Sino Indian border brawl or ambush - A piece of rubbish reporting

Brutal details emerge of India soldier 'ambush' on contested border with China as Modi tries to calm tension.  Joe Wallen, The Telegraph.

As the sun began to set over the Himalayan peaks, Colonel Santosh Babu and his unarmed platoon of 50 Indian soldiers on Monday set off on a patrol across the strategically crucial Galwan Valley in Ladakh.

Their mission was probably the most important in recent Indian history - to ascertain whether Chinese troops had withdrawn, as per an agreement between senior army officers from the two nations, from territory which had previously been administered by India for decades.

Instead, to their surprise, what Colonel Babu's men found were temporary Chinese all-weather tents and roughly enemy 100 soldiers waiting at a location called Patrolling Point 14.

Despite being outnumbered, the Indian soldiers confronted the Chinese troops.  Some started to remove the tents, sparking a long and brutal man-to-man brawl that has brought the two superpowers to the brink of war. ...

“Just when the Indian soldiers, who were on patrol started removing Chinese tents and material, it evoked a violent response from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)”.

As the fight continued, both sides called for reinforcements but Chinese troops again significantly outnumbered those on the Indian side, allegedly 500 to 100....

Indian Army sources told the Telegraph that 23 troops are now confirmed to have died but casualties will significantly rise, with 110 soldiers injured and  more troops still missing....

The Indian sources say China suffered 35 casualties during the clash, quoting U.S intelligence material, a development Beijing said it wasn’t aware of.


The above is the most unprofessional piece of reporting with hazy and garbled facts and fuzzy numbers. How did the reporter gathered these facts? From slippery tongue witnesses of course. Now wonder all the facts were so funny and illogical and the numbers as good as guess work.

Read this, the 50 Indian soldiers were on a survey mission. But they ended up removing the tents of Chinese soldiers while being outnumbered. How arrogant to start such an aggressive act, to walk into Chinese camp to remove the tents of soldiers of another country. Who did these Indian soldiers think they were? Such hostile acts would definitely invite retaliation from the Chinese side. And the Indian news all over are still claiming that they were provoked by Chinese soldiers. Isn't it clear who were the aggressors?  In this report the heading was 'ambush'. What utter rubbish!  Does the reporter know the meaning of ambush?

And look at the numbers, 50 Indian soldiers provoking 100 Chinese soldiers.  Though both called for reinforcement, with claims that there were 500 Chinese soldiers to 100 Indian soldiers, and only 23 Indian casualties against 35 Chinese casualties.  The numbers gets more confusing with the Indians claiming 110 soldiers injured and more are missing. How many more? It seems that this brawl would have involved at least a few hundred soldiers from the Indian side and 5 times more from the Chinese side. That would be around a 1000 men involved in the fight from an initial 50 Indians against 100 Chinese.

And the funny thing, the Indians did not know how many casualties were from the Chinese side but the Americans that were not there were able to provide the number of Chinese casualties. The Americans must be Gods, omniprescience, all knowing. And the Indians damn were bloody good fighters, outnumbered 500 to 100 but able to inflict more casualties on the Chinese side, and they were ambushed!

Slippery tongues indeed. Talk like real. What is real? Who started the fight or provocation? How come all the great fighting Indians landed up in the river but not the Chinese? Is the reporter saying that the Indian soldiers were all pushed into the river by the Chinese soldiers?

Sino Indian border fist fight

'India and China have never even agreed on the length of their "Line of Actual Control" frontier, and each side uses different frontier proposals made by Britain to China in the 19th century to back their claims....

"China, with its better infrastructure, with its better military capabilities, perhaps thinks that this is the time to push India, to see how far India will go," Pant told AFP.'  CNA

The above is reported in CNA on the recent border scuffle between Indian and Chinese soldiers. 20 Indian soldiers were dead and there were undisclosed casualties on the Chinese side arising from unarmed hand to hand combat between the two sides with no bullets fired. As expected, loud mouth India claimed at least 45 casualties on the Chinese side. Indians always win, like the Americans.

The AFP report is as usual seen from the western eyes, that India and China were using the 19th Century British proposal for negotiation. This is outright false and misinformation. China would never use a map arbitrarily drawn by a mad white man during the British Empire, scrawling whatever he liked as part of the British Empire as a basis for negotiation. China would not accept such nonsense from the British against its national interest. It is the Indians that are using this British so called maps to tell the Chinese that the disputed land belong to India because they think they have inherited the British Empire and whatever the Brits claimed to be part of their Empire.

And there were many instances of India pushing the barrier and crossing into Chinese territories to harass Chinese soldiers. Doklam was a good example of India attacking Chinese construction workers in the name of defending Bhutan's territory. And in this instance it was the Indians building roads into Chinese territory. The cocky and arrogant Indians think that they are more powerful and better equipped to defeat the Chinese soldiers, not like the AFP report above that China was pushing India with its better infrastructure and military capabilities. India is the aggressor, just like the 1962 border war but when got walloped, claimed to be the victim.

China has lost patience with the constant incursions, provocations and harassment of the Indian soldiers and have built up its forces in the region, and ready to take on the Indians if they continue to be reckless and adventurous.

The only way the Indians could win a war with China is a talking war. There is no way the Indian soldiers could match the might and military sophistication of the PLA. The PLA is the only military force that had fought the mighty Americans in a massive conventional war in Korea and won. And this was during a time when the Americans were at the peak of their military power while China was at its weakest, just coming out of a civil war with the KMT and the destruction by the Japanese in WW2.

India could not even win a war with Pakistan but daily telling the world how capable it is and how ready it is to fight and win a war with China. If China could thrash the Americans at its best, with basic small arms against air, naval and heavy artillery weapons from the Americans, what is there in the Indian military to fight against a China today with some of the best weapons and well armed and trained PLA?

The Indians better stop their nonsense and seek a negotiated border settlement with China than craving for another war with China when it would be simply a mismatch of military and economic strength. It would be suicidal for India to even think of launching a war with China.

Make peace and cooperate to grow and prosper with China is the best way out for India...and stop spouting nonsense about how superior India is vis a vis China. A slum country acting and behaving as if it is a super power.  The world is only talking about G2? Anyone heard of G3?

What are Singapore's intangible strengths?

SINGAPORE’S INTANGIBLE STRENGTHS

Noting the Future Economy Council, formed in 2017 and led by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, had already been driving such preparations, Mr Chan highlighted the things that set Singapore apart – its intangible strengths.

He noted that while many investors have chosen to locate and expand their businesses in Singapore, this was not based on factors such as the availability of natural resources or cost.


“They chose us because of our strengths, which are not easy to replicate elsewhere. We are open, and connected with the world, we are trusted, we are united and stable as a society, and we have a skilled workforce,” he said.   CNA

Chan Chun Sing is flying Singapore's intangible strengths as the key reason why foreign investors chose to invest here. What then are these intangible strengths of Singapore? In short it is the system and the people. The system is created and developed and maintained by the people, a product of the people, the early Singaporeans, the Pioneer and Merdeka Generations.

What has happened to these generations of hard working and disciplined Singaporeans? They are ageing and passing away, and being replaced by funny and unpredictable third world wildlife that are pretending to be law abiding and hardworking and disciplined workers like our earlier generations. They are very nice....some said.  Just you wait. Just wait till they find their footings and be more familiar and confident of the environment and the timid kiasu, kiasi, kia cheng hu Singaporeans, and then only will their true colours emerged. Wildlife would be wildlife.  That is why they are kept in cages and not allowed to roam free. Even after years in cages, when released, they would return to their wild behaviour at the slightest opportunity.

If these wildlife and third world beans are that good, they would not be here, their countries would be just as good or better than Singapore. To believe that they are the talents to replace our hardworking and disciplined Pioneer and Merdeka generations is foolishness.

Our intangible strength has been compromised and would not be the same again. Remember what LKY said about the tenacity and vigorous of the culture of our early generations? What have they been replaced with, contentious, cheating, racist, lying, back stabbing third world work ethics and culture? Whatever work cultures or values the new wildlife brought with them will determine the intangible strength of Singapore for good or for bad as we go forward. Only the blind would not be able to see the stupidity of it all, like exchanging Singapore dollars for rupees and exclaiming very good and pretending to be happy about it while the smart ones are exchanging their rupees for Singapore dollars.

Is Singapore bringing in the right mix of people to strengthen its social fabric and the work ethics and talent of its workforce, or doing the opposite? What kind of intangible strength is Singapore hoping to develop under this stupid open leg policy for wildlife to come here to replace Singaporeans and calling them talents when they are armed with fake or funny certificates and CVs?

Is Singapore creating more low paying jobs for Singaporeans and high paying jobs for foreigners?

In the fourth of a series of National Broadcasts, Trade and Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing said on Sunday (June 14) that the Government will intensify its efforts to bring the best foreign talent to Singapore.

His comments come as Singaporeans, who were already worried about foreign competition, face an unprecedented loss of jobs in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Speaking about the Government’s plans to improve Singapore’s infrastructure for the next generation, Mr Chan said: “We will also intensify the efforts to attract the best ideas and talent to compete on our side, and complement our strengths.

“Initiatives like the Global Innovation Alliance connect us with talent hubs across the world. We will make ourselves a more attractive safe harbour for talent, ideas and intellectual property, to grow more businesses and create better jobs.”

The minister, who is also the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) Second Assistant Secretary-General, added: “Competition is intense. Talented people, including our own, can go anywhere.”


Above is reported in www.theindependent.sg. Just a few days back the govt plastered the media with the message that Singapore is spending billions to create jobs for Singaporeans. But most of these jobs are trainee level jobs or relatively low paying jobs as there was not such remarks about jobs to attract talents. Now compare this with this nonsense about bringing in more foreign talents ie high paying jobs. Is the govt thus creating low paying jobs for Singaporeans and high paying jobs for foreigners?

Another question, if the foreign talents are brought in to fill high paying jobs, and the jobs are local in nature, ie local market, local customers, local competitors, is there a need to hire more talented foreigners for such jobs to compete with local talents to do jobs that operate in the local environment? If the jobs created are to compete in the international market for more business and revenue, that is understandable.

There is no need to hire super foreign talent to run chicken rice stalls to cater to domestic supply and demand, to compete against another local chicken rice stalls. Even if one is literally selling chicken rice overseas, who are the competitors for chicken rice? Singaporeans, not foreigners.  Foreigners wanting to eat chicken rice must eat Singaporean chicken rice.  Is this too difficult to understand? There is no need to hire foreign talents, to pay them million, to run the public transport system or taxi system when the business is the domestic market. Many businesses are domestic in nature and there is absolutely no need for foreign talents. Why need foreigners to run the postal system, why need foreigners to be our local bank managers, MRT, buses etc etc

I can't believe that we have fools that are so happy to hire foreign talents and pay them millions to operate in the local market to make money from the local consumers, to compete with other local businesses. Unless these foreign talents are to fight with the best in the world for international market and foreign revenue, what the fuck is there a need to hire such foreign talents and be paid in the millions?  Foreigners tua kee is it? Just because some demi gods said so, everyone blindly think this is the recipe for the well being of Singapore. There must be certain criteria and conditions to demand for foreign talents. Do not sacrifice the interests of Singaporeans by replacing them with foreigners.

Even the CEO job of a bank, if the business is local, does not require a foreign talent and paying multi million dollar salary when the job and pay could be given to a local talent.  Even if the business has some overseas offices, it does not necessarily require a foreign talent as the business is mainly for businesses operating from here, and the customers are from here and any business generated is due to comparative advantages, captured business and nothing really got to do with foreign talent and expertise.

It is so stupid to everyday yelling about hiring foreign talents and wasting taxpayers money when such money could be used to pay Singaporeans. Why don't the govt hire more foreign talents to take over the govt, in political appointments like ministers as well? How many of the foreign talents hired are actually running another chicken rice stall here? There is no need to have a gold plated chicken rice stall run by foreign talents and to charge more and the people paying more for another plate of gold plated chicken rice.

There are many myths that are just myths and must be discarded. And this fetish fad of hiring foreign talents must be reexamined to see if they really make sense and contribute to the productivity of the country, the interests of Singaporeans, and generating more revenue in terms of foreign revenue and not taxing more on the people.

Good jobs must go to Singaporeans, not foreigners unless there are exceptional reasons for doing so. No one must be allowed to sell out the interests of Singaporeans to benefit foreigners. We do not owe the foreigners a living. Think, don't just simply follow old mantras wholesale.

Singapore is for Singaporeans not foreigners. Think Singaporean first. And stop the crap of giving instant pink IC to foreigners and call them Singaporeans.

USA - a nation built on the foundation of white supremacy, racism and hate

WASHINGTON, DC: The fatal shooting of a black man by a white police officer, this time in Atlanta, Georgia, poured more fuel on Sunday (Jun 14) on a raging US debate over racism after another round of street protests and the resignation of the city's police chief....

 "I do not believe this was a justified use of deadly force," Bottoms said. The officer who shot Brooks - identified as Garrett Rolfe - was dismissed....

James Clyburn, an African American member of Congress from South Carolina, said he was incensed.
"This did not call for lethal force. And I don't know what's in the culture that would make this guy do that. It has got to be the culture. It's got to be the system," he said, speaking on CNN's "State of the Union."  CNA

In a way it is the system. But the system is built over centuries of hate and white supremacy.  From the days of genociding the native Americans to the slavery of black Africans and racial discrimination against Chinese and Asians, this doctrine of hate is in the bones of the white Americans.  And this culture has been built and perpetuated through centuries of hate narratives in the culture, in the homes, in the schools, in society, where white supremacy is the norm.

America is for the whites. The rest of the coloured people do not matter. The blacks, the native Indians and other coloured immigrants are second, third and fourth class citizens, with lesser rights, some with no rights like the blacks Africans, to be killed at the slightest infringement, not necessary violation of the law. Imagine youths walking on a country road with no sidewalks can be hauled up for jaywalking and be killed when resisting arrest. Imagine young boys and girls can be harassed and handcuffed at the whims and fancy of the white policemen. Imagine killing a black man for accused of $20 fake notes, note even proven. Imagine being checked everyday on the roads, in your own garden or right in front of your own houses.

The white supremacy and hate culture are in the bones of the white Americans. It cannot be wiped out just be a few protest. It took centuries to build and develop. It would take centuries to erase from the sick minds of the whites.

The only way out is to divide America in coloured and white states. Let the whites rule themselves and the coloured rule themselves in two or more countries of the Disunited States of America. Otherwise the killings and discrimination of blacks and coloured people will never cease.

The USA needs to be broken up. The coloured people need a country of their own when they are treated as equals, not the unwritten slaves of the whites and to serve the interests of the whites.

This is the 21st Century, but the whites are still living in medieval times when they are the superior race, living under the Doctrine of Christian Discovery, where the coloured and natives are sub humans, and could be killed under their religion of white supremacy.  This doctrine of racial discrimination and hate must be eradicated once and for all. No more dilly dally and hoping that the whites would be merciful and kind to the blacks and coloured people.

There were thousands of cases of police abuses but all dismissed except a handful of cases that involved black policemen attacking white men. Cases involving white policemen were always dismissed.

They will not. Mark my words, there will be more killings of blacks before this thing is over. The white policemen is only a small fraction of white supremacy gangs and thugs. There are the KKK still hiding around the corners, the extreme rightist groups, the Nazi groups etc etc waiting to kill the blacks and coloured people when the chips are down.

America needs a black revolution for equal rights to exist with dignity and to be treated like human beans.

PS.  AFP report.

"A LONG WAY TO GO"
A 1999 review into the case found British police were "institutionally racist".

Basu said there had been "real" progress since then but "we must confront the fact that with many of our communities - especially the black community - we still have a long way to go".

Alternate truth versus transient risks

Many people must have remember Trump's famous comment about alternate truth. Trump used this to describe his own truth or interpretation of things and events that is different from the truth or what was reported in the news. The truth of the matter is that truth is subjective and anyone can spread his own alternate truth from the truth. There is nothing but the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is no longer fashionable, only to be used in archaic organisations like the courts of law where truth has a different meaning.

Lately, with the Covid Pandemic, there is a big tussle between more restrictions and lockdowns and opening up the economy. Both are equally damaging to the financial well being of the people. Many countries could not resist the temptation of opening up despite their infected cases still on the rise. It is the in thing, fashionable because clown Trump did it and so far nothing serious has happened in the USA. This nice situation could be helped by not testing too many people and keeping the numbers of infected cases low.

Singapore is also struggling between extending the partial lockdown to opening up. Slowly more businesses are allowed to open and people are starting to get to work.  And with cars so expensive, many poor and not so rich Singaporeans have no choice but to take the Slow MRT to work. And in morning rush hours, the crowded train is still a normal thing.

This puts into conflict the prohibition against social visiting. This is still banned but cramming in trains is ok. When confronted by this kind of questions that is conflicting and contradicting, this is what Lawrence Wong's reply, introducing a new phrase called 'transient risks'. Below is quoted from theindependent.sg.

'Mr Wong, who is the co-chair of the Government’s multi-ministry COVID-19 taskforce, explained that the Government is taking other precautions like stepping up cleaning, making masks mandatory and asking commuters not to talk on trains since it will be difficult to maintain physical distance on public transport.

Asserting that current precautions minimise the risk of virus transmission on trains, the ruling party politician went on to qualify public transport journeys as “transient risks” for COVID-19 since they are generally not long.

Social interactions, however, “are of a different magnitude of risk all together,” according to the Minister. Explaining why the Government implements strict restrictions on gatherings, Mr Wong said:'

Transient exposure is surely a relative term. How long is transient ok and how long is not ok. Is 30min exposure in a crowded train ok, less risk of being infected versus an hour or two at home with visitors that are friends or relatives?

According to all the reports on Covid19, as long as there is an infected person around, symptomatic or asymptomatic, a few minutes are all it takes to be infected.  So who is wiser? Perhaps if our Slow MRT is moving a bit faster, the exposure time could be lessen and the risk equally lessen. Until the day when our slow trains move at a faster speed than a snail, then this 'transient risks' could be more meaningful, I think.

What do you think?  Are 'transient risks' an alternate truth? A risk is a risk. A calculated risk, a no choice risk, a risk forced upon us because of the unthinkable population density that is going to double when the population hits 10m?

Another new political party called Red Dot United

In a virtual press conference on 29 May 2020, political veterans Ravi Philemon and Michelle Lee announced the formation of a new political party - Red Dot United. Ravi Philemon and Michelle Lee shared the goals for their party, and explained the need for another credible voice in Singapore's political landscape.

Instead of joining existing parties, Red Dot United was created because there is distinct space in Singapore's political landscape for their party to bring new perspectives, ideas and methods. There is also a need for a party to keep asking hard questions and to seek solutions. With Red Dot United, Singaporeans will therefore have another good choice to consider for future elections.

- More at AllSingaporeStuff.com https://www.allsingaporestuff.com/article/ravi-philemon-and-michelle-lee-form-political-party-red-dot-united

This is another piece of good news for Singaporeans and for democracy. In democracy, the most important element is the right to vote, the freedom to choose your own representative to Parliament. Right to vote is number one, whether the person one voted goes to Parliament is secondary. It would be good if he goes to Parliament, a bonus. If not, never mind, just feel good that one has the right and chance to vote.  

Singaporeans are so lucky, with so many choices of political parties and people standing for election. And so many voices to be heard, inside and outside of Parliament. This is an exemplary form of democracy. The best on earth.We should tell the world we are number one in number of political parties per 100,000 people.

I  think we, all of us in this blog, can also form a political party called Redbeans United.

Our mission should be talking cock about Singapore and International Affairs. We would also be offering an alternative voice to be heard.  The voters also would have another choice to vote for a new party and its candidates. The Singaporeans would be very thankful to have another new political party and more political rallies to attend.

I would encourage all the members of political parties that are not happy with their parties for whatever reasons to resign and form new parties. The more the merrier. And they can all become little Indian chiefs and maybe by a stroke of luck or accident, they can also become millionaire ministers and PM.  The thought of it is so intoxicating, like day dreaming, building castles in the air. Pure entertainment.  Better than viagra.

What do you think?