Comments by "神州 Shenzhou" (@Shenzhou.) on "Gravitas: Has China offered Bhutan $10billion in standoff with India?" video.

  1. Once Bhutan changes its stance, Indian government would lose the reason for Indian troops presence in that territory and would be forced to withdraw. Its much more preferable to direct war between India and China. Bhutan stands to lose the most if such war were to break out over this territorial dispute.
    4
  2. Indian government knows that once Bhutan accepts this deal, Indian troops no longer have any reason to be present at Doklam/Donglong, and will be forced to withdraw.
    3
  3. +Desham Pravesh If India wants NSG so bad, then why not sign Non-Proliferation Treaty first? If you claim uranium will run out 40 years time, and thorium is the new uranium, then why does India want to enter in NSG in first place, when it has thorium like you claim? Like I said, beside China, other countries also oppose India's entry into NSG like New Zealand, Ireland and Austria. You need full approval of all 48 countries to join NSG. China wants to make Asia strong, by building infrastructure and roads in Pakistan, Kazakhstan, other -stan countries, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and even in South African countries like Angola, Nigeria, Djibouti. But Indian government is constantly opposing Chinese road construction and obstructing Asia's growth.
    2
  4. Indian government knows that once Bhutan gives up its territorial claims, Indian troops no longer have any reason to be on Chinese territory. Besides, investment in infrastructure will lead to better trade and relations between Bhutan and China.
    2
  5. +Vishal Kumar CPEC project in Pakistan make use Chinese engineers and materials, because Pakistan does not have sufficient engineers and cement. Pakistan already planning double cement production to meet CPEC demands, and training more engineers to handle CPEC. Majority of CPEC jobs also go to Pakistan people according to (tribune.com.pk/story/1429131/cpec-provides-jobs-30000-pakistanis/ )
    1
  6. +Desham Pravesh I don't see how China will become a hostage of Pakistan because of CPEC. For India admission into NSG, you need unanimous support of all 48 member nations of NSG, and about 9 other countries also oppose India's admission. USA's approach to dealing with terrorism is invade country, and in process kill many innocent people, making the locals angry and join the terrorists in revenge. For example, the rise of ISIS is credited to USA's constant interventions in Middle East Wars. For US, its only short-term solution, until another terrorist cell pops up to replace the one destroyed. China's approach different from USA. People join terrorists because they are poor, jobless, unhappy and angry with USA, own government etc. So China tries develop Pakistan economies, so that more people find work, and the terrorists will have ever shrinking pool of recruits willing to join them. This is long term solution that aims to solve/reduce problem of terrorists by improving the country's economic and thus, improving stability in the region.
    1
  7. +Desham Pravesh If you think US navy does not control the sea lanes, then why have there been up to 4 reports of US destroyers colliding with civilian vessels in this year alone, such as the USS Fitzgerald, USS John McCain, etc. It's obvious that US Navy is stepping up its patrol routes, probably with inexperienced sailors which led to collisions. This type of collision is serious, and can possibly create scandal or even war, if say, a US destroyer collides with Chinese warship. The Hambantota port in Srilanka is for economic trade, even the Sri Lanka government does not allow Chinese military vessels to dock there, so why is it considered a military base? Besides roads, ports and railas, CPEC also invests in energy for Pakistan, including the building of various powerplants to fuel Pakistan's growth. And in South Africa, China built various roads, railways, schools, hospitals, hotels, stadiums, shopping centers and telecommunication projects. Lastly, the LEMOA agreement between India and USA, will not only affect China, but possibly Russia as well. Russia is against US attempts to encroach on its territory, which forms basis of China-Russia relations, and by growing closer to USA, India could potentially grow further from Russia. Soon the BRICS summit will held in China, and our countries should be cooperating to resist Western influence in our countries, not fighting over territorial disputes and growing closer to the West.
    1
  8. +Desham Pravesh According to this source (therichest.com/rich-list/rich-countries/lets-sea-the-10-biggest-navies-in-the-world/ ) India actually has the 7th largest navy in the world. The world's largest is US Navy, followed by Russian Navy, PLA Navy (China), Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Royal Navy (UK), French Navy and finally, Indian Navy.
    1
  9. +Desham Pravesh According to (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Navy ) under Operational fleet as of August 2017 Indian Navy has 1 aircraft carrier, 11 destroyers, 14 frigates, and 15 submarines. Japanese Self-defense Maritime force has 4 helicopter carriers, 26 destroyers, 10 frigates, 19 submarines. So how is India really considered 4th largest navy in the world? It should be USA, Russia, China, Japan and then India in terms of navy strength. Like jim kuan said, If India has the "naval strength" you claimed, then where is the exercise of control? If Indian naval power was so capable, then why isn't its presence being felt more keenly?
    1
  10. +Desham Pravesh That link you keep sending me, only represents the Future of the Indian Navy, not the present. The Wiki I used is dated to Indian Navy's Operational fleet as of August 2017 so why do you keep insisting that it is outdated? Its as close to the present as it can get. The INS Vikrant is under construction in your wiki, and the submarines are still being planned or under construction as well.
    1
  11. +Desham Pravesh Its not even 2018 yet, so why are you constantly posting possibilities in the future. Even the your wiki "Future of the Indian Navy" clears indicates that these vessels are only being planned and have not been fully incorporated into Indian Navy. There could be various reasons it not being reflected in "Indian Navy's Operational fleet as of August 2017" There could be delays, bribery of officials, and unforeseen circumstances and so on. The Scorpene class submarines are undergoing trials, but that doesn't mean that it is operationally ready. That's why it has been listed as "Future" not "Present" so why are you relying on data that only potentially represents Indian Navy in the future, and not the present Indian Navy data?
    1
  12. No surprise that there is anti-Indian sentiment in Sri Lanka, due to allegations of Indian Peacekeeping force atrocities like rape, committed among the Sri Lanka people during war against Tamil Tigers. Nepal has anti-Indian sentiments according to (therisingnepal.org.np/news/8561 ) as well as in Bangladesh (rediff.com/news/2005/dec/21bspec.htm )
    1
  13. +Vishal Kumar China has always encouraged Indian participation in Belt and Road Initiative and it is entirely India's choice not to get involved for reasons of its own. China does not force India to participate in OBOR if it doesn't want to.
    1
  14. +Joy R Ancient Bharat consisted of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, etc. but today, modern India does not control those countries, so India's participation in China's new silk road is not an absolute must. Here is a map of the ancient Silk Road, and India is only one of routes, but not the main trade artery. (orexca.com/silk_road.html )
    1
  15. China been fighting Japanese since 1931, years before Nazi Germany even invaded Poland. In contrast USA, Britain and USSR only fought Japanese for about 3 years (1942-45). So China fought Japan for 14 years, with 11 years alone (1931-1942) and 3 years with Allied help, whereas, Allies only fought Japan for 3 years (1942-45), with Chinese help. There is a reason why China was inducted into United Nations Security Council, not India.
    1
  16. Actually, China only suspend Donglong construction because of worsening weather conditions due to onset of winter. Next year when winter ends, the conditions will change and the government might decide resume road construction.
    1
  17. China has had 5000 years of governance compared to USA's 200-300 years of democracy, so why should China adopt democracy? Ancient democratic country like Rome fell to barbarians, while Chinese civilization has survived the course of history to the present day on our own. Having Multiparty system, means that the two parties will compete against each other, instead of for the country's interest. Take USA multi-party system for example. Present Obama spent 8 years developing Trans Pacific Partnership, only for Trump to come in and cancel the policy, because Trump doesn't like Obama (Obama humiliated him publicly with his birth cert) All the taxpayers money put into TPP all go down the drain, because of Trump's actions. USA can afford to waste billions of dollars just like that, but not China. Having a single party like China, means that there is continuation of policies and the government can make long term policies to benefit China, instead of short-term policies that may get cancelled by another incoming party. Such a system is not perfect, but if it works for China and bring prosperity and development, then Chinese people don't see any major reason to change our government.
    1