India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020 - Part 2

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 18 Sep 2020 06:53

Surajsan,

This thread is being derailed. Can we please stick to the border security topic?
The COAS general MM Naravane visited troops at the front lines and very little info here, yet we're talking about loud Punjabi songs and Bruce Lee? I thought Ramana's warning was pretty clear, no whining and keep the signal-to-noise ratio high or face a ban.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 18 Sep 2020 07:33

Mort ji point taken

All request you to move different types of intimidating music, Sardarji fears and Xitler analysis to the thread in strat forum

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 18 Sep 2020 07:58

abhik wrote:This slightly old data but shows that even the ~3m population of tibet is highly concentrated in the Shigatse - Lahsa area (which is close to Sikkim and east AP border) and to the east edge of the province. Its the same story in the Xinjiang districts adjoining Ladakh (north of Spanggur). IMO our border should ideally be along the Kunlun towards the north and Kailash range between north and northeast.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Da ... inghai.png
Tibetan population density based on 1990 county/prefecture census data for Qinghai Province and the Tibetan Autonomous Region. Increasingly darker shades indicate higher population densities. Source: The Tibetan & Himalayan Library [www.thlib.org].

Btw, not sure if you noticed, but this map shows Arunachal and some portions of Sikkim as a part of Tibet. Perfect example of cartographic aggression - even though the map source is not Chinese, it glibly incorporates a full Indian state into Tibet. Do we really need to reference and publicize these kind of maps on the forum?

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 18 Sep 2020 08:00

It’s a slow news day

why don’t you review news yourself instead of complaining about what you see here and asking others to review something ?

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 18 Sep 2020 08:24

Suraj wrote:India doesn't carry such feelings about Chinese. Heck, we don't even fear the Japanese - unlike rest of Asia that got overrun, we stopped the IJA at our borders and served as the base to take on the Japanese in China. Naturally the Chinese don't appreciate anything we did in that context. First the turbaned Indian soldier humiliated them. Then the turbaned Indian soldier was part of liberating them. All the while they could do nothing.

Replied in the neutering thread: viewtopic.php?p=2461010#p2461010

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 18 Sep 2020 09:21

Replied to a few other posts about Indian troops deployed to China in the neutering thread.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Sep 2020 09:24

Is Pangong Tso just a smokescreen and Depsang China’s main target? - Rajat Pandit, ToI

The strategically-located Depsang Plains in Ladakh did not find any mention in defence minister Rajnath Singh’s detailed statements in Parliament despite Chinese soldiers blocking all Indian patrols there since April and a massive mobilisation by the two rival armies in the region.

A senior defence official, asked about this by TOI on Thursday, said Depsang was an “old lingering issue” that should not be “equated or conflated” with the “new flashpoints” in Pangong Tso-Chushul, Gogra-Hotsprings and Galwan Valley area this year.

“There is no immediate military stand-off at Depsang, where there are huge overlapping claims about the Line of Actual Control (LAC). There is no fresh attempt to change the status quo there,” he added.

But there is growing concern in security circles that China could be diverting India’s attention from the far more important Depsang region through its aggressive manoeuvres in the Pangong Tso-Chushul and other areas lower down along the frontier in Ladakh.

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has for the last five months been actively blocking Indian soldiers in Depsang from going to their traditional Patrolling Points 10, 11, 11A, 12 and 13, which are well short of India’s LAC claim further to the east there, as was earlier reported by TOI.

PLA troops camping near the ‘Bottleneck’ or ‘Y-junction’ area in Depsang, which is around 18 km inside what India perceives to be its territory, swing into action to block an Indian patrol whenever they see it approaching.

China, in fact, claims 972 square km of territory in the region. A core concern for Beijing is that the Depsang-Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO) sector is in close proximity to its Western Highway G-219 {Ahh . . . G219 is itself on Indian territory and China would use circular logic to claim Depsang for being too close to its comfort for G219?} , which connects the Tibetan Autonomous Region to Xinjiang.

The PLA has deployed over 12,000 troops, with tanks and artillery guns, from its 4th Motorised Infantry Division and 6th Mechanised Infantry Division, in its depth areas across the LAC there.

Since May, India has also counter-deployed with two additional brigades (each has around 3,000 troops) as well as tank and mechanised infantry regiments in the Depsang tabletop plateau, which located at an altitude of 16,000 feet provides access to the DBO advance landing ground and the critical Karakoram Pass in the north.

“India could be playing into the hands of China by trying to delink Depsang from the friction points to the south and allowing the PLA to get away with what it wants,” another officer said.

“Unlike the Line of Control with Pakistan, which is physically held with permanent deployments, the only way to press our claim along the LAC is to patrol to our PPs. But access to our PPs has been cut off in Depsang,” he added.

The last major troops face-off in Depsang Plains, incidentally, took place in April-May 2013. The PLA troops had then intruded 19 km across the LAC to camp at the Raki Nalla area, with the confrontation finally resolved after 21 days of hectic diplomatic negotiations.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Sep 2020 09:43

For the People's P*bic of China,the PPC,its new nameplate, ,everything is an " old lingering issue". They will even go back to pre- Raj times to buttress their POV.India similarly should go back to ancient history where large swathes of Tibet today was territory of Indian rulers and stake our ancient claim. Israel stakes its claim to the " Promised Land", going back to the time of Moses! We are playing into PPC hands by restricting our claims to McMahon,etc.

williams · Post by **williams** » 18 Sep 2020 10:16

“India could be playing into the hands of China by trying to delink Depsang from the friction points to the south and allowing the PLA to get away with what it wants,” another officer said.

“Unlike the Line of Control with Pakistan, which is physically held with permanent deployments, the only way to press our claim along the LAC is to patrol to our PPs. But access to our PPs has been cut off in Depsang,” he added.

The last major troops face-off in Depsang Plains, incidentally, took place in April-May 2013. The PLA troops had then intruded 19 km across the LAC to camp at the Raki Nalla area, with the confrontation finally resolved after 21 days of hectic diplomatic negotiations.

Patrolling points are there to keep watch of these areas and need to be backed by force if interdicted. I think we gave our game away by going for long drawn negotiations. Probably Chins think that is the max we will do and keep walking all over us. How could India be playing into the hands of the Chinese if we stopped patrolling these areas many years back? We have enough troops deployed in DBO to defend it.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 18 Sep 2020 10:37

What are the odds that PLA has employed Pakis to monitor our communications channels.

Pakis have decades of experience in Kashmir monitoring our comms and are familiar with our SOPs. Collaboration in this aspect between the Pakis and PLA cannot be ruled out.

williams · Post by **williams** » 18 Sep 2020 10:54

Paul wrote:What are the odds that PLA has employed Pakis to monitor our communications channels.

Pakis have decades of experience in Kashmir monitoring our comms and are familiar with our SOPs. Collaboration in this aspect between the Pakis and PLA cannot be ruled out.

What sort of monitoring? We did a surgical strike, Balakote ops, and threw article 365 to trash and they did not have a clue. They will have to close all of their airspace for months in the fear of repeating the same. They probably have ww2 basic hum.int capability to see some troop movement here and there and that is about it.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 18 Sep 2020 11:16

Brahma Chellany
On China, India is making a mistake

Successive governments have put more faith in diplomacy than the armed forces in achieving security objectives. Diplomacy can accomplish little in the absence of strategic vision and resolve or adequate leverage. The diplomatic blunders of 1948 (Kashmir dispute’s internationalisation), 1954 (Panchsheel Agreement’s acceptance of the “Tibet region of China”), 1960 (Indus Waters Treaty), 1966 (Taskhent) and 1972 (Simla) have imposed enduring costs.

What explains India’s “hug, then repent” proclivity over the decades? Why has India repeatedly cried betrayal, not by friends, but by adversaries in whom it reposed trust? Why has Indian diplomacy rushed to believe what it wanted to believe? What makes India keep repeating the cycle of bending over backward to court a foe and then failing to see aggression coming (as in Kargil, Pathankot or Doklam)? Why does India stay at the receiving end of its foes’ machinations? Why has it never repaid China with its own “salami slicing”?

One reason history repeats itself is that virtually every prime minister, although unschooled in national security at the time of assuming office, has sought to reinvent the foreign-policy wheel, rather than learn from past blunders. Another reason is that intellectuals and journalists shrink from closely scrutinising foreign policy moves. Overselling outcomes of summit meetings with China from 1988 to 2019 for leadership glorification has led to India’s worst China crisis after the 1962 war. For example, five separate border-management agreements were signed at summits between 1993 and 2013, with each accord hailed in India (but not China) as a major or historic “breakthrough".

China is showing it is a master in protracting negotiations to buy time to consolidate its territorial gains, while exploring the limits of its adversary’s flexibility and testing its patience. For Beijing, any agreement is designed to bind not China but the other side to its terms. It is seeking fresh CBMs to make India respect the new, Chinese-created territorial status quo and to restrict India from upgrading its border infrastructure. China’s foreign minister claims the “consensus” reached at Moscow is to “meet each other halfway”. Meeting China halfway will validate its “10 miles forward, 5 miles back” strategy, with China gaining half but India losing half. This illustrates Beijing’s definition of “give and take” — the other side gives and China takes.

Yet, India has placed its faith in diplomacy ever since it discovered China’s intrusions in early May. It reined in its armed forces from taking counter-actions until recently. Had it permitted proactive counter-measures earlier, once sufficient acclimatised troops and weapons capability were in place, China’s territorial gains would have been more limited.

China used the talks to make additional encroachments, especially on the critical Depsang Y-Junction, which controls access to several areas. Of all the land grabs China has made, the largest is in Depsang, the sector of utmost importance to Indian defences. Yet, this has received little attention.

Diplomacy is unlikely to deliver the status quo ante India seeks. In fact, China seems intent on continuing, below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure along the entire frontier until India acquiesces to its demands, including reconciling to the new status quo.

Will China’s win-without-fighting warfare campaign help create a new India steeped in realism and determined to break the cycle of history repeating itself? At a minimum, it promises to shake up India’s business-as-usual approach to national security.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 18 Sep 2020 11:20

China suffered 'far fewer' casualties than India in Galwan clash, Chinese media admits damage
China suffered 'far fewer' casualties than India in Galwan clash, Chinese media admits damage said editor of Chinese government mouthpiece, Global Times, while rejecting the remarks of Defence Minister Rajnath Singh.

In doing so, the Chinese side has acknowledged that troops on their side suffered casualties in the violent clash in June in which 20 Indian soldiers were killed and many others injured. India has maintained that the Chinese side suffered heavy losses and more casualties compared to India.

Tagging an Indian news report on Rajnath Singh’s statement, Global Times editor-in-chief Hu Xijin said in a tweet, “As far as I know, the death toll of Chinese troops in Galwan Valley clash on June 15 is far fewer than 20 deaths of Indian troops. No Chinese soldiers was captured by Indian troops, but PLA captured many Indian soldiers that day.”

The Global Times is published by the People's Daily, the official newspaper of China's ruling Communist Party.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 18 Sep 2020 11:29

Now Shekhar Gupta highlights the importance of Depsang:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AHE059fsd0

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 18 Sep 2020 11:46

Suraj wrote:It’s a slow news day why don’t you review news yourself instead of complaining about what you see here and asking others to review something ?

Analysis of the news is what we get from some posters here which is quite insightful. Otherwise Baba Banaras for just news is plenty of fun.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 18 Sep 2020 12:03

Given that we've dharmically decided not to occupy Black Top and Helmet Top

Given that our access and hence depth at Depsang Plains is restricted,

Given that Depsang areas are 100 km or possibly lesser from Siachen,

Given that Siachen is the main source of the Nubra River that drains into the Shyok River that drains into Indus River

There is a serious threat to the Watershed via Depsang that can possibly result in the Chinese rolling down the drainage areas.

Even if the present status quo is maintained, the Chinese will have made significant gains.

Ladakh is the 7th largest territory in India and bigger than Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Bihar & West Bengal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... ia_by_area

Presently the Chinese are blocking in the Y junction bottleneck.

Forget rockets and artillery, even the 120 mm mortar with 10 km range can shell the DSDBO road from Y Junction 7 km away.

https://ofb.gov.in/unit/pages/GCF/detai ... mortar-e-i

Happy to be corrected, but the bend at Galwan where the clash happened is still in Chinese control, after "de-escalation" and "dis-engagement". The bend gives the Chinese line of sight to all Indian positions in the valley. From that bend, the Chinese spotters can call in artillery fire on the entire length of Indian positions.

So to summarize, while we've occupied some strategic positions overlooking Spanggur Gap, the Chinese still retain all the gains they have made so far. And as time flies by, the gains get consolidated and become permanent.

No one is even giving the scantest respect or regard to the "Indian" perception of the LAC in any area that Chinese have crossed and consolidated (refer Depsang & Galwan maps)

LakshmanPST · Post by **LakshmanPST** » 18 Sep 2020 12:12

Dilbu wrote:Brahma Chellany
On China, India is making a mistake

Brahma Chellaney is criticizing each and every diplomatic move and writing long articles on every word, letter, comma & spelling mistake in official statements...
Whatever may be his agenda, I stopped taking him seriously after he kept claiming that China occupied new areas in Galwan sector without any proofs to back up his claim...

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 18 Sep 2020 12:19

^^^It seems he's arguing against diplomacy and implying the time is for action. However, in the mountains you need a 3:1 to 5:1 numerical superiority by any side to launch an offensive. It is effectively a stalemate at worst from the Indian PoV.

rpartha · Post by **rpartha** » 18 Sep 2020 12:41

Just trying to understand whether China is buying time or actually ran out of option - will onset of Winter give any tactical advantage to China in terms of motorized or rocket forces...??

rpartha · Post by **rpartha** » 18 Sep 2020 12:43

I am searching and came across this article too

https://www.indiatoday.in/news-analysis ... 2020-09-18

Many within China believe that its India policy is lacking strength and its military deterrence against India is proving ineffective. The questions doing rounds among Chinese strategic circles are that despite India’s “all-out attack”, why has the government still not taken “equal” countermeasures? Some Chinese strategists say the Chinese govt is either avoiding conflict, or it is secretly planning a counterattack.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Sep 2020 13:03

Dilbu wrote:Brahma Chellany
On China, India is making a mistake
China used the talks to make additional encroachments, especially on the critical Depsang Y-Junction, which controls access to several areas. Of all the land grabs China has made, the largest is in Depsang, the sector of utmost importance to Indian defences. Yet, this has received little attention.

Diplomacy is unlikely to deliver the status quo ante India seeks. In fact, China seems intent on continuing, below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure along the entire frontier until India acquiesces to its demands, including reconciling to the new status quo.

Will China’s win-without-fighting warfare campaign help create a new India steeped in realism and determined to break the cycle of history repeating itself? At a minimum, it promises to shake up India’s business-as-usual approach to national security.

Chellany is a propogandist at best and the highlighted part is the best illustration.

Y-junction is supposed to "control access" to "several areas" making is sound like Spanggur gap. From whatever little I have seen of the Y-junction, it is just a point on the map that was/is used by Indian patrols to mount their regular patrol. The terrain surrounding the y-junction is good for infiltration, nalas and all but not suitable for an invasion.

BUT now that the Chinese have blocked Indian patrol access beyond, it has suddenly become a short of "choke point" that "controls access to **several areas**".

Anyone who has studies the map around the Y-junction and the area patrolled will immediately know that there are many pathways to the area beyond including from the Trach HQ side (easy) and Jeewan/Jeong nala side (easy) and quite a few paths in between (tough but doable).

The two things that make the struggle for y-junction worthwhile is that IFF the Chinese side permanently establish base here
1. Permanent loss of substantial territory
2. Bring our camp at the base on the patrol point, can't spell the name without looking up but it starts with B, AND DSDBO road that much nearer to to the Chinese positon.

Again, he misses the woods for the tree. India does recognise that diplomacy us unlikely to deliver status quo ante. Why else would it have done re-adjustment at upwards of 40 points? However India is interested in avoiding a shooting match IFF it can be avoided.

China may be intent on "below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure" BUt what was the GOI/IA's readjustment about? Was it not a "below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure"?

Finally, the new status quo, at least in the Pangong tso sector suits India while the details of the situation around Depsang are not clear beyond the blocking of patrols. BOTH sides have assembled massive force in that sector so the game is still fluid.

chola · Post by **chola** » 18 Sep 2020 13:13

SSridhar wrote:
chola wrote:Prisoners and film. We lacked both at Galwan.
No, we didn't. We had both at Galwan.

If we had them then what good are they when they are hidden? We publicized our dead, they didn't. They publicly returned 10 prisoners to us while we didn't for any of theirs. So how would the chini public know anything of this even if they weren't being censored?

To be honest if we are already banning chini apps and pissing in their face with our rhetoric then what reason do we have to withhold publicizing pictures and prisoners if we had them?

If what you say is true then the Indian Army need to capture and kill so many chini soldiers that even the GOI can't cover up chini prisoners and dead for whatever reason. We need a Tsushima Strait scenario where an entire formation is annihilated so no one on either side can deny chit. Having thousands of prisoners and dead bodies littering a valley that can't be covered up.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 18 Sep 2020 13:51

If wishes were horses!

http://mil.m4.cn/2020-09/1369870.shtml

Wang Hongguang: If the Indian army offends the four policies, it will be destroyed!

rpartha · Post by **rpartha** » 18 Sep 2020 14:22

Pls find a new tweet from Nitin...

Nitin A. Gokhale
@nitingokhale
·
5h
I am glad
@rwac48
has revised/corrected his info on black top. Emphasising this because many of you had quoted Gen Panag to ridicule my information that Helmet and Black top heights are NOT in India’s possession. The map depicts the current positions

https://twitter.com/nitingokhale/status ... 06144?s=20

pahadig · Post by **pahadig** » 18 Sep 2020 16:28

Unconfirmed reports of Tibet National Anthem being played at LAC in Ladakh to lift Morale of PLA Troopers in response to punjabi songs

https://twitter.com/MeghUpdates/status/ ... 7249899520

kit · Post by **kit** » 18 Sep 2020 16:39

pankajs wrote:
Dilbu wrote:Brahma Chellany
On China, India is making a mistake

Chellany is a propogandist at best and the highlighted part is the best illustration.

Y-junction is supposed to "control access" to "several areas" making is sound like Spanggur gap. From whatever little I have seen of the Y-junction, it is just a point on the map that was/is used by Indian patrols to mount their regular patrol. The terrain surrounding the y-junction is good for infiltration, nalas and all but not suitable for an invasion.

BUT now that the Chinese have blocked Indian patrol access beyond, it has suddenly become a short of "choke point" that "controls access to **several areas**".

Anyone who has studies the map around the Y-junction and the area patrolled will immediately know that there are many pathways to the area beyond including from the Trach HQ side (easy) and Jeewan/Jeong nala side (easy) and quite a few paths in between (tough but doable).

The two things that make the struggle for y-junction worthwhile is that IFF the Chinese side permanently establish base here
1. Permanent loss of substantial territory
2. Bring our camp at the base on the patrol point, can't spell the name without looking up but it starts with B, AND DSDBO road that much nearer to to the Chinese positon.

Again, he misses the woods for the tree. India does recognise that diplomacy us unlikely to deliver status quo ante. Why else would it have done re-adjustment at upwards of 40 points? However India is interested in avoiding a shooting match IFF it can be avoided.

China may be intent on "below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure" BUt what was the GOI/IA's readjustment about? Was it not a "below the threshold of armed conflict, coercive military pressure"?

Finally, the new status quo, at least in the Pangong tso sector suits India while the details of the situation around Depsang are not clear beyond the blocking of patrols. BOTH sides have assembled massive force in that sector so the game is still fluid.

I have only this to say to BC., On India, China is making a mistake

nam · Post by **nam** » 18 Sep 2020 17:00

https://twitter.com/ananthkrishnan/stat ... 1479315458

Chinese strategic expert Yan Xuetong speaking
@ics_delhi
, says on current problems in India-China relations: 'the view in Chinese eyes is current government in India has given up non-alignment and has motivation to become a US ally, using non-alignment as a cover to make policy'

As I expected, the Chinis have already decided that we will be allying with US in the future. This will mean a major threat to Tibet in the future, once the border roads are done. They will also assume, US troops/asset will in future, deploy in India nearer to LAC.

So Chini will NOT resolve the border. Otherwise they loose leverage over us to control our behavior. In 2 years the roads will be done, so this last opportunity that they can intrude and stop the roads.

Didn't do it in 2019, as I assume they though Modi will loose. Once he won, Xi came running to India. Xi must have asked Modi not to become US ally. Modi gave no such promise or must have countered with Chini relation with Pak.

Hence in 2020... But Galwam clash poured water on their plans... to stop the road build.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 18 Sep 2020 17:18

pahadig wrote:Unconfirmed reports of Tibet National Anthem being played at LAC in Ladakh to lift Morale of PLA Troopers in response to punjabi songs
https://twitter.com/MeghUpdates/status/ ... 7249899520

Unfortunately they will have no idea what the song is about. Such is the degree of cutoffness of the Chinese thanks to the great fire wall and general disinterest of Tibetan affairs among Han population.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 18 Sep 2020 17:25

Aditya_V wrote:https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... s-6599063/

No ground lost in Depsang but India hasn’t accessed large parts for 15 years

Clearing the air on the situation in the Depsang Plains in Ladakh, where China has been blocking India’s access to four traditional patrolling points since April this year, a top security officer has told The Indian Express that while there has been no loss of ground this time around, Indian troops have not had access to a large chunk of territory on their side of the Line of Actual Control for “more than 10 to 15 years” now.
SO UPA 1 and 2 handed this to China, soo much for the Ajai Shukla types and supporters and Pappu's.

Posting this again as after deployments with PLA being in defensive the usual suspects have been putting the same misinformation In Depsang, truth is we have not been able to access these areas since 2005-10 period when the Government and beauracrats of the day put a lid on the loss.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 18 Sep 2020 18:05

Aditya, irrespective of who did it, and yes, the UPA did stop both infra development and military operations,

the real issue is that Karakoram Pass is India's only access to Central Asia. DBO guards it.

Today the DBO airfield is 30 km from Chinese positions - well within artillery range. The Darbuk–Shyok-DBO Road is 7 km from Chinese positions - well within mortar ranges.

This is the only flat area near Siachen and offers employment of mechanized forces. Its 80 km from Siachen. There is barely sufficient depth to keep the Chinese from interfering in Siachen.

Losing this area puts our entire Siachen deployment at risk as well as all gains since 1980's

https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... s-6599063/

sooraj · Post by **sooraj** » 18 Sep 2020 18:41

@MeghUpdates
·
4m
Not able to bear Cold weather (Just Started) , Indian positions have witnessed PLA Troopers being carried from forward posts to Field Hospital on Stretchers

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 18 Sep 2020 18:58

yensoy wrote:
pahadig wrote:Unconfirmed reports of Tibet National Anthem being played at LAC in Ladakh to lift Morale of PLA Troopers in response to punjabi songs
https://twitter.com/MeghUpdates/status/ ... 7249899520
Unfortunately they will have no idea what the song is about. Such is the degree of cutoffness of the Chinese thanks to the great fire wall and general disinterest of Tibetan affairs among Han population.

It is logical.According to Tibetian diaspora, young Tibetian are forced to fight on hights. It has been confermed several time. IA has to announce that any Tibetian POW will be taken to a meeting with Dalai Lama. That will bring a mass desertations in PLA.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 18 Sep 2020 19:01

Lisa wrote:If wishes were horses!

http://mil.m4.cn/2020-09/1369870.shtml

Wang Hongguang: If the Indian army offends the four policies, it will be destroyed!

The Chinese love their numbers & think it makes them grandiose: "The 4 policies", "1000 grains of sand", "The five point palm exploding heart technique"

chola · Post by **chola** » 18 Sep 2020 19:12

^^^ Sorry, this thread is turning into a badly dubbed kung fu movie of the kind I used to watch as a kid.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 18 Sep 2020 19:21

chola wrote:
SSridhar wrote: No, we didn't. We had both at Galwan.
If we had them then what good are they when they are hidden? We publicized our dead, they didn't. They publicly returned 10 prisoners to us while we didn't for any of theirs. So how would the chini public know anything of this even if they weren't being censored?

To be honest if we are already banning chini apps and pissing in their face with our rhetoric then what reason do we have to withhold publicizing pictures and prisoners if we had them?

If what you say is true then the Indian Army need to capture and kill so many chini soldiers that even the GOI can't cover up chini prisoners and dead for whatever reason. We need a Tsushima Strait scenario where an entire formation is annihilated so no one on either side can deny chit. Having thousands of prisoners and dead bodies littering a valley that can't be covered up.

Adherence to Geneva Convention rules regarding POWs.

sraj · Post by **sraj** » 18 Sep 2020 20:34

tsarkar wrote: This is the only flat area near Siachen and offers employment of mechanized forces. Its 80 km from Siachen. There is barely sufficient depth to keep the Chinese from interfering in Siachen.

Losing this area puts our entire Siachen deployment at risk as well as all gains since 1980's

https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... s-6599063/

Do the IA readjustments on the Kailash Range provide an adequate counter to a PRC move in Depsang? By credibly threatening G219 if needed?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Sep 2020 20:43

The Chinese Depsang gambit has to be countered in that sector ...

IA is on the task. Apart from blocking the IA patrol most of the Chinese buildup is beyond the Patrol route on the Chinese side as can be made out my the map attacked by @tsarkar.

1. IA has done some readjustment in this sector too ... whatever that means. I expect they have taken up positions on some heights surrounding the Karakoram pass and Depsang plain.
2. IA is deployed in strength both men and machines in the sector.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Sep 2020 21:03

tsarkar wrote:Happy to be corrected, but the bend at Galwan where the clash happened is still in Chinese control, after "de-escalation" and "dis-engagement". The bend gives the Chinese line of sight to all Indian positions in the valley. From that bend, the Chinese spotters can call in artillery fire on the entire length of Indian positions.

So to summarize, while we've occupied some strategic positions overlooking Spanggur Gap, the Chinese still retain all the gains they have made so far. And as time flies by, the gains get consolidated and become permanent.

No one is even giving the scantest respect or regard to the "Indian" perception of the LAC in any area that Chinese have crossed and consolidated (refer Depsang & Galwan maps)

The point about Galwan is not true. Multiple reports by muliple agencies and reporters have confirmed that the ONLY place where full dis-engagement happened was at Galwan and the forces have moved back about 1.5 to 2.0 km each on either side of the LAC which in anycase is on the Chinese side of the bend.

Even Crooklow had to shift the LAC by 1.5 to 2.0 km beyond the bend on the Chinese side to claim that the Chinese are still sitting on LAC while Indian Army moved back by 3 km. Even if you believe him, the Chinese are @ LAC which according to Crooklow is 1.5 to 2.0 km beyond the bend on the Chinese side. Even by his account, the Chinese spotters don't have a line of sight on Indian positions.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 18 Sep 2020 21:19

IA has superior armor in T-90 compared to T-15s. It lacks in mobility, but last I checked, there is no Olympics (Tank Biathlon) for tanks going on here. Perhaps faster tank will help Chinese for faster downhill skiing. I am assuming that the flat plateau where the war will take place can handle both 48 ton T-90 and 36 Ton T-15 (i.e. the ground is strong enough for both), IA will make a mincemeat. Both IAF planes and Apache will show up, and Hotan is not that far from here (I would say 150 miles, by Leh is 50 miles), so will expect PLAAF action as well. Chines have mobile artillery while we have fixed ones (but good for another 20-30 KM from LAC, unless we are planning to go further than that, our lack of mobility should not hurt that much). We will come on Tops at Depsang, let the war start.

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 18 Sep 2020 21:35

tsarkar wrote:Given that we've dharmically decided not to occupy Black Top and Helmet Top

There is another side to it from a veteran. You are free to believe it or not.

https://twitter.com/danvir_chauhan/stat ... 3529612288

Danvir Singh
@danvir_chauhan
Sir, I can tell you with 100% confirmed source information that Helmet and Blacktop are firmly under our boots. In fact our boys are sitting on the saddle of the spur that juts out towards Spangur. Just forget the malicious propaganda by a few.

Some one has misled you on this. Both are with us unless we have vacated them. Which in any case we have not. Secondly Chinese don’t have ‘defended post’ concept. Their doctrine is offensive defence and not the static one.

Some journalists have a compulsion of putting across govt’s version. That version is not always correct. Remember, PM had said there was no Chinese occupation of our area or post. And foreign minister when he said our troops during Galwan episode were armed. Both were wrong.

When I am referring to someone “involved” ( not know of things) then let’s listen the other side as well sir
Quote Tweet

Maj Gen Harsha Kakar
@kakar_harsha
· Sep 12
When it is stated by someone well in the know so strongly, lets avoid questioning or doubting twitter.com/danvir_chauhan…