China doing free publicity for India is a good thing for us. NaMo's fortune to get powerful but self defeating enemies through arrogance is being extended to India as well.
We need a strong enemy to grow from here. US would not have been US of today if there was no USSR.
Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
-
kapilrdave
- BRFite
- Posts: 1566
- Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Is this a Chinese conspiracy to keep India from indigenously producing weapons ?
Last edited by Trikaal on 22 Jul 2017 11:51, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Some comic relief from People's Daily - Chinese echandee is deeply hurt why India shines brighter than China in photos from space
http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0720/c90000-9244331.htmlIndia looks brighter than China on a map, but really it’s not
By Shan Xin (People's Daily Online)
The State Grid Corporation of China has provided three reasons for why India shines brighter than China in the Earth’s City Lights of image, a NASA project to map urbanization.
According to the Shanghai based media outlet The Paper, India has more plains than China and is surrounded by seas on three sides, which makes the lights appear brighter. Forty-percent of Indian lands are plain and the mean attitude of the Deccan Plateau is less than 1,000 meters, while China’s plains make up 12 percent. More than half of China is made up high-altitude plateaus and mountains, home to about 28 percent of population, which makes the western and northern regions of China seem dim in comparison.
Official data shows China is more urbanized than India, as the percentage of urbanization in China is 57 percent compared to India’s 35 percent. In the map, India has more lights from villages, which take up more space, while China has more large cities that appear as big, round lights that are not as intense as the lights in India.
Actually, the map does not measure the intensity of the lights. But India has more blue and green lights and fewer red and orange lights, the latter of which refer to developed areas.
Experts say India is developing at a high speed, but not at the same pace as China both in terms of economy and electricity consumption.
According to the Economic Times in India, more than 300 million Indians are living without electricity and more than 18,000 villages don’t have electricity.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
No fraud by the owner of the Bearing supplier company Sidh Supplies. He won the tender by low bid and got the Chinese to make thema nd stamp them with markings. The GCF officials bought off the bearings even when they failed dimensional attributes. The guy had the cheek to offer to replace for free if it didnt work.Third Dash wrote:Is this a Chinese conspiracy to keep India from indigenously producing weapons ?
But odd thing is the bearings maker in Germany never made that model. Yet GCF specified them!!!
c
-
kapilrdave
- BRFite
- Posts: 1566
- Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I've tweeted a short and sweet version of your post to people's daily and global times. Hope you don't mindyensoy wrote: Idiots. Globaltimes is getting more and more asinine every passing day. Keep up the chest thumping, references to 4x GDP and 1962. We are not fools, we don't have a million person army and billions of dollars worth hardware for a big military parade (as seems to be the case with China). We have spilled blood and continue to spill blood; our last military success was not that long ago in Kargil which showed our resolve when push came to shove. GDP is a number, while China is richer, it is a far more expensive place for most requirements of life, making the GDP difference in effect only around 2:1 or less.
Chinese excel at rhetoric. "She was lying" and "will surely lose" sounds like the article was written by a schoolkid coming to grips with puberty. Analysis, subtlety and nuance don't come when most news borders on propaganda and a clear definition of good and evil.
.https://twitter.com/kapilrdave/status/8 ... 4137417728
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Of course there will be nefarious interests of our traitors too. But I suspect this is a part of a conspiracy. Why would GCF specify a model that isn't even made unless already paid do that ?ramana wrote:No fraud by the owner of the Bearing supplier company Sidh Supplies. He won the tender by low bid and got the Chinese to make thema nd stamp them with markings. The GCF officials bought off the bearings even when they failed dimensional attributes. The guy had the cheek to offer to replace for free if it didnt work.Third Dash wrote:Is this a Chinese conspiracy to keep India from indigenously producing weapons ?
But odd thing is the bearings maker in Germany never made that model. Yet GCF specified them!!!
c
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Such corruption in defense sector should have a sedition charges.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
How concerned should we be about the new Chinese base in Djibouti ?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This is what India Today's screaming headlines say today:
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 08042.html
Working hand-in-glove with their Packee & Chinese masters.. disgusting.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 08042.html
Working hand-in-glove with their Packee & Chinese masters.. disgusting.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Very well put, I am flatteredkapilrdave wrote:I've tweeted a short and sweet version of your post to people's daily and global times. Hope you don't mind
https://twitter.com/kapilrdave/status/8 ... 4137417728
BTW, all the discussion about China cutting off the North-East is premised on a couple of falsehoods/mistaken notions:
1. Somehow that without a link to the rest of India, centrifugal force would push the North-East into orbit. This is absolutely not true. For one, the "North-East" is not homogeneous - there are a lot of sections of society which feel proud to be a part of India. Even those who might have a different view would definitely not wish to be under Chinese occupation for any length of time. Were the Chinese successful in slicing off the chickens neck - what next? How will the millions of "North-East"eners be supplied? From Burma or Bangladesh? Or would China want to oversee a massive human genocide/tragedy?
2. Were China stupid enough to slice thru the chickens neck, the Indian response would definitely not be restricted to local action. This would be major war whose consequences would be felt across the Chinese land/economy, and I am sure China has wargamed it.
I just don't get why we are so paranoid about the Chicken Neck. It's not as if the North-East is a depopulated landmass of strategic or mineral interests which could be exploited by the occupier. This would be China's Afghanistan or Vietnam, were it to happen.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This may be good news for us. Pakistan is not going to be docile like Tibet, with encouragement it may be Lizard's Vietnam. A slow boiling pot will consume a lot of lizard resources and the US may even play an active role.
Gautam
Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Trade deadlock with US dims China's hopes for support on Doklam stand-off
BEIJING: China's hopes of getting the West's support on the Doklam stand-off dimmed with a setback this week for its negotiators at the annual US-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in Washington.
Negotiations between the two sides got into a deadlock as American negotiators demanded an end to Chinese dumping of steel and a reduction in the adverse trade deficit created by Chinese exporters.
Chinese envoys are already facing an uphill task trying to convince western countries that the world's biggest democracy was actually an aggressor on the border with the second biggest economy. It is much easy for China to persuade countries depending on its largesse (like Pakistan) that it is a victim at the Doklam plateau where Indian troops have allegedly trespassed into Chinese territory.
A joint press conference that was to be held by officials of the two countries was abruptly cancelled.
"The press conference was canceled because there was nothing to say. Nothing has been achieved in specific terms," Sourabh Gupta, a senior specialist at the Institute of China America Studies in Washington told TOI. "The US came down very hard on China and I think China balked," he said.
The economic dialogue has resulted in a setback in US-China relationship, which will make it more difficult for Chinese diplomats to get Washington to accept their point of view on the border standoff with India, sources said.
The Trump administration has repeatedly said that Chinese dumping of steel and other goods has led to huge loss of American jobs. During the negotiations, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross said that China's $347 trade deficit with his country was not the result of natural market forces but the absence of "fair, equitable and reciprocal" relationship between the two countries.
"We must create more balance in our trade by increasing exports of made-in-America goods to China," Ross said adding, "There are significant opportunities to do this if we can work together to remove the significant barriers that continue to exist".
Chinese Vice-Premier Wang Yang, who participated in the talks, spoke about the importance of cooperation between the two countries in general terms but had nothing specific to report in terms of outcomes.
"Good cooperation between China and the US, the world's two largest economies, will not only benefit the businesses and people of the two countries, but the entire world," China's state media quoted him as saying.
Cheers
BEIJING: China's hopes of getting the West's support on the Doklam stand-off dimmed with a setback this week for its negotiators at the annual US-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in Washington.
Negotiations between the two sides got into a deadlock as American negotiators demanded an end to Chinese dumping of steel and a reduction in the adverse trade deficit created by Chinese exporters.
Chinese envoys are already facing an uphill task trying to convince western countries that the world's biggest democracy was actually an aggressor on the border with the second biggest economy. It is much easy for China to persuade countries depending on its largesse (like Pakistan) that it is a victim at the Doklam plateau where Indian troops have allegedly trespassed into Chinese territory.
A joint press conference that was to be held by officials of the two countries was abruptly cancelled.
"The press conference was canceled because there was nothing to say. Nothing has been achieved in specific terms," Sourabh Gupta, a senior specialist at the Institute of China America Studies in Washington told TOI. "The US came down very hard on China and I think China balked," he said.
The economic dialogue has resulted in a setback in US-China relationship, which will make it more difficult for Chinese diplomats to get Washington to accept their point of view on the border standoff with India, sources said.
The Trump administration has repeatedly said that Chinese dumping of steel and other goods has led to huge loss of American jobs. During the negotiations, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross said that China's $347 trade deficit with his country was not the result of natural market forces but the absence of "fair, equitable and reciprocal" relationship between the two countries.
"We must create more balance in our trade by increasing exports of made-in-America goods to China," Ross said adding, "There are significant opportunities to do this if we can work together to remove the significant barriers that continue to exist".
Chinese Vice-Premier Wang Yang, who participated in the talks, spoke about the importance of cooperation between the two countries in general terms but had nothing specific to report in terms of outcomes.
"Good cooperation between China and the US, the world's two largest economies, will not only benefit the businesses and people of the two countries, but the entire world," China's state media quoted him as saying.
Cheers
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This is a conflict where India has the upper hand atleast for now. War is all about logistics, intelligence and right planning in addition to the optimal level of required weaponry and troops. Even if the military in terms of men and material is at the level of minimum required, with right intelligence and creative war strategies, wars can be won.
There is absolutely no need to dhoti shiver based on total size of Chinese economy or their road / rail infrastructure in Tibet. Their road / rail infrastructure in Tibet will be taken out within first few hours of conflict escalation. One needs to look at Israel- Arab war of 1967 to draw inference. With the right leadership - political, military and intelligence (Modi, Gen Rawat and Doval) India is better placed now than it was ever before (with the possible exception of Indira Gandhi, Field Marshal Manecksaw and Shri Kao of RAW) to come up with the execute a right war strategy and tactical executions. Even on the diplomatic front, we have more friends than we had in 1971.
Even if Chinese take out our road infrastructure (which isnt easy as they do not have several accurate vertical descent cruise missiles to go around mountains to attack our roads. Only a small part of our roads in Sikkim and other border areas in Arunachal have direct visibility from China, but we have much better visibility of their road infrastructure and can put our short range rockets and artillery to good use.
Regarding size of Chinese economy, it may have a bearing in terms of how much China can withstand a longer extensive conflict. However for short border conflicts, the odds overwhelmingly favor India. For the current conflict, Chinese GDP muscle or manufacturing base is as useful as a big bicep is going to be useful in bed. For the performance in bed (or Himalayan border conflict - whether localized or not), different muscles are useful which Chinese lack.
Instead of our best BRF brains from SSji to Hakeemji to others spending time speculating on what the strategies or war games of China might be imho, we should seize the initiative and consider what can our game plan can be. If we dont think beyond concerned defensive mindset even when we have such a fantastic tactical and leadership advantage and several strategic cards on our side, we can never hope to fully defend India when we dont have such an advantage.
I have put together some obvious options, please add / discuss further. We need discussion around how we can dictate terms and take the initiative in this conflict instead of meekly accepting a perpetual disadvantage by being reactive. Once again we can refer to 1967 Israel-Arab war to understand the importance of setting the agenda in a war or wider conflict.
Option I-A: Timid Offense: Hold the ground and fight an aggressive but defensive warfare with the aim of not conceding an inch of Indian and Bhutanese territory across the 4000 km long border and skillfully leverage economic and world pressure trump cards to bring together a stalemate without much loss of life or property for either side.
Option I-B: Tactical Smartness: Hold all the high ground and plan strategies to take back tactically important terrirory / mountains / plateaus that rightly belongs to us which are under illegal Chinese occuption since 1962 even if it means escalating to a multi front border conflict. But all action limited only to LoC and even any reclaiming of territory limited to tactically important areas along the LoC.
Option I-C: Sword of Durga: Go all out, get back part of GB enough to cut CPEC, and larger part of Aksai Chin and Ladakh under illegal occupation. Be prepared for any eventuality and not hesitate to wage a full scale war if the wider border conflict escalates further. At a very minimum destroy CPEC infrastructure and Karakoram highway that passes through our legal territory in GB and PoK.
Option I-D: Dreamingly Aggressive: With help of CIA and other partners, drop arms and incite local population in Xinjiang and Tibet and take war inside of Chinese territory by aiming to cut off Tibet and Xinjiang provinces. Option (C) becomes just a subset here.
I have prefixed the options with I to indicate these to be various Indian objectives as the default objectives we discuss seem to be Chinese.
Finally, as Hakimji had called out earlier, the title of the thread itself indicates a meek mindset. Can we change the title to Defending against China or Eliminating Chinese threat instead of Managing Chinese Threat. It is a self-defeating mindset.
There is absolutely no need to dhoti shiver based on total size of Chinese economy or their road / rail infrastructure in Tibet. Their road / rail infrastructure in Tibet will be taken out within first few hours of conflict escalation. One needs to look at Israel- Arab war of 1967 to draw inference. With the right leadership - political, military and intelligence (Modi, Gen Rawat and Doval) India is better placed now than it was ever before (with the possible exception of Indira Gandhi, Field Marshal Manecksaw and Shri Kao of RAW) to come up with the execute a right war strategy and tactical executions. Even on the diplomatic front, we have more friends than we had in 1971.
Even if Chinese take out our road infrastructure (which isnt easy as they do not have several accurate vertical descent cruise missiles to go around mountains to attack our roads. Only a small part of our roads in Sikkim and other border areas in Arunachal have direct visibility from China, but we have much better visibility of their road infrastructure and can put our short range rockets and artillery to good use.
Regarding size of Chinese economy, it may have a bearing in terms of how much China can withstand a longer extensive conflict. However for short border conflicts, the odds overwhelmingly favor India. For the current conflict, Chinese GDP muscle or manufacturing base is as useful as a big bicep is going to be useful in bed. For the performance in bed (or Himalayan border conflict - whether localized or not), different muscles are useful which Chinese lack.
Instead of our best BRF brains from SSji to Hakeemji to others spending time speculating on what the strategies or war games of China might be imho, we should seize the initiative and consider what can our game plan can be. If we dont think beyond concerned defensive mindset even when we have such a fantastic tactical and leadership advantage and several strategic cards on our side, we can never hope to fully defend India when we dont have such an advantage.
I have put together some obvious options, please add / discuss further. We need discussion around how we can dictate terms and take the initiative in this conflict instead of meekly accepting a perpetual disadvantage by being reactive. Once again we can refer to 1967 Israel-Arab war to understand the importance of setting the agenda in a war or wider conflict.
Option I-A: Timid Offense: Hold the ground and fight an aggressive but defensive warfare with the aim of not conceding an inch of Indian and Bhutanese territory across the 4000 km long border and skillfully leverage economic and world pressure trump cards to bring together a stalemate without much loss of life or property for either side.
Option I-B: Tactical Smartness: Hold all the high ground and plan strategies to take back tactically important terrirory / mountains / plateaus that rightly belongs to us which are under illegal Chinese occuption since 1962 even if it means escalating to a multi front border conflict. But all action limited only to LoC and even any reclaiming of territory limited to tactically important areas along the LoC.
Option I-C: Sword of Durga: Go all out, get back part of GB enough to cut CPEC, and larger part of Aksai Chin and Ladakh under illegal occupation. Be prepared for any eventuality and not hesitate to wage a full scale war if the wider border conflict escalates further. At a very minimum destroy CPEC infrastructure and Karakoram highway that passes through our legal territory in GB and PoK.
Option I-D: Dreamingly Aggressive: With help of CIA and other partners, drop arms and incite local population in Xinjiang and Tibet and take war inside of Chinese territory by aiming to cut off Tibet and Xinjiang provinces. Option (C) becomes just a subset here.
I have prefixed the options with I to indicate these to be various Indian objectives as the default objectives we discuss seem to be Chinese.
Finally, as Hakimji had called out earlier, the title of the thread itself indicates a meek mindset. Can we change the title to Defending against China or Eliminating Chinese threat instead of Managing Chinese Threat. It is a self-defeating mindset.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I have a question. Often it is stated that India controls China's jugular vein through Malacca Straits. My question is that in case of war, if we block Malacca, what is stopping China from just going around Indonesia(closer to Australia) Sure the route will cost a little extra but I guess such costs will be acceptable in a war scenario.
Also, do we have the naval capability to block this route as well as Malacca at the same time ?
Also, do we have the naval capability to block this route as well as Malacca at the same time ?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
[g.sarkar :g.sarkar wrote:This may be good news for us. Pakistan is not going to be docile like Tibet, with encouragement it may be Lizard's Vietnam. A slow boiling pot will consume a lot of lizard resources and the US may even play an active role.
Gautam
Sir Ji, with due respect and reverence the Clapistanis will - as JEM Ji stated - will Chop Off their Nuts to spite their Dicks (or similar words).
Just as the Islamic Countries are IMPOTENT in respect of the Chinese effort to cleanse the Muslim Uyghur in Xinjiang - not a "Dickie Bird" from the Two Bastions of Islam i.e. Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran similarly Clapistan will even Eat their Morning Evacuation AS LONG AS THEY CAN HURT INDIA IN GENERAL AND HINDUS, JAINS AND SIKHS IN PARTICULAR!
You can take that to the Bank.
Cheers
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
True. Also the army generals and politicians, the true rulers don't give a f**k about being a colony. They allow US to bomb them with impunity and conduct black ops without a complaint for a few dollars. The majority of population can be fooled with jingoism and machismo against India.Peregrine wrote:[g.sarkar :g.sarkar wrote:This may be good news for us. Pakistan is not going to be docile like Tibet, with encouragement it may be Lizard's Vietnam. A slow boiling pot will consume a lot of lizard resources and the US may even play an active role.
Gautam
Sir Ji, with due respect and reverence the Clapistanis will - as JEM Ji stated - will Chop Off their Nuts to spite their Dicks (or similar words).
Just as the Islamic Countries are IMPOTENT in respect of the Chinese effort to cleanse the Muslim Uyghur in Xinjiang - not a "Dickie Bird" from the Two Bastions of Islam i.e. Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran similarly Clapistan will even Eat their Morning Evacuation AS LONG AS THEY CAN HURT INDIA IN GENERAL AND HINDUS, JAINS AND SIKHS IN PARTICULAR!
You can take that to the Bank.
Cheers
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
When we use the wrong analogy we will come to the wrong conclusion. And no matter what the US invariable is brought into the picture. It just goes on to show our confidence in ourselves or rather the lack of it.
The correct model is Afghanistan and not Vietnam. This time it will be *ordinary* Muslims fighting the godless to protect the *Citedal of Islam*.
The correct model is Afghanistan and not Vietnam. This time it will be *ordinary* Muslims fighting the godless to protect the *Citedal of Islam*.
Last edited by pankajs on 22 Jul 2017 13:56, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Third Dash Ji :Third Dash wrote:I have a question. Often it is stated that India controls China's jugular vein through Malacca Straits. My question is that in case of war, if we block Malacca, what is stopping China from just going around Indonesia(closer to Australia) Sure the route will cost a little extra but I guess such costs will be acceptable in a war scenario.
Also, do we have the naval capability to block this route as well as Malacca at the same time ?
Sorry No Dice!
1. With Oil And Gas Pipelines, China Takes A Shortcut Through Myanmar - Eric Meyer
China has Built the Myanmar Port of Kyaukpyu - 60 Miles South East of Sitwe (Old Name "Akyab") and built Two Pipe Lines - One for Crude and the other for Natural Gas - to Kunming. It can service 300.000 DWT Tankers and the Gas is from Off-Shore Myanmar.
2. Around 1973 the Globtic Tokyo and the Globtic London about 480,000 (Scrapped around 1985) and the Nissei Maru about the same size (1975 - 2003) Loaded full Cargoes from PG to Japan and used the Lambok Straits for the Loaded Passage and Malacca for Ballasted Passage.
Thus China DOES NOT NEED THE MALACCA STRAITS FOR OIL IMPORTS!
Cheers
Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Trade deadlock with US dims China's hopes for support on Doklam stand-off
BEIJING: China's hopes of getting the West's support on the Doklam stand-off dimmed with a setback this week for its negotiators at the annual US-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in Washington.
Negotiations between the two sides got into a deadlock as American negotiators demanded an end to Chinese dumping of steel and a reduction in the adverse trade deficit created by Chinese exporters.
Chinese envoys are already facing an uphill task trying to convince western countries that the world's biggest democracy was actually an aggressor on the border with the second biggest economy. It is much easy for China to persuade countries depending on its largesse (like Pakistan) that it is a victim at the Doklam plateau where Indian troops have allegedly trespassed into Chinese territory.
A joint press conference that was to be held by officials of the two countries was abruptly cancelled.
"The press conference was canceled because there was nothing to say. Nothing has been achieved in specific terms," Sourabh Gupta, a senior specialist at the Institute of China America Studies in Washington told TOI. "The US came down very hard on China and I think China balked," he said.
The economic dialogue has resulted in a setback in US-China relationship, which will make it more difficult for Chinese diplomats to get Washington to accept their point of view on the border standoff with India, sources said.
The Trump administration has repeatedly said that Chinese dumping of steel and other goods has led to huge loss of American jobs. During the negotiations, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross said that China's $347 trade deficit with his country was not the result of natural market forces but the absence of "fair, equitable and reciprocal" relationship between the two countries.
"We must create more balance in our trade by increasing exports of made-in-America goods to China," Ross said adding, "There are significant opportunities to do this if we can work together to remove the significant barriers that continue to exist".
Chinese Vice-Premier Wang Yang, who participated in the talks, spoke about the importance of cooperation between the two countries in general terms but had nothing specific to report in terms of outcomes.
"Good cooperation between China and the US, the world's two largest economies, will not only benefit the businesses and people of the two countries, but the entire world," China's state media quoted him as saying.
Cheers
BEIJING: China's hopes of getting the West's support on the Doklam stand-off dimmed with a setback this week for its negotiators at the annual US-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in Washington.
Negotiations between the two sides got into a deadlock as American negotiators demanded an end to Chinese dumping of steel and a reduction in the adverse trade deficit created by Chinese exporters.
Chinese envoys are already facing an uphill task trying to convince western countries that the world's biggest democracy was actually an aggressor on the border with the second biggest economy. It is much easy for China to persuade countries depending on its largesse (like Pakistan) that it is a victim at the Doklam plateau where Indian troops have allegedly trespassed into Chinese territory.
A joint press conference that was to be held by officials of the two countries was abruptly cancelled.
"The press conference was canceled because there was nothing to say. Nothing has been achieved in specific terms," Sourabh Gupta, a senior specialist at the Institute of China America Studies in Washington told TOI. "The US came down very hard on China and I think China balked," he said.
The economic dialogue has resulted in a setback in US-China relationship, which will make it more difficult for Chinese diplomats to get Washington to accept their point of view on the border standoff with India, sources said.
The Trump administration has repeatedly said that Chinese dumping of steel and other goods has led to huge loss of American jobs. During the negotiations, US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross said that China's $347 trade deficit with his country was not the result of natural market forces but the absence of "fair, equitable and reciprocal" relationship between the two countries.
"We must create more balance in our trade by increasing exports of made-in-America goods to China," Ross said adding, "There are significant opportunities to do this if we can work together to remove the significant barriers that continue to exist".
Chinese Vice-Premier Wang Yang, who participated in the talks, spoke about the importance of cooperation between the two countries in general terms but had nothing specific to report in terms of outcomes.
"Good cooperation between China and the US, the world's two largest economies, will not only benefit the businesses and people of the two countries, but the entire world," China's state media quoted him as saying.
Cheers
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
We can't have it both ways.
IF we have the capacity and the b@lls to block Malacca we should be able tobomb block Myanmar Port of Kyaukpyu. If we don't have the b@lls to block Kyaukpyu we won't block Malacca.
How far is it from Bengal and Andaman bases?
IF we have the capacity and the b@lls to block Malacca we should be able to
How far is it from Bengal and Andaman bases?
Last edited by pankajs on 22 Jul 2017 14:03, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Djibouti is a de faco French colony. They do as the French (The West) please. Just one example....OmkarC wrote:How concerned should we be about the new Chinese base in Djibouti ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Lemonnier
The Chinese THINK they have a base there. In reality its a hotel and a petrol station, both as tenants and not owners.
one more example,
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_a%C3 ... 8_Djibouti
Last edited by Lisa on 22 Jul 2017 14:08, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
the only greeting cheen will get in NE is the end of sharp, fire hardened bamboo sticks and the edges of the "Dahs". i can guarantee you that as a native born and brought up there.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/how-india-c ... hi-1727511
Some portions of the article are quoted:
Some portions of the article are quoted:
We have little hope when folks like this exist and are allowed to do their stuff by the govt. One can understand going on a tour to come back with some assessments but this guy seems to have been coopted by the Chinese and is spewing their bull.During my lecture tour of universities in China last week...
Let us not overplay our hand - building our manufacturing strength and bolstering employment will require encouraging Chinese companies like Foxconn Moron does not even know that Foxconn is Taiwanese and BYD to invest in India's industrial economy. It will also require keeping our markets open to their penetration, whether in electronics (consider how Oppo and Vivo have flourished in India's Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities) or in automotive (encouraging electric cars will require electric car manufacturers, mostly Chinese, to manufacture in India). We need $455 billion of investments in infrastructure development in the next 5 years - Chinese banks can help provide that, albeit only at suitable commercial rates. However, as in the day of Zheng He, China's road to dominating Asia and exporting its overproduction (in areas as varied as capital goods, high speed rail, steel and solar panels) will require access to India's strategic location and its market.
(Feroze Varun Gandhi is a member of the BJP and a two-time member of parliament.)
-
Marten
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
- Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
So we need to help insurgent groups blow up one bridge north of Lhasa and one pipeline in Myanmar.Peregrine wrote:Third Dash Ji :Third Dash wrote:I have a question. Often it is stated that India controls China's jugular vein through Malacca Straits. My question is that in case of war, if we block Malacca, what is stopping China from just going around Indonesia(closer to Australia) Sure the route will cost a little extra but I guess such costs will be acceptable in a war scenario.
Also, do we have the naval capability to block this route as well as Malacca at the same time ?
Sorry No Dice!
1. With Oil And Gas Pipelines, China Takes A Shortcut Through Myanmar - Eric Meyer
China has Built the Myanmar Port of Kyaukpyu - 60 Miles South East of Sitwe (Old Name "Akyab") and built Two Pipe Lines - One for Crude and the other for Natural Gas - to Kunming. It can service 300.000 DWT Tankers and the Gas is from Off-Shore Myanmar.
2. Around 1973 the Globtic Tokyo and the Globtic London about 480,000 (Scrapped around 1985) and the Nissei Maru about the same size (1975 - 2003) Loaded full Cargoes from PG to Japan and used the Lambok Straits for the Loaded Passage and Malacca for Ballasted Passage.
Thus China DOES NOT NEED THE MALACCA STRAITS FOR OIL IMPORTS!
Cheers
Seems like a good move if our Afghan friends can send a team via Xinjiang, and the friendly rebels in Myanmar get a hold of some explosives. Nothing like a shot across the bow to help wake up the Admiral Xi.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
High treason is what it is.brvarsh wrote:Such corruption in defense sector should have a sedition charges.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
AdityaM wrote:Fair point Karthik.
But I still don't know how Tibetans within Tibet after years or re-eduction think and behave. Can they do a present day mukti bahini if required
We are only exposed to Tibetans outside Tibet.
When I see North Koreans express their emotions with robotic similarity on govt approved videos, my personal fear is that Tibetans may not have fallen pray to same
Will desist from further uninformed worry.
---------------------
Normally it is China in the past telling GOI to reign in Indian media.
GOI should now say the same to PRC
I don't think we have enough clear data to assume that they will come to our assistance even informally among the local populace (which is fairly sparse anyway) let alone take up arms, let alone tibetan PLA soldiers mutinying. Anything of the sort should be considered a bonus and not a core assumption, we need to avoid making the stupid mistakes that the PA made in 65.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
BJP should ask this guy to shut up.Bart S wrote:http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/how-india-c ... hi-1727511
Some portions of the article are quoted:
That whole family is problematic, whatever branch it is, and GoI must have nothing to do with them.
-
panduranghari
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Shouldn't he be reprimanded. Why is he even in the party? Dont give him a ticket next time or make him contest from somewhere in WB or KL.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
We should never allow congress into power for another century. They have eaten india from the inside
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Sikkim standoff: India needs to stop looking for reasons why China won't up the ante
http://www.firstpost.com/india/sikkim-s ... 42891.html
Are we sleeping yet again
http://www.firstpost.com/india/sikkim-s ... 42891.html
Are we sleeping yet again
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Could you explain how the article suggests to you that we might be "sleeping yet again"? Is that anxiety or contempt I detect in your query.Iyersan wrote:Sikkim standoff: India needs to stop looking for reasons why China won't up the ante
http://www.firstpost.com/india/sikkim-s ... 42891.html
Are we sleeping yet again
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Guys any in formal deep but not so deep overall military capability write up. in two front war I think Kashmir maybe a joint attack place. Any idea how the objectives, military etc are stacked up?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Infuriating.
With a 20 to 1 IA manpower advantage across the length of our contested area with Cheen. With 31 IAF airbases and hundreds of aircraft within striking distance of the border versus literally a handful of altitude-handicapped cheeni airstrips and just 24 J-10s and J-11s.
Why the fvck are we not kicking their arse instead of looking for "talks"?
We are staring at a monumental military victory but will not do the needful.
With a 20 to 1 IA manpower advantage across the length of our contested area with Cheen. With 31 IAF airbases and hundreds of aircraft within striking distance of the border versus literally a handful of altitude-handicapped cheeni airstrips and just 24 J-10s and J-11s.
Why the fvck are we not kicking their arse instead of looking for "talks"?
We are staring at a monumental military victory but will not do the needful.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Looks like Chola saar will start a war on his own given an opportunity.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I've been banging on the war drum for weeks now.
BTW, there are reports of a chini Type 052D floating without power in the IO somewhere. Would love to see the IN intercept it with warships and put it under observation publicly so we can literally hold one of their main surface combatants hostage.
Why can't we ratchet up tension for a change?
BTW, there are reports of a chini Type 052D floating without power in the IO somewhere. Would love to see the IN intercept it with warships and put it under observation publicly so we can literally hold one of their main surface combatants hostage.
Why can't we ratchet up tension for a change?
Last edited by chola on 22 Jul 2017 16:17, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
From Fakingnews, for some comic relief 
http://www.fakingnews.firstpost.com/wor ... hina-22106
http://www.fakingnews.firstpost.com/wor ... hina-22106
But seriously, this rather than Dhoti Shivering or copy-pasting verbatim without so much as adding critical commentary or context setting, is the appropriate way for Indian media to react to Global Times garbage.China claims Ghatkopar citing presence of 'Mainland China' there
21, Jul 2017 By Sandeep Kadian
Beijing: After Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, China has now claimed that Ghatkopar is a part of China and India should hand over this area back to its rightful owner. Chinese government has said that the presence of ‘Mainland China’ in Ghatkopar clearly shows that this is Chinese territory and India should do the right thing. This latest development comes amidst a lot of tensions between the two neighbours in the tri-junction region of Bhutan, China and India.
Mainland ChinaWill this board cost India Ghatkopar?
This request has totally stumped India and nobody in the Indian government is quite sure how to react to that. There have been suggestions to unleash Arnab but security experts believe the strategy of western frontier may not work with China. Meanwhile, several Chinese papers have published articles saying that India has only 2 options now, agree to Chinese demands or prepare for the battle of Ghatkopar.
Speaking to the international press, a Chinese official said ,”Obviously Ghatkopar is a part of China, you can go and clearly see ‘Mainland China’ written over there. India can’t deny our claim this time like they did with Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. China has never claimed territory of any other country and our peaceful nation will never do it in future either but we will claim what is rightfully ours.”
Meanwhile, as per sources, several residents from South Mumbai have requested the Chinese to take all the Mumbai suburbs.
Last edited by Bart S on 22 Jul 2017 16:26, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chola sir, not convinced by 20:1 advantage. Thier land army is 2.5 times our in size. Not all high altitude acclimated, and not all against the Indian border, but they cannot be so less to give us 20:1 advantage. If anything, plaa has more men trained or can be aclimatized in few weeks giving them the advantage. Mountain warfare is different and with our mountain divisions and men we should score over plaaa plains army converted to fight in the mountains but their mountain divisions maybe as effective. In spite of your 20:1 advantage, I think if we dig deep enough ( hence my question to those who follow these kinds of stuff) the advantage could be 1:.7.
By its nature not big wars can be fought in these mountains and it is going to be slow with technology playing not that big an advantage. All these favor us. Moreover, Chinese can only win few more 1000 sq km, after that they have to step into Indian proper land where their supply lines will be heavily interdicted. Whereas we can win a million sq miles and logistically be in the same footing or better than the plaa. My take, given leadership and objective we cannot be taught a short lesson and long war is what China cannot win.
With tsp in the mix, jk is a possible play. Chinese gain nothing, tsp does, but I think we have decent advantage over tsp. We may or may not loose k but can severe sindh and Baluchistan (in case tsp army is concentrated in k, to overwhelm us they have to leave southern side unguarded). Tsp may gain k but would become a land locked country. Of course new clear detergent is not in play until now.
By its nature not big wars can be fought in these mountains and it is going to be slow with technology playing not that big an advantage. All these favor us. Moreover, Chinese can only win few more 1000 sq km, after that they have to step into Indian proper land where their supply lines will be heavily interdicted. Whereas we can win a million sq miles and logistically be in the same footing or better than the plaa. My take, given leadership and objective we cannot be taught a short lesson and long war is what China cannot win.
With tsp in the mix, jk is a possible play. Chinese gain nothing, tsp does, but I think we have decent advantage over tsp. We may or may not loose k but can severe sindh and Baluchistan (in case tsp army is concentrated in k, to overwhelm us they have to leave southern side unguarded). Tsp may gain k but would become a land locked country. Of course new clear detergent is not in play until now.