplies" help change the geographical challenges to maintain logistical support? Kindly explain.
2. Why would the US expend money and manpower to support our need for strategic depth? If they had a problem with China that requires military intervention, won't it be easier to use their navy on the eastern seaboard? Why would they choose this difficult route instead?
3. How well has "US supplies" helped its own troops to sustain in Afghanistan? Isn't Tibet an order-of-magnitude increase in difficulty?
4. If it were that easy to deal with China via the Himalaya and Tibet, why didn't the allies with all their resources at their command, attack Japanese positions in China from Arunachal? Why did they resort to, at best, sustenance-level of supplies to Chiang Kai-shek's troops over the hump? Getting Japan off China would have been worth the cost, wouldn't it?
5. Conversely, why did the Japanese choose to attack India via Myanmar and not China? India was the key to the allied effort in Asia (and Europe too, if food supplies were considered), and would have been a humongous strategic prize for the Japanese, not to mention Bose's attempt to throw the Britshits out of desh. It would have ended the allied effort in Asia in short order. Given these obvious benefits, why didn't they think about it?

Lastly, as a thought exercise, kindly do some research into what it takes to supply 1 of our brigades stationed in, say Lhasa, and share your findings. Routes (road + air), requirements for 1 brigade worth of troops, time taken for a single convoy, amount of material to be sent daily, ammunition, manpower to secure the route, etc. For this theoretical exercise, you can dismiss any Chinese challenge to this supply route.


The population density of Tibet is 2.5 persons per sq. Km vs mainland China which is 145 persons per sq. Km. Tibet is scarcely populated and the Alaska of China. It doesn’t have a big Han population and fundamentally shared cultural values form as a function of Climate. Tibet is an alpine climate while China is a tropical / forest climate.

US maintains the biggest arms repository known to man. They can out manufacture and have huge reservoirs of ammunition and guns. Walmart can ship more weapons to their citizens vs our OFB companies to our military. If you are planning to fight a war of attrition, you want them on your side.

Regarding why they will help us. It is easier to hold Tibet from India vs from China. Tibet is naturally separated from China with climate. We simply need to offer them a logistics supply chain through India. US would be all over this to drive forward an attack without facing the full wrath of China’s military.



Civilizations are naturally separated by Climate. If we can create a supply chain to the alpine climate, then we can truly create a buffer between India and China.

US benefits because the war would have a low human capital cost, a huge wealth of resources and future security around the water supply for its allies.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vishvak » 07 Jun 2020 13:29

..It is easier to hold Tibet from India vs from China. Tibet is naturally separated from China with climate. We simply need to offer them a logistics supply chain through India.

Supply who logistics chain from India?! Like this?
https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news ... quer-tibet

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 13:47

vishvak wrote:
..It is easier to hold Tibet from India vs from China. Tibet is naturally separated from China with climate. We simply need to offer them a logistics supply chain through India.

Supply who logistics chain from India?! Like this?
https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news ... quer-tibet


Yes if we could supply rice and food, we should be able to supply a couple divisions. The Chinese have already done a lot of hard work connecting TAR with India for the purpose of salami slicing. Why not use it against them if we have numerical superiority?

khan
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 12 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: Tx

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby khan » 07 Jun 2020 13:50

vimal wrote:Some members here seem to consume too much Ganja for their own good. Stick to twitter or fb please.

:mrgreen: Ganja? Its methamphetamine these warriors are on - ready to send some poor saps to blizkreig the Chinese over the Himalayas.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 13:51

somdev wrote:Nothing beyond recapturing Aksai Chin, GB. Tibet should be left to Dalai Lama and his followers to start an armed insurgency.


Why strategically limit your self. Defending the Himalayas is tougher than defending Tibet. There are only 3-4 roads connecting Tibet to the rest of China. Take those out and hold your ground.

khan
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 12 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: Tx

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby khan » 07 Jun 2020 13:56

SriKumar wrote:Your plan will work for a limited period of time. After that, what happens? How long does the air war continue. Do logistics exist for a 6 month period of interdiction.

THe concept of a limited war is a little tricky. I've seen a Pakistani general talk on TV about a limited short and sharp war against India, and my mental rejoinder was 'what makes you think India will keep it limited'.

Limited war is limited only when the stronger side decides (for whatever reason) to offer a cease fire.
The weaker side offering a cease-fire, especially with land occupied, may or may not be accepted. The weaker side has to be prepared for either possibility, essentially a fight to the finish (and see what that scenario looks like).
As for quad and G7, I see some level of support for India, (to what extent no one knows, it is not in public domain) but will they deploy troops if push come to a shove. If not, then one has to arrange troops from the Indian Army.

There is a bigger question: whether India is prepared for a total war (non-nuclear) and/or a total war (nuclear). This question needs to be decided and answered at the highest levels, and also at the lowest levels (the aam janata on the street).

Added later: The damage, in the evernt of war that goes into Tibet, will NOT be limited to the border for India. One can expect missiles to land in several cities and possibly the capital. Why- because I fully expect India to test Agni IV and Agni V with conventional warheards, sent north east insteand of south east.

My overall point is that even if a war ends up being limited, the country initiating the war has to look at all possible scenarios of the end-game, even if that means asking a third country to intervene (after declaring a cease-fire), or sending more troops to keep a war alive for months.

+1 all these fantasies about grabbing Lhasa and what not are like Pakistani fantasies about grabbing Cashmere.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4002
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby kit » 07 Jun 2020 13:59

Guys, may I ask for a discussion along these lines., the quadrilateral grouping is all fine , but how exactly is the US, Australia Japan etc going to help india if push comes to shove ? ..keep in mind this is still not a full fledged military alliance. I don't care political support which is clapping from sidelines.

Sravan
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 15:15

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Sravan » 07 Jun 2020 14:04

khan wrote:
SriKumar wrote:Your plan will work for a limited period of time. After that, what happens? How long does the air war continue. Do logistics exist for a 6 month period of interdiction.

THe concept of a limited war is a little tricky. I've seen a Pakistani general talk on TV about a limited short and sharp war against India, and my mental rejoinder was 'what makes you think India will keep it limited'.

Limited war is limited only when the stronger side decides (for whatever reason) to offer a cease fire.
The weaker side offering a cease-fire, especially with land occupied, may or may not be accepted. The weaker side has to be prepared for either possibility, essentially a fight to the finish (and see what that scenario looks like).
As for quad and G7, I see some level of support for India, (to what extent no one knows, it is not in public domain) but will they deploy troops if push come to a shove. If not, then one has to arrange troops from the Indian Army.

There is a bigger question: whether India is prepared for a total war (non-nuclear) and/or a total war (nuclear). This question needs to be decided and answered at the highest levels, and also at the lowest levels (the aam janata on the street).

Added later: The damage, in the evernt of war that goes into Tibet, will NOT be limited to the border for India. One can expect missiles to land in several cities and possibly the capital. Why- because I fully expect India to test Agni IV and Agni V with conventional warheards, sent north east insteand of south east.

My overall point is that even if a war ends up being limited, the country initiating the war has to look at all possible scenarios of the end-game, even if that means asking a third country to intervene (after declaring a cease-fire), or sending more troops to keep a war alive for months.

+1 all these fantasies about grabbing Lhasa and what not are like Pakistani fantasies about grabbing Cashmere.


Yes that’s exactly my point. Even if we don’t succeed, the theater will be outside India. Pakistan is able to keep us off balance by stirring trouble for us for the last several decades with minimum loss on their side.

Instead of fighting the terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir, fight in PoK. Instead of fighting China in Ladakh, fight then in Tibet. The same fight has to happen regardless, why not fight it on their territory.

Unless you believe the conflict will not occur. History proves otherwise. History also proves that even when we successfully defend, they attack us again after biding their time.

I’m getting a lot of nay saying and shushing. What is a better alternative with a permanent solution?

When your enemies are collaborating, people are scoffing at getting allies?

amar_p
BRFite
Posts: 497
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby amar_p » 07 Jun 2020 14:17

If India's demand is that Chinese Army must withdraw to April's "status quo ante" positions, then we are not imposing any costs for this Chinese misadventure. Makes us look weak to the Chinese. There has to be a punitive element in our demands so that the other side thinks twice before taking any aggressive steps in the future.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1735
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby schinnas » 07 Jun 2020 15:04

The very fact that some forum members panick at the very mention of taking the war to Chinese theatre and reversing their illegal occupation of Tibet indicates the defeatist mindset we have developed over the years. If one takes out the nuclear equation, India with its MSC, SSB and ITBP is more than capable of taking out China, but if and only if, US were to provide at free of cost, unlimited weapons and ammunition support, incl. smart weapons, ELINT and hi tech support such as jamming enemy radars and satellites. We would also need them to help safeguard Indian ocean from Cheeni subs and help Indian Navy in enforcing a blockade of Straights of Malacca. The Quad should pay for building up of Tibetan defences post war and sign a pact of protection with Tibet. A very massive counter attack is to expected from PLA and threat of n-war would loom.

Also US would need to disable F16s and other US weaponry on Pakistan to avoid any material engagement on the second front.

Edited later to add:
Very difficult proposition but very much needed. China is leaving us no choice. We cannot put up with their intrusions, illegal occupations and salami slicing on the border. Even if we don't end up liberating Tibet, we would teach them a very good lesson and take back occupied territories.

Israel wouldn't have won the Arab Israel war, if they had a defeatist mindset.
Last edited by schinnas on 07 Jun 2020 16:28, edited 2 times in total.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby vishvak » 07 Jun 2020 15:10

..When your enemies are collaborating, people are scoffing at getting allies?

ITBP police are allies and perhaps it deserves to have a detailed proposal of logistics perhaps more than knight with shining armour that the Chinese took advantage of earlier when we dithered.

Larry Walker
BRFite
Posts: 307
Joined: 26 Nov 2019 17:33

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Larry Walker » 07 Jun 2020 15:13

You surprise PRC and lay siege to Lhasa for few days, create PR material that shows that India has wrested Tibet and then withdraw back into our side of the mountains and bait the PRC to come and fight us with all their might. They will have to show that they can capture Indian territory of some significance before cease-fire, else they will loose their face and control of Hans. Then we grid them in our mountains where their fancy toys will not cause any significiant change in power dynamics. But we need to beef up on basics first - artillery, tactical missles, transport and logistics including more roads, railways,airlift and heli-lift, submarines and sea-denial, ISR assets including AWACS. We can build-up each of these areas as we are almost self-reliant in these. And have some silver bullets like Rafale and Meteors etc.

khan
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 12 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: Tx

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby khan » 07 Jun 2020 15:19

Let me offer you two options:

(a) do something big, make a point, lose control of the escalatory ladder and kill a few thousand troops.

(b) grind out a few months of diplomacy with deployed troops keeping the pressure on, build those roads (which is the whole point) and have the Chinese withdraw by the winter.

What option would you go for? GOI is going for (b).

AshishA
BRFite
Posts: 222
Joined: 07 Feb 2018 22:10

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby AshishA » 07 Jun 2020 15:23

I think we are destined to go to war if not today sometime later in the future. China is very clear on the war of unification which it intends to fight. And they are biding their time and building up their strengths to strike us when we are at our weakest. And before that they intend to strangle us by creating enemy states around us and threatening to cut off us our water supply. Now when China will start building dams over the brahmaputra river and deprive our people of water, we will have no choice but to take on China. But by that time Chinese would be well prepared fully expecting us to attack. Nuclear or Non nuclear we will have to fight at some point. And I prefer we do it on our terms. Not theirs.

Larry Walker
BRFite
Posts: 307
Joined: 26 Nov 2019 17:33

Re: India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Postby Larry Walker » 07 Jun 2020 15:42

So let me ask a basic question - if Chinese know that anyways they will withdraw when winter sets in, then why all this hullaboo ?? I am confused - what do the Chinese want and more importantly what do they gain by the current situation ?? If all it predicates is to have chai-biskoot till it snows and then Hans go back home ??


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jaeger, Karna, milindc, VTanMay, Yashu and 51 guests