It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Surya 1 and 2 : India's ICBM's

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Illegally obtained by the British?


According to China?


Dude... China's claim to Arunachal Pradesh is not grounded in either political, religious, ethnic, historic or cultural basis. Whereas this region has historically been part and parcel of Indian nations and culture since prehistory.

The very crux of the Chinese claim is based on their illegal claim to Tibet -- which is absolutely bunk in and of itself. Further, the Chinese claim is that as Tibet and British Indian bilateral demarcation of mutual borders is not recognized by an illegal third party (China), therefore the border is not demarcated at all, and therefore China can extend a claim for as far as she wants, with no justification whatsoever.


I doubt even you would seriously be able to rationalize such a warped and expantionistic logic.




posted on May, 27 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Actually, allow me to illustrate the situation with an analogy.

The logic is quite simple to follow.



My next door neighbor, Bob, and his next door neighbor, Fred, live in three houses.

|----Me----|----Bob---------Fred----|


Bob and Fred mutually agree to the line dividing their yards.

|----Me----|----Bob----|----Fred----|


I, in a fit of rage, march over to Bob, knock repeatedly him over the head with a baseball bat, bury his bleeding, lifeless corpse in the yard, and then subsequently claim all his territory.

|----Me----|----------->|----Fred----|


Now since I claim Bob's yard and that Bob never, ever had a right to his own yard in the first place (despite the fact that both our ancestors had also lived on our respective yards, administering our seperate households for 5 generations), I now say that the boundary that Bob and Fred decided between themselves is null and void.

Since the boundary is now 'void' I say, what the hell, and throw a rock as far as I can into Fred's 'illegal' yard. And then, for no good reason, claim the all the yard upto that rock I threw.

I wait till Fred goes on vacation for the weekend, promise I will look after his house and feed his dog, and then, in the dead of night, knock down the fence, kill the dog, and claim half of Fred's yard.

|----------Me-----------|->|--Fred----|


The rest of the neigborhood -- every single other house and every single other person (except me!) claim's I'm a theif and full of fetid crap.

Fred comes back from vacation, and because Fred and I are now at equal strength, (Fred's back in town), the boundary remains unresolved.


For those of you who did not follow the analogy, Bob is Tibet and Fred is India.

So guess which bastard I am...



Cheers,
Raj




[edit on 27-5-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Drat, can't edit my posts.

I forgot to add, that even if we were to accept Bob's murder as just swell, it doesn't give me any the right or any legal justification (either in case or international law) to arbitrary redraw the border that was already bilaterally demarcated.

None. Zero. Zilch.

Sorry



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by rajkhalsa2004
Illegally obtained by the British?


According to China?


Dude... China's claim to Arunachal Pradesh is not grounded in either political, religious, ethnic, historic or cultural basis. Whereas this region has historically been part and parcel of Indian nations and culture since prehistory.

The very crux of the Chinese claim is based on their illegal claim to Tibet -- which is absolutely bunk in and of itself. Further, the Chinese claim is that as Tibet and British Indian bilateral demarcation of mutual borders is not recognized by an illegal third party (China), therefore the border is not demarcated at all, and therefore China can extend a claim for as far as she wants, with no justification whatsoever.


I doubt even you would seriously be able to rationalize such a warped and expantionistic logic.


chinas claim to Arunachal Pradesh is both historical ethinic and cutural. it was Formerly the North East Frontier Agency. up to the 1940's the Arunachal Pradesh area was still being governed by the government in Lhasa.

let me remind you that india was controlled by the british

How long ago was it traditionally indian??

Also dont you know what the McMahon Line is. ??

chinas illegal claim to tibet??? if china was a illegal thrid party why were there presence needed to the 1914 Simla Convention

wow your definatly lost.

tibet has always been a Protectorate of china.

What has india got to do with this the british organized this. indians had no say in this what so ever

rak go read this article. (the Lieutenant General Henderson Brooks article was never published)

www.rediff.com...

[edit on 27-5-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   
wait your story doesn't allow how powerful the neigbours are.

china= fred
tibet= Jim
india = tim
britian = rob

Jim is freds son and Tim is robs son.

I---fred + jim ----I---tim +rob----I

these neighbours live together for a very long time no one has border disputes everyones happy. then one day fred breaks his leg. and rob see this as a opputunity to get some free land.

because fred is unable to fight because of his broken leg Rob forces Jim to hand over Fred + Jims land.

I---fred + Jim--I---------Tim + Rob ----------I

...........meanwhile Rob leaves tim

when Freds leg is all better he is able to get his land back. but Tim still thinks he owns the land that his dad stole. then keeps on building a fence closer and closer. Fred sees this as a threat because soon Tim will be all over Jim . so attacks Tim and levels his house to the ground then goes back to his area.

All the neighbours are new and dont know the story behind it so they blame Fred



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Originally posted by chinawhite
chinas claim to Arunachal Pradesh is both historical ethinic and cutural. it was Formerly the North East Frontier Agency. up to the 1940's the Arunachal Pradesh area was still being governed by the government in Lhasa.

Sorry but that is entirely incorrect. Even ignoring the fact that China has no legitimate claim to Tibet, the area of later NEFA was never governed by Lhasa or any Tibetan government, ever. The people of the area are not even Buddhists, but anamists and Hindus. The people of the area are mainly indigenous tribes that territorially have been with numerious Indian kingdoms and states (like the Bo, Manpas, Assamese, Manipuri, etc.) in the region, and are fully integrated into the Indic cultural cues.

Sorry, but to claim that China's claim to the area is ethnic (which is a racist argument, and even then, untrue) and even mroe galling is cultural, is absoutely insane.

The area was never influenced or even had contact with ethnicities and nations that can be considered "Chinese", ever. You claiming this is the height of ignorance. It is as absurd as me claiming that Indian culutre influenced the Swedish.

Simply repeating the same does not make it fact. It literally blows my mind that you can sit here and argue such!


chinas illegal claim to tibet??? if china was a illegal thrid party why were there presence needed to the 1914 Simla Convention

It seems you are ignorant of this fact as well. Yes, as you state, the Simla convention had all three nations -- British India, China, and Tibet -- as nations of equal standing in a tripartiate conferance.

[An aside worth noting -- China, by being a full and willing participant in these talks affirmed by very partiipation and by documents and agreements therein that Tibet is a full and equal partner of the talks... which is yet another nail in the confin of the Chinese claim that it controlled Tibet
But I digress...]

Now, the British Indian government and the Tibetan government fully agreed in the border demarcation -- the McMahon line -- from Tawang to the Trijuncture. Both sides, as independant governments, (again: with full recognisance from China in the conference) both agreed to this border.

China, upon invading Tibet, made the illegal claim that denounced all treaties signed by Tibet as illegal, and that the border that was agreed upon was in dispute.

This is an illegal -- not legal -- not recognized by international law -- in violation of bilateral treaties -- ILLEGAL action.

It is such a stupendously simple thing to understand, yet you refuse to!

This is precisely why EVERY country in the world does not recognize or agree with the Chinese claim -- because it is so outrageous!


tibet has always been a Protectorate of china.

Buddy, we can argue with this until we're blue in the face (or fingers), but we're simply never going to agree, so I suggest we let it drop.


What has india got to do with this the british organized this. indians had no say in this what so ever

All I can say to that is:




And what about the Hendrickson Brooks report? It's a report on how the political interferance in military matters made the Indian army lose the war, and the various ways in which it needed to be fixed (modernization, doubling in size, etc.) It is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 01:17 AM
link   
And your little story is cute, but has no basis in fact. OR legality.

If you really are unable to see this, or a second-grade understanding of law is so alien to you, than I really see no need in wasting my time discussing this.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 03:01 AM
link   
really a conundrum of al times..China claims to be isolationist but has expansionist policies ..



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 03:37 AM
link   
chinawhite you have been served

:Lol:



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   
guys this thread has strayed far from the original topic.



but an intresting discussion.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 06:36 AM
link   
well well well.

if you up on the mcMahon line youe find out that in the 1914 agreement tibet ceaed the land to britain. the ethnic groups are from a tibetian-burmanese group. indians never settled the area . when british india got the land from tibet they joined Assam and NEFA together.

Your so lost. china is not one ethnic group it is made up of heaps of ethnic groups.( Han Chinese 91.9%, Zhuang, Uygur, Hui, Yi, Tibetan, Miao, Manchu, Mongol, Buyi, Korean, and other nationalities 8.1%) . China was given this name by western countries.


After the independence of India in 1947, China made claims to practically the whole area covered by the districts of East and West Kameng, Lower and Upper Subansiri, East and West Siang, and Lohit, arguing that the McMahon Line had never been accepted by China and was the result of British "aggression." In letters to the Indian prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, the Chinese prime minister, Zhou Enlai, quoted a map in the 1929 edition of Encyclopædia Britannica showing the disputed territory as Chinese, with the boundary following the alignment of Chinese maps. Some Chinese maps before 1935 showed the North East Frontier Agency (Arunachal Pradesh) as part of India, and since then as part of Tibet. The Survey of India (1883) showed the disputed tribal areas as de facto administered by British India. British and Indian maps since 1914 have usually followed the McMahon Line, although the Tibetan government in Lhása still continued to rule and govern the Tawang district of present-day's Arunachal until the 1940s. (Cp. . If the Chinese claims were allowed, the Indian-Chinese border would follow roughly the margin of the Assam plain, a frontier almost impossible to defend. Following this dispute, Chinese troops crossed the McMahon Line on August 26, 1959, and captured an Indian outpost at Longju, a few miles south of the line. They abandoned this in 1961 but in October 1962 crossed the line, this time in force. After first striking toward the Tanglha ridge and Tawang near the Bhutan border, the Chinese later extended their attack along the whole frontier. Deep inroads were made at a number of points. Later the Chinese agreed to withdraw approximately to the McMahon Line and in 1963 returned Indian prisoners of war. (D.O.L.)


groups.msn.com...


You just said before that china was a illegal third party now everyones equal???
china

this is also worth nothing.The ROC (not PRC) chinese government of china never agreed to the Simla convention. (no chinese government ever agreed to the Simla convention) . Tibet at that time was still considered as a protectrate of china. being a protectrate tibet didn't have any power there.

read up on history.......
www.tibet-china.org...
www.freetibet.org...

map on inida 1857



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
chinawhite you have been served

:Lol:


Rogue1

if someone posted something and the other person hasn't finished posting his opinion how can he be served???

next time shut your mouth



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
really a conundrum of al times..China claims to be isolationist but has expansionist policies ..


This all happened a long time ago. during 1664-1800 china was in relative peace. it blocked contact with the outside world.

China today in not isolationist nor expansionist.

it expands its ecomonic progress while not blocking influnce from other countries.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Originally posted by chinawhite

if you up on the mcMahon line youe find out that in the 1914 agreement tibet ceaed the land to britain.

That's absolutely bogus. The border between Tibet and India was demarcated bilaterally. Do you understand the meaning of that word? Just because China whines retroactively that Tibet ceded land does not make it either a legal fact or a historical truth.


the ethnic groups are from a tibetian-burmanese group. indians never settled the area . when british india got the land from tibet they joined Assam and NEFA together.

You are either an incorrigible racist or a consumate idiot. The people of that area are part of the Tibeto-Burmese language group. That is a linguistic definition. Furthermore, though they are of Mongoloid racial extraction does not mean that they are Chinese! I can't convey how bloody hard I'm
right now. Jesus!

India is the most racially and ethnically (and linguistically) diverse nation on the planet. Of the many ethnic groups (over 3000 with populations over 200,000) 13% of Indians are either wholly of Mongoloid racial stock, or significant percentage of it. The concept of a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic nation may seem hard for you to grasp, coming from one of the most racially homogenized and ethnically segregated countries on the planet, but race is not a factor of nations. And even if we were to accept the compltely wrong assertion that these people are 'Tibetan' (
), it still doesn't make them Chinese!

To claim that a people who never were ruled by China, never were influenced by China, and never even had contact with China were CHINESE is the stupidest reasoning I've ever heard in my life. I'm sorry, but it is.


And do you even read what you post? You think anyone here will be imperssed by the size of the quotes you lift straight from webpages you apparently don't read?
The passage adds nothing to the discussion that hasn't already been said by me, and in fact, supports exactly my claims by subsituting the parties and events in my analogy to the real events.


You just said before that china was a illegal third party now everyones equal???

?


shoot, I got to go. Will reply to rest of your post when I get the time.


edit- I'll add one more.

this is also worth nothing.The ROC (not PRC) chinese government of china never agreed to the Simla convention. (no chinese government ever agreed to the Simla convention)

Firstly whether the RoC or PRC doesn't matter. It was the Chinese government at the time.

Secondly, China did not ratify the Simla Convention because of a disagreement on the demarcation of the border between Inner Tibet (Kingdom of Tibet) and Outer Tibet (Tibet Autonomous Region).

This demarcation took place -- and was a bilateral negotitaion -- and affected the border of the territory between Tibet and China. The India-Tibet border, McMahon Line, was a bilateral agreement between Tibet and India!

China still has no legal justification to redraw the boundary line to whatever suits their fancy!


Man oh man, did they stop teaching the idea of logic in China after Confucius died, or what?


-Raj

[edit on 28-5-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Are you stupid.

why do you think that chinese is one type of people.
china is a combined group of people.

i posted that quote because it mentions that the area was governmed by the government in Lhasa you idiot.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Moron, Tawang district in Arunachal Pradesh was paritioned in two by the McMahon line. That quote of yours does nothing except support my argument.

*shakes head*

Read a book on the subject, will you?


Are you stupid. why do you think that chinese is one type of people. china is a combined group of people.

Eh? What the hell does that have to do with anything here? How does that even remotely contradict anything I said? You were one claiming that Arunachalis are Chinese by ethnicity.

Hell, using your logic, I claim all Germans to be Indians. Why? Because I unilaterally expanded my definition in a stupid way, as Germans do not consider themselves Indian. And similarly expanding the definition of "Chinese" to "anyone who looks like Tibetan" is equally stupid.


I do doubt you to be that stupid. I think you are either racist or trying to deceive everyone here with inane racial-nationalistic theories.


[edit on 28-5-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by rajkhalsa2004
Moron, Tawang district in Arunachal Pradesh was paritioned in two by the McMahon line. That quote of yours does nothing except support my argument.

*shakes head*

Read a book on the subject, will you?


Are you stupid. why do you think that chinese is one type of people. china is a combined group of people.

Eh? What the hell does that have to do with anything here? How does that even remotely contradict anything I said? You were one claiming that Arunachalis are Chinese by ethnicity.

Hell, using your logic, I claim all Germans to be Indians. Why? Because I unilaterally expanded my definition in a stupid way, as Germans do not consider themselves Indian. And similarly expanding the definition of "Chinese" to "anyone who looks like Tibetan" is equally stupid.


I do doubt you to be that stupid. I think you are either racist or trying to deceive everyone here with inane racial-nationalistic theories.


[edit on 28-5-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]


are you stupid..

you keep on saying that the areas are not considered chinese.
and i keep mentioning that china is a combination of ethnic groups . but the Han dominate. You keep on saying that Arunachal Pradesh is indian ethnics. but they only came to Arunachal Pradesh recently

area of the Qing dynasty







i can get heaps of maps of the Qing dynasty



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I don't know if its a language barrier, or just plain stupidity. If you still cannot begin to comprehend what I'm saying by now, then I doubt you will.

And posting revisionist maps that even if were true still has no bearing on the legality of Chinese claim still doesn't mean squat. (I can post a thousand historical maps showing the area as Indian.)


You still have not given a single source that remotely claims Arunachal as Chinese.

You still remain wilfully ignorant of basic logic and legal principals.



And if you're suggesting that Indians 'moved in' to the area only recently, then not only are you completly bloody ignorant, but you are also dishonest and deceitful.

I've been more than willing to put down your position to simple ignorance, but your grandiose, unsubstantiated claims, hot-air rhetoric and repeating of inane mantras hoping with the intention to dupe others is now reaching critical mass.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:47 PM
link   
And ironically, the only map showing the area as part of the Quing dynasty, is that first alf-assed MS paint job map you posted.


Man oh man.... cognitive dissonance don't begin to describe this...



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 08:52 PM
link   
post your maps.


thats whats i been asking for

i mean if you see it now from all the maps i posted then your @#$% in the head


British and Indian maps since 1914 have usually followed the McMahon Line, although the Tibetan government in Lhása still continued to rule and govern the Tawang district of present-day's Arunachal until the 1940s


you said i never posted posted something about the claims to Arunachal

read this
www.db.idpproject.org...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join