Comments on: Think tanks, spy fronts and websites

By: Which voice came from the mouthpiece? | The Acorn

Which voice came from the mouthpiece? | The Acorn — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 06:04:02 +0000

[...] for signal—it’s bad for everyone if the fulminations of an “angry youth” run the risk of being confused with tacit but deliberate military threats issued by a key senior official. If China doesn’t [...]

By: Sud

Sud — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:32:40 +0000

‘62 debacle woke up the Indian establishment to ground realities and even made pompous blowhards like Shri JLN smell the coffee. We should be grateful for the wake up call because by the time Ayub wandered across the biorder in ‘65, we were, mercifully, reasonably ready.

Lets hope the PRC scare tactics elicit a similar wake-up among our somnambulent neta-ship without having to learnt he lesson after a ‘62 style bloody-nose. The after-effects of Kargil – we still haven’t procured the Bofors style guns that were so immensely useful in that war – do not inspire optimism, admittedly.

By: DaveyBoy

DaveyBoy — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 02:38:04 +0000

“as having threated a nuclear attack on Los Angeles in 1995.”

I think you meant ‘threatened’. Just pointing it out.

Also, could this be proof that the enforcement of intellectual property laws in China is not up to desirable levels?

By: Alagu Periaswamy

Alagu Periaswamy — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:44:51 +0000

The chinese govt. seems to have a need to blow hot and cold at the same time, with an eye towards the border talks that happened this month. In the past, the chinese have invited Indian heads of state in a grand diplomatic gesture and then proceeded to do a nuclear test of missile firing while that head of state is still around.

Seems possible that they are “testing the waters” in India as to the response this article will elicit from Indians.

By: photonman

photonman — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:16:35 +0000

I don’t understand how publishing the article serves Chinese interests. Surely serious strategic objectives – dismembering a country of 1 billion+ is not simple – are not discussed in public.

So was the article just a piece of “patriotic thinking” that the Chinese government endorses? Exaggerating an adversary’s threat is a great way to keep people together…

By: Arvind

Arvind — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:01:23 +0000

So basically to simplify there are two groups – hardliners mainly in the PLA with their own “kind of connected” groups with “plausible deniablity” and the official groups who want to “save face” and don’t want to write anything “risky” that could blow up later.

By: Nitin

Nitin — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:26:18 +0000

Invalid

No, I mean Gen Xiong’s CIISS. According to the last three paragraphs.

By: Invalid

Invalid — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:38:14 +0000

“connect Mr Kang’s CIISS with General Xiong’s CIISS.”
Xiong’s CIISS ?? Probably you meant CIIS which is the official one according to the first paragraph.

By: Alagu Periaswamy

Alagu Periaswamy — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:14:37 +0000

Offtopic comment deleted. I’m strictly enforcing the commenting policy stated in the caveat. – Ed