Comments by "" (@Rav01508) on "Hindustan Times"
channel.
-
10
-
10
-
"Farmers' income would double by 2022, this is a promise I would assure our Indian farmers.."
- Modi, 2019
"China has bullet trains, so are we Indians too, very soon. Our 508 km Sabarmati-Mumbai bullet train, would be a reality before August 15, 2022.."
-Modi, 2018
"Make in India would end China's era as the factory 🏭 of the world 🌎.."
-Modi, 2015
"I will create at least 20 million jobs a year until there are not enough workers if elected as the PM of India.."
- Modi, 2014
"When we Indians celebrate our 75th year of independence in 2022, I shall present 🎁 to you all, India's very first bullet train.."
- Modi, 2017
"India will send its first astronauts to space before independence day 2022, this is not a promise but a guarantee.."
- Modi, 2018
"Give me 5 years as the PM of India and people won't even remember there was once something called pollution in India.."
- Modi, 2014
"If I'm the PM of India, Pakistan and China would be so scared of India's power, they would think twice before attempting any funny moves on India.."
- Modi, 2014
"Give me 6 years and corruption would be a thing of the past in India.."
- Modi, 2014
"We will build 100 smart cities within 5 years in India to the point where Americans, Japanese, Europeans and even Chinese would want to come and study our smart city concept.."
- Modi, 2015
"Atmanirbhar Bharat Self-Reliant India will end our imports from China, instead, China will even have to import stuffs from us after that.."
- Modi, 2018
"Give me 6 years as the PM of India and everyone in the world would want to come to India to study our achievements.."
- Modi, 2014
Ladies and gentlemen i present to you the Talking Superpower🎉
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
The McMahon Line was first drafted in 1913, and the treaty to ratify them (Simla Accords) was never signed by the Republic Of China(ROC) who had just overthrown the Qing dynasty. There was no such thing as the McMahon Line in 1890, and China isn't disputing where the Line was drawn, she's disputing the validity of the Line in its entirety. The primary Indian claim is that the ROC did sign the Simla Accords because a British official called Olaf Caroe fabricated a narrative in 1938 where the ROC signed the Simla Accords (they didn't) and ceded parts of Tibet to the Raj.
In 1963 a British diplomat compared a pre-1938 treaties compendium with the post-Caroe compendium and found that Caroe had changed the note on the ROC's not signing the Simla Accords into one where the ROC signed it and considers the Indo-Tibetan border finalised. Nehru picked up a copy of Caroe's fabricated compendium so he got the impression that his country was legally entitled to more than she actually was. Compounding this was the US' decision to add fuel to the flames by declaring the McMahon Line as the legitimate boundary in an attempt to contain the spread of communism, despite reservations from the US State Department and protests from the fiercely non-communist Chiang Kai-Shek, leader of the ROC.
However, we all know Nehru irreversibly altered his country's relations with China in 1962, so by 1963, when the fabrication was discovered, it was already too late to stem the tide of Indian nationalism based on the false compendium entry. And that leaves us with the situation today, in the aftermath of a British attempt to de jure carve out a piece of Chinese territory which failed but had some success de facto, then a British fabrication of her failed attempt to carve out Chinese territory, then an Indian acceptance of the British fabrication alongside American endorsement, and a Chinese refusal to accept the fabrication as anything remotely legal.
Some Indians recognise that they don't actually have a legal claim to South Tibet, so they've begun using a different claim in that the people living in South Tibet want to be part of India more than China; in essence, a claim based on the principle of self-determination. This is India's secondary claim. However, as history has shown time and time again (Catalonia, Confederate States, Taiwan, Corsica, Chechnya, Tibet, Naxalites), without the permission of the larger body, a smaller section of the population will not be allowed to separate from its original country regardless of what they want.
A much more detailed account of the McMahon Line and its history is available here, written by Peter Lee who, contrary to impressions given by his surname, is not at all Chinese.
8
-
8
-
8
-
The McMahon Line was first drafted in 1913, and the treaty to ratify them (Simla Accords) was never signed by the Republic Of China(ROC) who had just overthrown the Qing dynasty. There was no such thing as the McMahon Line in 1890, and China isn't disputing where the Line was drawn, she's disputing the validity of the Line in its entirety. The primary Indian claim is that the ROC did sign the Simla Accords because a British official called Olaf Caroe fabricated a narrative in 1938 where the ROC signed the Simla Accords (they didn't) and ceded parts of Tibet to the Raj.
In 1963 a British diplomat compared a pre-1938 treaties compendium with the post-Caroe compendium and found that Caroe had changed the note on the ROC's not signing the Simla Accords into one where the ROC signed it and considers the Indo-Tibetan border finalised. Nehru picked up a copy of Caroe's fabricated compendium so he got the impression that his country was legally entitled to more than she actually was. Compounding this was the US' decision to add fuel to the flames by declaring the McMahon Line as the legitimate boundary in an attempt to contain the spread of communism, despite reservations from the US State Department and protests from the fiercely non-communist Chiang Kai-Shek, leader of the ROC.
However, we all know Nehru irreversibly altered his country's relations with China in 1962, so by 1963, when the fabrication was discovered, it was already too late to stem the tide of Indian nationalism based on the false compendium entry. And that leaves us with the situation today, in the aftermath of a British attempt to de jure carve out a piece of Chinese territory which failed but had some success de facto, then a British fabrication of her failed attempt to carve out Chinese territory, then an Indian acceptance of the British fabrication alongside American endorsement, and a Chinese refusal to accept the fabrication as anything remotely legal.
Some Indians recognise that they don't actually have a legal claim to South Tibet, so they've begun using a different claim in that the people living in South Tibet want to be part of India more than China; in essence, a claim based on the principle of self-determination. This is India's secondary claim. However, as history has shown time and time again (Catalonia, Confederate States, Taiwan, Corsica, Chechnya, Tibet, Naxalites), without the permission of the larger body, a smaller section of the population will not be allowed to separate from its original country regardless of what they want.
A much more detailed account of the McMahon Line and its history is available here, written by Peter Lee who, contrary to impressions given by his surname, is not at all Chinese.
8
-
7
-
The McMahon Line was first drafted in 1913, and the treaty to ratify them (Simla Accords) was never signed by the Republic Of China(ROC) who had just overthrown the Qing dynasty. There was no such thing as the McMahon Line in 1890, and China isn't disputing where the Line was drawn, she's disputing the validity of the Line in its entirety. The primary Indian claim is that the ROC did sign the Simla Accords because a British official called Olaf Caroe fabricated a narrative in 1938 where the ROC signed the Simla Accords (they didn't) and ceded parts of Tibet to the Raj.
In 1963 a British diplomat compared a pre-1938 treaties compendium with the post-Caroe compendium and found that Caroe had changed the note on the ROC's not signing the Simla Accords into one where the ROC signed it and considers the Indo-Tibetan border finalised. Nehru picked up a copy of Caroe's fabricated compendium so he got the impression that his country was legally entitled to more than she actually was. Compounding this was the US' decision to add fuel to the flames by declaring the McMahon Line as the legitimate boundary in an attempt to contain the spread of communism, despite reservations from the US State Department and protests from the fiercely non-communist Chiang Kai-Shek, leader of the ROC.
However, we all know Nehru irreversibly altered his country's relations with China in 1962, so by 1963, when the fabrication was discovered, it was already too late to stem the tide of Indian nationalism based on the false compendium entry. And that leaves us with the situation today, in the aftermath of a British attempt to de jure carve out a piece of Chinese territory which failed but had some success de facto, then a British fabrication of her failed attempt to carve out Chinese territory, then an Indian acceptance of the British fabrication alongside American endorsement, and a Chinese refusal to accept the fabrication as anything remotely legal.
Some Indians recognise that they don't actually have a legal claim to South Tibet, so they've begun using a different claim in that the people living in South Tibet want to be part of India more than China; in essence, a claim based on the principle of self-determination. This is India's secondary claim. However, as history has shown time and time again (Catalonia, Confederate States, Taiwan, Corsica, Chechnya, Tibet, Naxalites), without the permission of the larger body, a smaller section of the population will not be allowed to separate from its original country regardless of what they want.
A much more detailed account of the McMahon Line and its history is available here, written by Peter Lee who, contrary to impressions given by his surname, is not at all Chinese.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Despite similar population number at 1.4b, India only have 672m workforce vs 931m for China. 48% Indian worked to support the others 52% unproductive population vs 66% Chinese worked to support the others 34% unproductive population.
India:
Population 1.4b
Male 700m = 73% labor force participation rate
Female 700m = 23% labor force participation rate (On par with Somalia, Pakistan, Palestine)
Total workforce = 511+ 161 = 672m
Literacy Rate = 69%
Educated workforce = 463m
Grain production = 330 million tons
Grain Reserve = <40 million tons
China:
Population 1.4b
Male 700m = 72 % labor force participation rate
Female 700m = 61% labor force participation rate (On par with Canada, Netherlands, Israel)
Total workforce = 504 + 427 = 931m
Literacy Rate = 95%
Educated workforce = 844m
Grain production = 686 million tons
Grain Reserve = >700 million tons
Comparing India to China is akin to comparing Pakistan to Japan , Bangladesh/Nepal to South Korea , Sri Lanka to Taiwan . One group is influenced by Chinese civilization, the others group is influenced by Indian civilization. Two different class. One is Yellow the others is Brown/Dark. One uses chopsticks, the others uses bare hand. The most developed country in ASEAN is Singapore, a nation populated by predominantly Chinese an East Asian origin people.
One group collectively & consistently ranked within the world top 10-20 in IQ Test, PISA Score, University Rank, International Collegiate Programming Contest (ICPC) & Mathematical Olympiad standing shoulder to shoulder with western world ....while the others group collectively & consistently ranked somewhere in the middle out of 100+ participant nation standing shoulder to shoulder with some failed states & banana republic.
It's like comparing some Africans countries with Europe. No developed countries exist outside of Western & East Asian world.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7