Modi Hits at China's Expansionism

[reddy123456 + 10]

13 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

When was Kashmir, Nepal, Tibet or Bhutan ever part of China historically? Or were they ‘invaded and reduced to possession’ by China?

Effectively making the inhabitants ‘slaves of the Chinese’, as per Yoshi’s comment earlier about Indian’s being slaves of the British.

 

Kashmir is an Indian territory via Legal Instrument of accession during the Partition of India, these Chinese shills think their propaganda will work in open internet too like their walled oppressive internet. We Indians can read and reply to these CCP shills.

[frankfurter + 562]

4 hours ago, reddy123456 said:

Kashmir is an Indian territory via Legal Instrument of accession during the Partition of India, these Chinese shills think their propaganda will work in open internet too like their walled oppressive internet. We Indians can read and reply to these CCP shills.

Incorrect.  To accede means to yield to a superior power. The intent of accede is a temporary arrangement whereby certain powers are granted between parties for specific purposed. Accede is not a surrender of sovereignty.  Thus, accede is never given voluntarily; it is an instrument of duress.

The accession was instigated by Mountbatten, with clear intent this was temporary and the underlying issue would be resolved by a plebiscite. That issue was the determination of which country the peoples of Kasmir and Jammu would join: India or Pakistan. At the time prior, the Kashmir and Jammu were populated predominantly by Muslims for 500 years, and ruled as a kingdom by a Sikh, Hari Singh, who was inept and could not decide. But, for 100 years prior, the Singh kingdom was under the suzerainty of Britain.

Suzerainty is not a surrender of sovereignty.

In August 1947, Singh signed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan, deferring the decision, of which country to join, to a latter time of discussions and decision by the peoples. Mountbatten interfered deeply in this matter, to create a heated conflict between the Hindus and Muslims in the entire subcontinent. 

In October 1947, Pashtun tribesmen, being Muslim, entered both Jammu and Kashmir, to liberate their fellow Muslims from infidel rulers, the Brits and the Hindus. They were very successful to occupy rapidly, and the smaller Hindu population retaliated, with ensuing violence. By October 26, 1947, Mountbatten convinced Sigh to preserve law and order by substituting British suzerainty for Indian, and the instrument for this was the 'Accession'.  Thus, Sing signed under duress.

But the Accession ignored completely the Standstill Agreement, and was a violation of the spirit and intent of that Standstill. Mountbatten tried to convince Pakistan the Accession was temporary, and would be resolved by a future plebiscite by the peoples of Kashmir and Jammu. freely without interference by Britain and India.  Mountbatten's promise was empty and thus a lie.

The Accession did not and does not surrender sovereignty to India. This is stated clearly in black and white within the Accession: 

ARTICLE 7. Nothing in this Instrument shall be deemed to commit me in any way to acceptance of any future constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into arrangements with the Government of India under any such future constitution.

ARTICLE 8. Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this state, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this state or the validity of any law at present in force in this state.

From 1947 to today, India has not respected ANY provision, article, treaty, spirit of goodwill, or sovereignty respecting the peoples of Kashmir and Jammu. India treats them as the vanquished. 

The way to solve the Kashmir and Jammu issue is to grant those people the right to hold a free plebiscite, as was intended and promised by Mountbatten. For 73 years, India refuses. 

India is a belligerent expand-ist. 

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

And China is not?

[reddy123456 + 10]

4 hours ago, frankfurter said:

Incorrect.  To accede means to yield to a superior power. The intent of accede is a temporary arrangement whereby certain powers are granted between parties for specific purposed. Accede is not a surrender of sovereignty.  Thus, accede is never given voluntarily; it is an instrument of duress.

The accession was instigated by Mountbatten, with clear intent this was temporary and the underlying issue would be resolved by a plebiscite. That issue was the determination of which country the peoples of Kasmir and Jammu would join: India or Pakistan. At the time prior, the Kashmir and Jammu were populated predominantly by Muslims for 500 years, and ruled as a kingdom by a Sikh, Hari Singh, who was inept and could not decide. But, for 100 years prior, the Singh kingdom was under the suzerainty of Britain.

Suzerainty is not a surrender of sovereignty.

In August 1947, Singh signed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan, deferring the decision, of which country to join, to a latter time of discussions and decision by the peoples. Mountbatten interfered deeply in this matter, to create a heated conflict between the Hindus and Muslims in the entire subcontinent. 

In October 1947, Pashtun tribesmen, being Muslim, entered both Jammu and Kashmir, to liberate their fellow Muslims from infidel rulers, the Brits and the Hindus. They were very successful to occupy rapidly, and the smaller Hindu population retaliated, with ensuing violence. By October 26, 1947, Mountbatten convinced Sigh to preserve law and order by substituting British suzerainty for Indian, and the instrument for this was the 'Accession'.  Thus, Sing signed under duress.

But the Accession ignored completely the Standstill Agreement, and was a violation of the spirit and intent of that Standstill. Mountbatten tried to convince Pakistan the Accession was temporary, and would be resolved by a future plebiscite by the peoples of Kashmir and Jammu. freely without interference by Britain and India.  Mountbatten's promise was empty and thus a lie.

The Accession did not and does not surrender sovereignty to India. This is stated clearly in black and white within the Accession: 

ARTICLE 7. Nothing in this Instrument shall be deemed to commit me in any way to acceptance of any future constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into arrangements with the Government of India under any such future constitution.

ARTICLE 8. Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this state, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this state or the validity of any law at present in force in this state.

From 1947 to today, India has not respected ANY provision, article, treaty, spirit of goodwill, or sovereignty respecting the peoples of Kashmir and Jammu. India treats them as the vanquished. 

The way to solve the Kashmir and Jammu issue is to grant those people the right to hold a free plebiscite, as was intended and promised by Mountbatten. For 73 years, India refuses. 

India is a belligerent expand-ist. 

 

Completely false, Almost all the states of India are part of India due to Legal instrument of Accession . The only illegal and expansionist state is the fake PRC China. Taiwan is the real China whereas PRC is farce dictatorship which will soon fall apart.

 

Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau will get complete independence from the fascist, Nazi like Communist party of China.  When will  the communist party conduct a plebiscite in these regions after kicking out PLA soldiers and illegal Han Chinese occupiers?

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

3 hours ago, reddy123456 said:

Completely false, Almost all the states of India are part of India due to Legal instrument of Accession . The only illegal and expansionist state is the fake PRC China. Taiwan is the real China whereas PRC is farce dictatorship which will soon fall apart.

 

Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau will get complete independence from the fascist, Nazi like Communist party of China.  When will  the communist party conduct a plebiscite in these regions after kicking out PLA soldiers and illegal Han Chinese occupiers?

Well played sir

[specinho + 439]

On 8/23/2020 at 3:49 AM, 0R0 said:

The Shanghai faction are not in support of this, since they have more trade with the world at large than with the rest of China. It is this internal regional friction of the Beijing and inland core and the coastal cities that is the actual threat to the CCP.

It is this same need for trapping Shanghai and Guangdong/Shenzhen/HK/Macao which led to the S. China sea takeover to prevent their access to the outside world without the CCP's central govt. ability to control it.

Shang-hai (upper region of the sea) might become Hai-shang (in the sea) soon with the flooding and all........ The dam could hasten the process, or no? Two countries?? May be not.........

9 hours ago, frankfurter said:

India is a belligerent expand-ist.

📢   ..... an Indian minister of a small dot country said it somewhere "do not mention India or Indians again or he will subside Chinese............"

Edited August 24, 2020 by specinho

[frankfurter + 562]

10 hours ago, reddy123456 said:

Completely false, Almost all the states of India are part of India due to Legal instrument of Accession . The only illegal and expansionist state is the fake PRC China. Taiwan is the real China whereas PRC is farce dictatorship which will soon fall apart.

 

Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau will get complete independence from the fascist, Nazi like Communist party of China.  When will  the communist party conduct a plebiscite in these regions after kicking out PLA soldiers and illegal Han Chinese occupiers?

The Accession is written in black and white. I presume you can read. You deny the text of the Accession?

Regardless, I fail to see why you assert China has claims upon Kashmir and Jammu: China has not. India has troops Jammu, Kashmir, Bhutan, Nepal: China has not.  Why you assert such is a mystery.

China has resolved its border with all countries except India. China has, for decades, offered to resolve the border with India, but has been repulsed. The de facto border is the LAC, which has stood for decades and could quickly become the de jure border if India were to accept.  Now, why would an expand-ist nation offer to resolve the border? Would this not contravene an expand-ist policy?  The simple fact China offers to accept the LAC as the de jure border shows clearly China has no expand-ist claims upon India. 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 8/20/2020 at 10:29 AM, Marcin2 said:

When pandemic hits US, people that suddenly became unemployed are given free handouts and foodstamps.

In India they are just get more hungry.

Impact of Covid-19 is that this very  evening additional 100,000,000 Indians will go to sleep hungry.

Actually it is a long shot, cause I do not know.

Malnourishment in India under normal circumstances is about 30% of population that is 400,000,000.

So another 100,000,000 or 200,000,000 does not make much difference.

You need a very good speech,  if you cannot solve this real problem of hungry people.

 

And please do not associate China, Pakistan , Bhutan or anybody else with this terrible situation.

I think it is morally wrong to publish propaganda of politicians of failed state

so to give them more legitimacy for their misdeeds.

You are just supporting them.

I would like to read that this or any evening less than 200,000,000 Indians went to bed hungry.

 

I like to read about US-China rivalry in the context of Chinese or US expansionism,

but remember in this very stories there are NO HUNGRY people, unlike in India.

 

The Chinese people are on short rations because of poor planning and geopolitics by their CCP overlords. 

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 8/23/2020 at 2:45 AM, Marcin2 said:

Please share the source of this 40% loss of arable land number ?

I took that number from Peter Zeihan

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1747423X.2019.1571120 actually uses a smaller final number

 

[Strangelovesurfing + 737]

On 8/24/2020 at 1:02 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

And China is not?

CCP signed agreements matter when they benefit current CCP narrative/needs and keep the opposite party off-balance. Agreements, Hong Kong etc., that do not benefit current CCP objectives are ignored.