Naib Subedar Gyan Bahadur Limbu was having a heated argument with his Chinese counterpart at the sentry post during which he rested his right foot on the boulder under dispute. The Chinese kicked his foot away. Gyan put his foot back and challenged them. Events were moving quickly.
By this time the Chinese had taken up position, presumably because their commander had already taken a decision to escalate the incident. And one of the Chinese sentries bayoneted Gyan wounding him in the arm. The Gorkha's response was swift. Both arms of the Chinese who hit the JCO were chopped off with a Khukri. At this point the Chinese opened fire and the two sides engaged in a firefight at close range. Lance Naik Krishna Bahadur, the Post Cdr., then led a charge against the Chinese in the vicinity who were forming up for an assault. Although hit & incapacitated, he continued to harangue his men forward. Rifleman Devi Prasad Limbu directly behind his Post Cdr. was already engaged in a close quarter battle with the enemy and his Khukri took off five Chinese heads.
Rifleman Limbu was soon claimed by a direct hit. For his action he was awarded a Vir Chakra, Posthumous.
RE:The Chola Incident.
by lax on Dec 22, 2007 06:42 AM Permalink
maut ko dekh ke hagega tu... gorkhas are known for their bravery & discipline.. the british army still has a gorkha regiment for this reason...
RE:!!!!!
by ajit achuthan on Dec 21, 2007 06:03 PM Permalink
commies from west bengal and kerala are busy arranging a rally to express their support to people's liberation army. They are going to have a serious discussion on how to support PLA in the event of a war against BJP/congress led India. Discussion will be also be on on the political assylum for Karat and Yechury in such an eventuality
RE:!!!!!
by off side on Dec 22, 2007 05:57 AM Permalink
After 1962 war, RSS ban was revoked and it became a national service organization, permitted to take part in 26th January parade. Thereafter, the events took a downslide. Emergency led to Janata Party which broke on dual membership issue. Net result RSS got further embroiled in politics and was subjected to communal charge. Resolving RSS issue is now crucial to Indian internal security and counter Maoist indoctrination.
If RSS sheds it political bias, devotes itself to service, educational and cultural efforts within constitutional ethos, thereby emerging as acceptable to national mainstream and EARN a non-controversial invitation to take part in 26th January parade, it would be a step towards strengthening Indian societal ethos and create suitable environs for cultivating Bharatiya value paradigm.
RE:!!!!!
by Vijay B on Dec 22, 2007 06:09 AM Permalink
RSS is, was and will be always a national upliftment service organization, unlike your paymasters' Islamic organizations whose main job is bomb innocent people and drive out authors and straight talking people (ie, kafirs).
RE:!!!!!
by off side on Dec 22, 2007 06:21 AM Permalink
Vijay, Good to hear positive things from you about RSS. A shade of its ethos in ingrained in me. This positive aspect makes the visible degrading all the more sufferable.
It is better to get acceptance from all segments of the society. This has clearly not happened. Resolving for whole hearted acceptance by the society will need lot more thinking.
RE:!!!!!
by off side on Dec 22, 2007 05:59 PM Permalink
VS, your views about RSS and also Nehru in another post is unfortunatly shaped by ill-informed perceptions. We need more considered and intricrate analysis to fathom these issues.
Ofcourse, one can not deny on which side RSS would be if any riot indeed breaks out. This does not mean they are the causal or even abetting factor. We need more sensitised comprehension to grasp complex and bewildering realities better. Likewise, Nehru as you may not be aware, laid the foundation for Nuclear India with special care and finesse.
Your "Major Shaitan Singh PVC" was good and expect your words in future on RSS and Nehru would be those which heal and not merely open up the wounds of what VS Naipaul has called 'India, the wounded civilisation'.
Reason for Healing .......................................... Words expressed with vitriolic energy Force their way thorough strife. Something must be said and others heard.
Emotions reach everywhere, Unbridled urges born in confusion Descend blind on all pathways.
The raw expressions of insignificance, And frustrated desires dissipate, Make room for silence to hear the wails.
You cannot just be feeling in still air. There is got to be some healing. Make reason work for life.
The main lesson India learned was that India must strengthen its defences and stand on its own feet to be of consequence in the world. India could no longer blindly follow Nehru's trusting polemics of "Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai" and non-violent peace. Because of India's inability to sense danger, Prime Minister Nehru faced harsh accusations from government officials, as he was the one who promoted good relations with China.Indians in general became highly skeptical of China and its military. Indians view the war as a betrayal of India's attempts for long-standing peace with China. The war also put an end to Nehru's earlier hopes that India and China would form a strong Asian Axis to counteract the increasing influence of the Cold War superpowers.
The unpreparedness of the army was blamed on Defense Minister Menon, who resigned his government post to allow for someone who might modernize India's military further. India's policy of weaponisation via indigenous sources and self-sufficiency was thus cemented. Sensing a weakened army, Pakistan, a close ally of China, initiated the Second Kashmir War with India in 1965, however India was still indecisive in this war and led to cease fire.Two years later in 1967, there was a short border skirmish (dubbed "Chola Incident" by India) between PLA troops and Indian troops, which went more favourably for India.
In 1954, Prime Minister Nehru wrote a memo calling for India's borders to be clearly defined and demarcated: in line with previous Indian philosophy, Indian maps showed a border that, in some places, lay north of the McMahon Line. Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, in November 1956, again repeated Chinese assurances that the People's Republic had no claims on Indian territory, although official Chinese maps showed 120,000 square kilometres of territory claimed by India as Chinese. CIA documents created at the time revealed that Nehru had ignored Burmese premier Ba Swe when he warned Nehru to be cautious when dealing with Zhou. They also allege that Zhou purposefully told Nehru that there were no border issues with India. in 1954, China and India negotiated the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence by which the two nations agreed to abide in settling their disputes. India presented a frontier map which was accepted by China, and the Indian government under Prime Minister Nehru promoted the slogan Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai. This apparent progress in relations suffered a major setback when, in 1959, Nehru accommodated the Tibetan religious leader, the Dalai Lama, who was fleeing Lhasa after a failed Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule. This was an act which, in China's eyes, eclipsed any former friendly gestures,although Nehru's motives were very humanitarian.
RE:The turning point
by V S on Dec 21, 2007 07:12 PM Permalink
nehru was a day dreamer and in love with edwina mountbatten. he cared two hoots about India.
Months after the Simla agreement, which China considered illegal, China set up boundary markers south of the McMahon Line. T O\'Callaghan, an official in the Eastern Sector of the North East Frontier, controversially relocated all these markers to a location slightly south of the McMahon Line, and then visited Rima to confirm with Tibetan officials that there was no Chinese influence in the area. The Simla Agreement violated the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which (although mostly unrelated to the Himalayan region) stipulated that neither party was to negotiate with Tibet \"except through the intermediary of the Chinese government\". Because of these treaty constraints it was not until the 1930s that the British started to officially use the McMahon Line on maps of the region. China took the position that the Tibetan government should not have been allowed to make a such a treaty, rejecting Tibet\'s claims of independent rule. For its part, Tibet did not object to any section of the McMahon Line excepting the demarcation of the trading town of Tawang, which the Line placed under British-Indian jurisdiction. However, up until World War II, Tibetan officials were allowed to administer Tawang with complete authority. Due to the increased threat of Japanese and Chinese expansion during this period, British Indian troops secured the town as part of the defense of India\'s eastern border.
Months after the Simla agreement, which China considered illegal, China set up boundary markers south of the McMahon Line. T O'Callaghan, an official in the Eastern Sector of the North East Frontier, controversially relocated all these markers to a location slightly south of the McMahon Line, and then visited Rima to confirm with Tibetan officials that there was no Chinese influence in the area. The Simla Agreement violated the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which (although mostly unrelated to the Himalayan region) stipulated that neither party was to negotiate with Tibet "except through the intermediary of the Chinese government". Because of these treaty constraints it was not until the 1930s that the British started to officially use the McMahon Line on maps of the region. China took the position that the Tibetan government should not have been allowed to make a such a treaty, rejecting Tibet's claims of independent rule. For its part, Tibet did not object to any section of the McMahon Line excepting the demarcation of the trading town of Tawang, which the Line placed under British-Indian jurisdiction. However, up until World War II, Tibetan officials were allowed to administer Tawang with complete authority. Due to the increased threat of Japanese and Chinese expansion during this period, British Indian troops secured the town as part of the defense of India's eastern border.
RE:Macmohan, China, Tibet and India.
by super success on Dec 21, 2007 05:03 PM Permalink
who are chinese to claim our god stayed in mansarovar that is the biggest proof that the area belongs to us
RE:Macmohan, China, Tibet and India.
by ItsMe on Dec 21, 2007 07:44 PM Permalink
when god was there, there was no indian or no chinese. it is too ancient for any such claim. some historians can still date the ramayana and the mahabharata, but no one can ever date shiva.
In 1826 India and China gained a common border, including the area of what is now called Myanmar, following British annexations in the Anglo-Burmese Wars. In 1913, representatives of Great Britain, China and Tibet attended a conference in Simla regarding the borders between Tibet, China and India. Whilst all three representatives initialed the agreement, Beijing later objected to the proposed boundary between the regions of Outer Tibet and Inner Tibet and did not ratify it. The details of the Indo-Tibetan boundary was not revealed to China at the time.The foreign secretary of the Indian government, Henry McMahon, who drew up the proposal, decided to bypass the Chinese (although instructed not to by his superiors) and settle the border bilaterally by negotiating directly with Tibet. According to later Indian claims, this border was intended to run through the highest ridges of the Himalayas, as the areas south of the Himalayas were traditionally Indian. However, the McMahon Line lay south of the boundary India claims. India's government held the view that the Himalayas were the ancient boundaries of the Indian subcontinent, and thus should be the modern boundaries of India while it is the position of the Chinese government that the disputed area in the Himalayas have been geographically and culturally part of Tibet since ancient times[
RE:What is MacMohan Line.
by off side on Dec 22, 2007 03:13 AM Permalink
Excellent perspectives from Mr. Chavda. Folks like PKN need to be made aware of Chinese arguments.
Chinese do not bring in Marxian mumbo-jumbo to butress their claims, they do so on the basis of Chinese history. Sovreign India is the legal inheritor of British India and it is legal for Indian Govt to abide by all British agreements. China does not accept British treaties on Tibet and has deployed force or threatened to do so.
Tibet is the fountainhead of most of water flowing into India. China are fast acquiring capability to dam and alter the water flow pattern. Reestoring the rights of Tibet to be atleast autonomous is a great Indian imperative.
RE:What is MacMohan Line.
by PKN on Dec 21, 2007 05:18 PM Permalink
Your knowledge of history is wonderful ! But still like all primary school history teachers you have merely restated the obvious. History is History. While it can give some directions it cannot be a solution to how we conduct ourselves today. If the world were to use historical references to redraw national boundaries we would have global choas along with global warming threatening mankind. Using history we could reclaim for India most of Pakistan and what is today called afghanisation. Using history Tamilnadu could make logical claims on large parts of Bali , Cambodia etc. The problem with the Mc Mohan Line was that Henry McMohon drew it not only unilaterally but also on a two- dimesional map without caring to even know the terrain. Result : There are little or no natural elements to firmly identify the line on actaul ground zero. Even streams identified by the line change course seasonally. Reality is that China and India are two giants in Asia . One of them has to emerge at the big brother and the other logically the smaller brother. Border disputes , China's moving closer to Pakistan , India's moving slowly into the US Camp are all posturing in this conflict for supremacy. The solution lies in working out the problems . But be assured that a solution doesnot lie in going back to historical elements during the reign of Chandra Gupta Maurya !
RE:RE:What is MacMohan Line.
by Major Sassy on Dec 21, 2007 05:55 PM Permalink
you work with solutions with those who are interested in solutions and as you say even McMohan line is history so how can you escape history?
RE:RE:RE:What is MacMohan Line.
by off side on Dec 22, 2007 03:20 AM Permalink
You escape history, by knowing history! As Toynbee once said, --Those Who Forget the Lessons of History Are Doomed To Repeat It--
We need to pursue all efforts to make it simply unaffordable for China to hold on illegally to Tibet. For that we need wise market oriented economic and technology policies in India first.
RE:What is MacMohan Line.
by super success on Dec 21, 2007 05:06 PM Permalink
ashok chavda is talking like what pakistan is talking since 60 years to claim kashmir.as we will not give up kashmir and china will not give up tibet now bringing this informations is useless
RE:Indian army can't even shot a bird
by Balakumaran on Dec 21, 2007 04:39 PM Permalink
Poolu, we dont need Karate, Kunfu training. War in 21st century needs strategy and technology.
