India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 05 Sep 2020 22:46

IIRC I read somewhere that there are 65 odd Patrol Points from KKP to Chumur... the article below from print mentions that PP 27 to 31 are in the Spangur Gap area...

IA holds 30 dominating heights in the Spangur Gap area

I like how cleanly the LAC is depicted in the above article - Kala Top is just to the west of where the LAC bulges eastwards on that ridge:

Above article states that IA is on Kala Top but there are deliberately contradictory reports on that.

Other interesting tid bit from Snehesh Alex Philip's twitter feed - Army used "tactical signaling" to "dissuade" PLA from advancing towards Kala Top. I think this is an euphemism for firing in the air...

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 05 Sep 2020 22:46

pankajs wrote:^^ Very likely setup previous to India's move ... Now that India is on the ridge at the Bump, it is very likely the Chinese have taken position on Black top.

When India moved in on the ridge line, why not conquer BT too? I think the BT is undefendable, either for the chinese or Indians. While the ridge line occupied by India runs approximately north to south, the BT ridge line runs east to west. The ridge does not offer protection from fire or snipers as both slopes of the ridge are visible from Indian positions.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 05 Sep 2020 22:52

it looks like IA is sitting on heights right at the LAC like yellow hump etc. the SFF has crossed LAC and is occupying black top that is why people close to IA are saying that IA has not 'crossed' LAC.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 05 Sep 2020 23:02

Thakur_B wrote: Does anyone have the said video?

Probably this one
https://twitter.com/sonamrigzin1/status ... 0241033216

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 05 Sep 2020 23:03

Y I Patel wrote:Given the markings, note what no one in media is talking about - the markings to the northeast of Kala Top

That would be the other arm of the semi-circle, I assume. That ridge line offers a direct line of sight to Sirijap on the North bank of Pangong Tso! It also is the highest ridge line among the 3 that come between Yula pass and this one, essentially offering a direct line of sight to that too.

https://imgur.com/CtbZgYN

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 05 Sep 2020 23:06

Y I Patel wrote:
Other interesting tid bit from Snehesh Alex Philip's twitter feed - Army used "tactical signaling" to "dissuade" PLA from advancing towards Kala Top. I think this is an euphemism for firing in the air...

The north slope and the south slope of BT does not offer protection from fire. They don't look easy to climb either. The east slope might offer some protection from Indian firing but the chinese will have to stop short of the peak.

So Indians are not afraid of escalation then, if they firing. The chinese are.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 05 Sep 2020 23:13

Am I misreading/misunderstanding, but this program states that Finger 8 is secure with India(?!?) Other encouraging sounding information and comments from the guests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrZ6bLUAzF0

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 05 Sep 2020 23:18

Its truly incredible that despite such very close face offs over a vast region involving 1000s of soldiers from each side since weeks and months, there hasn't been all out firing and more. I don't know the RoEs being followed in detail, but I doubt if there is a parallel in history.

Xi come lately may not realise his a$$ is being saved by protocols put in place by saner minds years and years ago and India's principled application of them.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 05 Sep 2020 23:27

manjgu wrote:
hanumadu wrote:
The road with the hair pin bends pass through a lower portion of the black top mountain and it seems to connect to south bank of Pangong Tso rather than to the top of Black Top. If the chinese camps are in the lower portion than at the top of BT hill, we could have captured the top. Perhaps, that's where the two contradicting reports arise from. NG says the chinese camps are still there but other news outlets say we captured BT hill. It could be that both are correct. Though it's unlikely that the chinese would not set up camp right at the top.

Unlikely pla will set up camp at top ...their camp must be till their motor tranasport can reach ... their cameras etc cpuld be at top..imho

If you look closely there is a zig zig track from their post on the ridge-line that ends right on Black Top, and there are also what looks like sangars on the Top (this is a year old images). Anyways the there are new sat images floating around (from Chinese "social media"), showing some of the latest disposition.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 05 Sep 2020 23:32

Narad wrote:
Thakur_B wrote: Does anyone have the said video?
Probably this one
https://twitter.com/sonamrigzin1/status ... 0241033216

Definitely does not look like a video from the "confrontation site" - probably just some random old video.

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 05 Sep 2020 23:42

Varoon Shekhar wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrZ6bLUAzF0

That interview underlines the sorely lacking need for a host who is even remotely listening to what his guests are saying, instead of probably what his producer is saying in his ear or his voices are saying in his head!

4 times his guests said that there is no particular significance to having the ITBP reinforce the IA at these posts because that's their job! It looked like the host was deaf. What a bloody waste of useful guests.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 05 Sep 2020 23:52

^
I hope he was accurate in some of the information! Probably was. But not about Finger 8.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 00:34

Anoop wrote:
Varoon Shekhar wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrZ6bLUAzF0
That interview underlines the sorely lacking need for a host who is even remotely listening to what his guests are saying, instead of probably what his producer is saying in his ear or his voices are saying in his head!

4 times his guests said that there is no particular significance to having the ITBP reinforce the IA at these posts because that's their job! It looked like the host was deaf. What a bloody waste of useful guests.

I think the NewsX anchor is deliberately making them all speak to the significance of ITBP deployment. My understanding of what the experts were saying in implied language and by using the same broad message with subtly different words:

* It is significant to have ITBP deploy under IA command - this only happens under war like situations, so it indicates a very high state of readiness or preparations to take it to the next level
* They all state that ITBP is very capable of static point protection roles. In this case, they are to defend Phurchok La against potential infiltration by PLA teams during hostilities. This kind of deployment of ITBP in an operational role (defense of static positions) frees up IA and SFF resources for other roles that are better performed by IA and SFF (hints - no longer 1962 where IA will be tied down in a defensive role).
* Big message - India is prepared for the next level + long haul, and do not think IA will passively defend the gains made so far

RamSuresh · Post by **RamSuresh** » 06 Sep 2020 00:38

kumarn wrote:https://twitter.com/sneheshphilip/statu ... 90976?s=08

Just like that? Drive through?

Would this be natural if some readjustment had happened north of Sikkim. Baba Banaras rumoured that something was done by IA.

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 06 Sep 2020 00:46

Will go with your interpretation, YIP. But does it really need the ITBP deployment to underline the state of play now?

What is your take on our Reqin La occupation? I can't see the significance, considering that we are always deployed on the adjacent Tsaka La and can see the Rezang La road on the Chinese side of the LAC.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 06 Sep 2020 01:01

Regarding black top area and both armies present.

The PLA camps are very likely on the lower altitude nearer to the road in the valley.

IA action was probably to get to the top from the other side and dominate the heights, getting rid of the PLA ISR equipment.

Also reading some Chinese forums, it seems that the path to many features has a gentler slope on the Indian side of things, compared to the Chinese side.
It will be harder for the PLA to hold those heights, much easier for India forces.

Anoop wrote:Will go with your interpretation, YIP. But does it really need the ITBP deployment to underline the state of play now?

What is your take on our Reqin La occupation? I can't see the significance, considering that we are always deployed on the adjacent Tsaka La and can see the Rezang La road on the Chinese side of the LAC.

One you dominate the heights you secure the gap area which can be used for a mechanized thrust. It effectively closes the gap as a possible point of ingress for an Attacking Force. It also allows the reverse. Provides cover to any IA force if it needs to go through the pass and patrol up to Indian perception of LAC.

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 06 Sep 2020 01:02

RamSuresh wrote:
kumarn wrote:https://twitter.com/sneheshphilip/statu ... 90976?s=08

Just like that? Drive through?
Would this be natural if some readjustment had happened north of Sikkim. Baba Banaras rumoured that something was done by IA.

Strange that they were not detected by PLA at their end of border control, must be complicit to let them through as a trial balloon on how we respond in contrast to them kidnapping 5 of our citizens. I wonder how common a Volkswagen is as opposed to one of the local big five Shanghai General Motors, Dongfeng, FAW, Chang’an, and BAIC?

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 01:07

@anoop - Well, it does not hurt to underscore every signal domestically as well as internationally. Indian media are going to be very closely monitored by everyone, and this piece on ITBP is clearly being played up by multiple media outlets. Some like Nitin Gokhle are upset that ToI released what is clearly an operational map (the one I linked in previous posts), but I suspect that too may be part of the signaling...

By occupying Requin La heights, IMVHO, Indian Army is correcting the basic mistakes of 1962 when the defensive deployments left huge gaps open. None of the accounts of the 1962 Battle of Rezang La even mention Requin La, even though it is right next to Rezang La and the Chinese in 1962 in all probability infiltrated through it to attack Kumaon Regiment deployments in Rezang La from multiple directions... this time, all reports indicate that the ridges north and south of Spangur Gap have been fully under control right up to Requin La, which is at the southern end of this entire area.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 01:16

OMG - that operational map, notice a yellow circle with 27 in it. Looks like location of Patrol Point 27!

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 01:45

IA has better view from Thakung Op Hill (where IA has post too). PP 27 is just down the slope.

BT was blocking the Moldo, the issue was solved on August 29-31.

-Ankit

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 06 Sep 2020 01:51

Y I Patel wrote:By occupying Requin La heights, IMVHO, Indian Army is correcting the basic mistakes of 1962 when the defensive deployments left huge gaps open. None of the accounts of the 1962 Battle of Rezang La even mention Requin La, even though it is right next to Rezang La and the Chinese in 1962 in all probability infiltrated through it to attack Kumaon Regiment deployments in Rezang La from multiple directions... this time, all reports indicate that the ridges north and south of Spangur Gap have been fully under control right up to Requin La, which is at the southern end of this entire area.

But my confusion is because GE puts Reqin La on the Western side of the ridge line. I can understand it if it were on the Eastern side. If we don't already have control over the entire Tsaka La road that connects Chushul and Dungti (which Reqin La abuts), we have bigger problems! So I assume that this is well taken care of already, despite the fact that there are tracks on the Western side of the ridge line that connect to the Tsaka La road near Reqin La. In fact, Maj. Gen. Thapliyal's article linked earlier states that the Tsaka La road was defended well since it was the only route (at that time) connecting Chushul to Leh and it was used for the withdrawal of casualties:

When Rezang La fell it was felt that the Chinese might establish a road block on road Chushul – Tsaka La thus blocking the only exit route of our vehicles and battle casualties to Leh. As has been mentioned earlier in those days no road existed across Chang La to Chushul via Tangtse and all move to Chushul from Leh was via Tsaka La. It was also appreciated that the enemy would require four to five hours to establish the road block after the fall of Rezang La. The main hindrance to this move, however, was the constant shelling of road Chushul – Tsaka La. With effective neutralisation of Chinese guns and mortars, a calculated risk was taken and approximately 100 vehicles comprising second line and a portion of first line transport alongwith all casualties were rushed to Dungti. This timely action saved valuable lives and transport.

Also, GE seems to show posts on either side of the Tsaka La road near Tsaka La, so I think this is another BPM point?

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 06 Sep 2020 02:31

Can IA hold the heights it has occupied recently through winter? If yes, India has less reasons to push for status quo ante.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 02:52

csharma wrote:Can IA hold the heights it has occupied recently through winter? If yes, India has less reasons to push for status quo ante.

India has many reasons to push for status quo ante as of early summer (May 5?).

1. PLA is sitting at ridge of Point 4, so they hold PP 8 to PP 4.
2. IA may gain "advantageous" position at north bank of Pangong Tso but there is no news indicating IA crossed PP4 or ridge of PP4.
3. IA is sitting at heights of many hills at south bank of Pangong Tso but we were patrolling at bottom of west side of those hills anyway.
4. Let's say IA is holding Black Top which we did not control before but the sq area in term of occupation is not same as PP4 to PP8.
5. Last news of Depsang plains is, IA patrols unable to reach area they used to patrol.

-Ankit

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 06 Sep 2020 02:54

I see. Most likely India will use the latest move as a negotiation tactic. But hard to see China agreeing to status quo ante after all this drama.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 06 Sep 2020 03:54

csharma wrote:I see. Most likely India will use the latest move as a negotiation tactic. But hard to see China agreeing to status quo ante after all this drama.

So china would have agreed to status quo before 'this drama'? This drama was because china did not agree for status quo. The 'drama' will only get bigger if they do not agree. I am not sure India wan'ts to return to status quo after this drama. India will extract a much larger concession from china.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 06 Sep 2020 03:59

I meant drama by China. They did all this drama.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 05:09

Anoop wrote: But my confusion is because GE puts Reqin La on the Western side of the ridge line. I can understand it if it were on the Eastern side. If we don't already have control over the entire Tsaka La road that connects Chushul and Dungti (which Reqin La abuts), we have bigger problems! So I assume that this is well taken care of already, despite the fact that there are tracks on the Western side of the ridge line that connect to the Tsaka La road near Reqin La. In fact, Maj. Gen. Thapliyal's article linked earlier states that the Tsaka La road was defended well since it was the only route (at that time) connecting Chushul to Leh and it was used for the withdrawal of casualties:

When Rezang La fell it was felt that the Chinese might establish a road block on road Chushul – Tsaka La thus blocking the only exit route of our vehicles and battle casualties to Leh. As has been mentioned earlier in those days no road existed across Chang La to Chushul via Tangtse and all move to Chushul from Leh was via Tsaka La. It was also appreciated that the enemy would require four to five hours to establish the road block after the fall of Rezang La. The main hindrance to this move, however, was the constant shelling of road Chushul – Tsaka La. With effective neutralisation of Chinese guns and mortars, a calculated risk was taken and approximately 100 vehicles comprising second line and a portion of first line transport alongwith all casualties were rushed to Dungti. This timely action saved valuable lives and transport.
Also, GE seems to show posts on either side of the Tsaka La road near Tsaka La, so I think this is another BPM point?

I agree that there are contradictory maps/reports as to where Requin La actually lies, especially with respect to Rezang La. I am inclined to go by reports/maps that put it immediately to the right (looking eastwards) of Rezang La on the ridge - that's where the location makes most sense to me, but I could be wrong in my understanding. If it is farther to the west of the ridge as you state, I would not be able to make sense of it either. In that case I would throw up my hands in confusion as to what the LAC actually means, because my impression is that GE depicts LAC as the line beyond which China does not exert control, and the road to Tsaka La has always been under India's control by my understanding...

Overall, from the leaked operational map, I feel that IA has been very careful to respect it's version of LAC in occupying forward locations - with the exception of that intriguing yellow marking on the leaked map, which is clearly way to the east of LAC. Maybe that would explain the mixed messaging related to Kala top - if IA is on that ridge to the east /north east of Kala Top, then Kala Top is probably well and truly surrounded and under Indian control without the need to actually occupy it. I know this whole proactive move looks like pulling off a Kargil or a Siachen on China, but IMHO a more appropriate way of looking at it would be if India had occupied Tiger Hill and Marpo La Ridge before the infiltrators crept in in 1990 to cause the Kargil crisis. In that case the Marpo La ridge, which defines LoC is the equivalent of the ridge containing the Thakung Heights, Helmet, Bump, and Gurung Hill features on LAC. The line India will take with the world is that now India is occupying positions on its side of LAC to forestall any further intrusions. Any other possibilities that open up, such as total domination of Spangur Gap, is a positive secondary consequence of the main goal of defending India's claim.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 05:27

Continuing from my previous post.

Latest google's map update of finger 4 & ridge line.

Pic of ridge line between finger 4 & finger 3 below.

<---- Clicky

Pic of ridge of finger 3 below.

<---- Clicky

Not sure who does hold them ?

-Ankit

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 05:31

Wikimapia is a goldmine -coordinates of important passes in the Spangur Tso area copied below. Kind of makes sense, but note that in this case Requin La is to the left of Rezang La - when looking eastwards.

Rezang La: 33°24'50"N 78°52'29"E <-- corrected later
Requin La: 33°25'6"N 78°50'56"E
Phurchuk La: 33°37'47"N 78°42'28"E
Yula La: 33°37'56"N 78°52'16"E
Yula (on south bank of Pangong Tso) 33°41'35"N 78°50'44"E

Could some kind soul please plot on 3D google maps?

Edited to correct Rezang La coordinates

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 06 Sep 2020 05:45

Look at the uniforms lined up on the other side

Rajnath Singh@rajnathsingh·Sep 5

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 05:59

Y I Patel wrote:Wikimapia is a goldmine -coordinates of important passes in the Spangur Tso area copied below. Kind of makes sense, but note that in this case Requin La is to the left of Rezang La - when looking eastwards.

Rezang La: 33°14'51"N 79°23'3"E
Requin La: 33°25'6"N 78°50'56"E
....?

You sure Rezang La's coordinates are correct ? Right of international boundary ! and too far from Requin La.

<---- Click

-Ankit

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 06 Sep 2020 06:12

Ankit Desai wrote:
csharma wrote:Can IA hold the heights it has occupied recently through winter? If yes, India has less reasons to push for status quo ante.

India has many reasons to push for status quo ante as of early summer (May 5?).

1. PLA is sitting at ridge of Point 4, so they hold PP 8 to PP 4.
2. IA may gain "advantageous" position at north bank of Pangong Tso but there is no news indicating IA crossed PP4 or ridge of PP4.
3. IA is sitting at heights of many hills at south bank of Pangong Tso but we were patrolling at bottom of west side of those hills anyway.
4. Let's say IA is holding Black Top which we did not control before but the sq area in term of occupation is not same as PP4 to PP8.
5. Last news of Depsang plains is, IA patrols unable to reach area they used to patrol.

-Ankit

Why do you wan't to push for status quo ante when they are on the back foot. Chinese being chinese will do this again, probably better planned and better trained next time. Losing some ground is temporary. We can't let the chinese go without punishing for their misadventures.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Sep 2020 06:26

Ankit Desai wrote:
You sure Rezang La's coordinates are correct ? Right of international boundary ! and too far from Requin La.

-Ankit

Yes, I must have gotten a wrong set of coordinates for Rezang La. Here's the correct set, right to the east of Rechin La: 33°24'50"N 78°52'29"E

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 06 Sep 2020 06:48

csharma wrote:I see. Most likely India will use the latest move as a negotiation tactic. But hard to see China agreeing to status quo ante after all this drama.

I also find it hard that India will agree to status quo after this drama because there is a breakdown of trust.

Status quo could mean "Lets step back 5km from the LAC as it existed Jan 1, 2020". But then SDREs would be like "Okay, you shredded every border management protocol that we've agreed to, we will sit on the heights at LAC and wont cross it". Which is a sensible position to take. But then that position will be unacceptable to Cheen.

I dont see an easy way out.

I think the basic fiasco started because someone high up in cheen decided that they have to 100% secure LAC against India and make sure India is no longer a threat before they go and attend to real kinetic threats on their east. They probably thought that they can show up with overwhelming force, realign LAC so they sit in the heights (remember Galwan problem started because they had a camp inside the LAC overlooking DBSO). And SDREs will dhoti shiver and let the salami slicing go, because we worship in small dark places.

But then just like how Pakis deluded themselves at Kargil (Pakis thought SDREs will look at TFTAs sitting on top of mountains and then give up and go back to worshipping in small dark places), the opposite happened. On top of that there is a trust deficit now and all border management has been shredded.

I dont know what the realistic end game is. (Yea yea, I know all the Jingos here talk about driving into tibet on T90s): China does not want to lose face, they dont want SDREs to walk in, SDREs have shown a willingness to walk in. SDREs wont agree to "status quo ante" because they dont trust cheen anymore.

LakshmanPST · Post by **LakshmanPST** » 06 Sep 2020 07:00

In Google Earth, the location being referred as Requin La is indicated by the spelling Rechin La...
There is another location spelled as Reqin La located few km inside Indian side of LAC, but this is not same as Requin being referred in media...
Hope this helps...

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 06 Sep 2020 07:03

Y I Patel wrote: Any other possibilities that open up, such as total domination of Spangur Gap, is a positive secondary consequence of the main goal of defending India's claim.

YIP, I think the Spanggur Gap domination is one thing, but as I mentioned earlier on this page, if we have occupied that ridge line on the Eastern flank of the Gap (the right arm of the encirclement marked as 'Eastern Ridge Line in the image I linked in my post and as the yellow/orange line to the N-E of Black Top in the Op map) allows direct line of sight to Sirijap and Yula. That should truly un-nerve the Chinese, not only for that reason, but as to how the IA got there. This means that the Chinese road that supplies Black Top is well and truly flanked on both sides and that the IA has positions that can supply posts along this ridge. I couldn't find any easy approaches from our side that would allow this to happen, so if it did, the IA's strength in this area is formidable.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 07:12

hanumadu wrote:
Ankit Desai wrote:

India has many reasons to push for status quo ante as of early summer (May 5?).

1. PLA is sitting at ridge of Point 4, so they hold PP 8 to PP 4.
2. IA may gain "advantageous" position at north bank of Pangong Tso but there is no news indicating IA crossed PP4 or ridge of PP4.
3. IA is sitting at heights of many hills at south bank of Pangong Tso but we were patrolling at bottom of west side of those hills anyway.
4. Let's say IA is holding Black Top which we did not control before but the sq area in term of occupation is not same as PP4 to PP8.
5. Last news of Depsang plains is, IA patrols unable to reach area they used to patrol.

-Ankit
Why do you wan't to push for status quo ante when they are on the back foot. Chinese being chinese will do this again, probably better planned and better trained next time. Losing some ground is temporary. We can't let the chinese go without punishing for their misadventures.

Please read those five points again. What makes you think PLA is on the back foot ?

Only two things change since PLA stopped IA going from finger 4 to 8 & Stopped Depsang patrol going where they used to patrol.

1. IA is on heights of hills of south bank of Pangong Tso, which make them over look Moldo and area between patrol point 27 to Requin La. Which is no doubt better than IA's own position before Aug 29 but IA is neither stopping PLA going from east or south to Moldo neither any sq km area obtained.
If we go by capturing height & over looking posts logic than IA lost finger 3 too, refer my second post. One would see similar structures from ridge line of finger 4 to ridge lien of finger 3.

2. IA is in "advantageous" position than before in respect to finger 4 ridge line. BUT still did not pass finger 4. IA may be able to over look up to finger 5 and that's it. What kind of advantage at gogra post, hotspring area or Depsang plains, no idea (Please post if you have any news).

In term of obtaining Sq km area very very much less than what we lost to PLA since it has stated.

Euphoria in news can only be justified if presented with proof. At things stand today I did not come across any proof of significant gain to not go to status quo ante as of April/May.

-Ankit

Anoop · Post by **Anoop** » 06 Sep 2020 07:14

LakshmanPST wrote:In Google Earth, the location being referred as Requin La is indicated by the spelling Rechin La...
There is another location spelled as Reqin La located few km inside Indian side of LAC, but this is not same as Requin being referred in media...
Hope this helps...

Thank you, this explains why the Chinese are rattled. This location overlooks the Chinese road seen as hairpins on the Western side.

https://imgur.com/gfr9SeJ

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 06 Sep 2020 07:46

Rezang La: 33°24'50"N 78°52'29"E

<--- Click

Requin La: 33°25'6"N 78°50'56"E

<--- Click

Phurchuk La: 33°37'47"N 78°42'28"E

<----- Click , Chusul is at right top.

-Ankit

rajpa · Post by **rajpa** » 06 Sep 2020 08:34

Has anyone noticed that Sugarlanders are always copy pasting the Indian statements as their own? Looks like copy-paste and reverse engineering is in their DNA. We should all post this sugar behavior on SM and make fun of them.