Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates

ghostwhowalks

Active member
Dec 4, 2017
157
109
Devlok
There will be no targeting of cities. That is the surest way to invite trouble. It shall remain localized.
Well in case of an all out war with India, trouble would already have come knocking for both countries. So what would prevent China from launching a salvo on new delhi, if say, IA makes a push towards Tibet or looks to reclaim Askai Hind? What incentive would China have to desist? a significant loss of territory will sound the death knell for CCP, so would then they not be pushed to enhance the conflict. IMHO it will be suicidal for us to belienve that the conflict will remain localised, if a shooting match does start with China.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Falcon

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
5,557
9,852
New Delhi
What about the Chinese Missile forces? by all counts they are vastly superior in numbers to our inventory and our AAD will easily be overwhelmed should the Chinese decide to launch a salvo over north India. In case of an all out war, that would be the logical thing for CHina to do to put India on the backfoot.

If missiles rain on new delhi, expect the war to end pretty quick unless India takes the nuke option then.
Well in case of an all out war with India, trouble would already have come knocking for both countries. So what would prevent China from launching a salvo on new delhi, if say, IA makes a push towards Tibet or looks to reclaim Askai Hind? What incentive would China have to desist? a significant loss of territory will sound the death knell for CCP, so would then they not be pushed to enhance the conflict. IMHO it will be suicidal for us to belienve that the conflict will remain localised, if a shooting match does start with China.
You need to understand the escalation ladder. Targeting major Indian cities like Delhi will make a major escalation and a localised skirmish can spread all across LAC with AIM being changed from say-Reclaiming Fingers area to Reclaiming Aksai Hind or Freeing Tibet. Moreover, I had very clearly stated that Quad will come in full support if we go for whole of Tibet by allowing foreign troops to use our territory. What will force us to take this extreme step-Strikes on our major cities. Can China afford it? No way.
 

HariPrasad

Active member
Dec 5, 2018
197
128
Surat
Who gave you this information? Do you know the extent of mobilisation of IA? Even I do not know it.


The 0.5 front is very well taken care of by RSS and Bajrang Dal. Remember Delhi riots? We taught a lesson to those who had prepared for it over three months within 24 hrs.

Some details please sir ji.
 

Sulla84

Well-Known member
May 31, 2019
1,039
635
India

Attachments

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
12,152
7,690
Mumbai
Whenever a Malayali has been in a position of authority w.r.t China we've come to grief. Be it K. M. Panniker or V. K. Krisha Menon or anybody who's succeeded them.

This man goes about claiming a virtue out of a necessity of the 1993 agreement on the LAC which doesn't talk of the LAC at all but defines ways to regulate the behavior of the troops stationed there.

He thinks what's happened now & Doklam was avoidable or could be better handled but has nothing to say about the GoI's capitulation during earlier Chinese incursions when he was the NSA.

He has a prescription for what our FP has to be with our neighbors notably Bangladesh, SL & Nepal but neglects to mention that when the Chinese invested in Hambantota, they first approached us but we're rebuffed. They went ahead with the Chinese. I wonder what cost benefit analysis did this man undertake then. None of the Indian PM's visited Bangladesh or Nepal when he was the NSA & even before. In fact when Modi visited Nepal in 2014 , he was the first Indian PM in 2 decades to have visited Nepal.

He thinks India ought not to toe the US line on Iran but I wonder if he remembers what was the GoI's stance when more stringent sanctons were imposed during Obama's tenure when he was the NSA.

This is what happens when we have ideologically charged bureaucrats who occupy the high office. They see everything including the nation's supreme self interest through that prism.