Do you and your country support China or India, if you had to choose a side?

[Easo]

India is becoming nationalistic craphole with the ruling party feeding on voters fears, but I would still choose them. China has had free reign for way too long.
And it is not like any kind of major invasion is possible outside of large scale skirmishes - Himalayas simply deny that. Proxy war via Pakistan? Now that is a different thing (though India still is in a different weight class).

[Ihavewaffles]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/15/coro...udy-shows.html

Not we will ever know for sure where it come from, pretty much like the Spanish flu.

Ur link merely says it came from china earlier than people thought..

[Omega10]

Ur link merely says it came from china earlier than people thought..

It was also found in the US and in Europe before December of 2019. So it could have started anywhere.

There is evidence that milder versions existed as early as June and July of 2019 all over the world. None of these were diagnosed as Covid mainly because they were thought to be just severe cases of the flu. As in not severe enough to kill people or even hospitalize them. Over time, the virus grew in strength until it became what it is today.

[szechuan]

India on largely religious grounds.

Yet you support/supported a party that is Islamophobic and Racist.

[Shadowferal]

Yet you support/supported a party that is Islamophobic and Racist.

if she supports india then that sounds about right...more so than China.

[OwenBurton]

Voted for China because I'd like to see the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity sphere in my lifetime

Interesting, товарищ -- someone from the motherland supporting China over India. While most Americans may not know this, the vast majority of Indians all but worship Russia. But India is also an Asian country, part of the SCO and BRICS, as well as the AIIB. And most Russians do support a side, just not the side most people in the West might imagine.

I don't like any of them, but if i had to choose i would suport china, because they didn't use strenght to take macau from Portugal, but india used strenght to take Goa from us, so, china.

Nehru's policy against Goa was indeed a violation of international law, although it must be admitted, Nehru did attempt negotiation, and the vast majority of Goans favored accession to the Indian Union -- indeed, it was condemned even by the United States. But China at the time actually fully supported his policies in the name of anti-imperialism.

"In the rest of India, people began demanding that Goa be liberated forcibly. In 1955, a satyagraha was launched by the communist and socialist parties for the freedom of Goa. When the satyagrahis entered Goa, the Portuguese opened fire, killing 20 Indians. Nehru imposed an economic blockade, but was not prepared to go further. He hoped that the popular movement in Goa and the pressure of world public opinion would force the hands of the Goan authorities.

It was in 1957, in a letter to Vinoba Bhave, that Nehru first hinted at the possibility of military action. The Goan question came alive when Portugal paid no heed to a UN resolution of December 1960 asking it to indicate when it would grant independence to its colonies in Asia and Africa. In December 1961, Portuguese soldiers in Goa fired at villagers.

Finding that his policy of patience and adherence to international ethics had not yielded results, Nehru decided to free Goa by force. Though advised by American President John F. Kennedy, British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and UN Secretary-General U Thant to postpone action, Nehru made up his mind. On December 18, after a long-drawn fight against Indian troops, the Portuguese gave up resistance. The Governor General of Goa, Vassalo e Silva, signed a document of unconditional surrender."

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-...le22339624.ece

December 19, 1961

Cable from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 'We Support the Action Taken by India against Goa, but We Cannot Agree with India’s Demand that We Withdraw Our Sentry Posts'

Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs ordered the Chinese Ambassador to convey to India that while China wholeheartedly support India taking back Goa, it could not agree to the demand that Beijing withdraw their sentry posts.

https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter....A%223276%22%7D

As an Indian-American (but not Hindu, and vehemently opposed to Modi), I have to hope that India is the obvious answer here, and that Modi is a temporary nationalist blip in the history of the world's largest democracy that was pretty damn socialist post-Independence (in 1947), til about the 90s. India's last PM before Modi was Mahomman Singh, an economist and academic who kickstarted India's economic boom through the early 2000s.....and is, of course, a Sikh. Not only a Sikh, but a Sikh who had a Muslim President serving under him, and a Christian party leader.

But I don't know how confident in that hope I am. Nationalism is on the rise everywhere, and India isn't free from susceptibility there. Also, in the 70+ year conflict with Pakistan, it's not like it has been one-sided - India has its share of the blame and fault and....well, downright dangerous, behavior.

Most Indian-Americans especially the young Indians are probably neutral on China and India's dispute. They may not necessarily like China, but they are the most extremely liberal and left-wing Asian-American group in America, and as such are probably lukewarm on Modi's policies as well.

[farsas]

Yet you support/supported a party that is Islamophobic and Racist.

I'm pretty sure Biden will be just as keen as Trump to continue genocidal policies in the arab world, and I don't think you care other than to obsessively keep fighting a pointless partisan squabble that's already over.

- - - Updated - - -

Whose side would the vast majority of Americans and Europeans pick, if they had to support either one?

China, because they seem to have a relatively stable leadership and have done a lot of good things the US hasn't-for example largely eliminating poverty within a generation. They do a lot of horrible shit but it pales in comparison to the sociopathic American death machine.

I'd favor an EU-Chinese alliance since the US has proven itself far too dangerous to have any power. You aren't going to get a Chinese leader with access to nukes mouthing off on twitter.

[Gaidax]

No dog in this fight.

[Breccia]

If I had a gun to my head and had to choose, it'd be China, because they'd be more likely to be holding the gun to my head.

As an American, I can say my country clearly prefers China, by virtue of handing them a trade war victory and then leaving the world stage, giving up a power vacuum so big it sucked China to the moon.

[Shadowferal]

If I had a gun to my head and had to choose, it'd be China, because they'd be more likely to be holding the gun to my head.

Now there's a perspective I can certainly understand.

China is more...structured, less inclined to a chaos that could screw things up on an international scale.
India...needs, if not "managed," then paid more attention to. Them launching a nuclear strike at Pakistan is just a matter of "when" not "if."

[Easo]

I don't like any of them, but if i had to choose i would suport china, because they didn't use strenght to take macau from Portugal, but india used strenght to take Goa from us, so, china.

Let's be fair - it was only a matter of time and Portugal did not get the memo. The end result was obvious, no matter which path - peaceful or forceful - was chosen, Goa would have gone to India anyway.

[Pendragon]

I'd support anyone or anything rather than support China.

[Tuor]

Nehru's policy against Goa was indeed a violation of international law, although it must be admitted, Nehru did attempt negotiation, and the vast majority of Goans favored accession to the Indian Union -- indeed, it was condemned even by the United States. But China at the time actually fully supported his policies in the name of anti-imperialism.

"In the rest of India, people began demanding that Goa be liberated forcibly. In 1955, a satyagraha was launched by the communist and socialist parties for the freedom of Goa. When the satyagrahis entered Goa, the Portuguese opened fire, killing 20 Indians. Nehru imposed an economic blockade, but was not prepared to go further. He hoped that the popular movement in Goa and the pressure of world public opinion would force the hands of the Goan authorities.

It was in 1957, in a letter to Vinoba Bhave, that Nehru first hinted at the possibility of military action. The Goan question came alive when Portugal paid no heed to a UN resolution of December 1960 asking it to indicate when it would grant independence to its colonies in Asia and Africa. In December 1961, Portuguese soldiers in Goa fired at villagers.

Finding that his policy of patience and adherence to international ethics had not yielded results, Nehru decided to free Goa by force. Though advised by American President John F. Kennedy, British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and UN Secretary-General U Thant to postpone action, Nehru made up his mind. On December 18, after a long-drawn fight against Indian troops, the Portuguese gave up resistance. The Governor General of Goa, Vassalo e Silva, signed a document of unconditional surrender."

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-...le22339624.ece

I'm going to tell you something that came out of a goese mouth, something i saw on a documentary.

An indian officer speaks to a local goese civilian, a lady. He say's proudly something like this in english ''You no longer have to speak your coloniser language'', to which the goese lady replied ''But you can keep using the language of your coloniser'', the officer didn't said anything in return.

No one in Goa was asking for liberation.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's be fair - it was only a matter of time and Portugal did not get the memo. The end result was obvious, no matter which path - peaceful or forceful - was chosen, Goa would have gone to India anyway.

Patiente is a virtude, china waited, and they got Macau without any incident... Can't say the same for India... Everywhere they have conflicts with almost everyone around them.

[Easo]

I'm going to tell you something that came out of a goese mouth, something i saw on a documentary.

An indian officer speaks to a local goese civilian, a lady. He say's proudly something like this in english ''You no longer have to speak your coloniser language'', to which the goese lady replied ''But you can keep using the language of your coloniser'', the officer didn't said anything in return.

No one in Goa was asking for liberation.


Patiente is a virtude, china waited, and they got Macau without any incident... Can't say the same for India... Everywhere they have conflicts with almost everyone around them.

First one sounds like a hearsay, not a fact. "My aunt totally said the thing". Especially considering how Portugal back then used to supress independence movements. Indians were killed regularly. Like, common, look at who was in power, what war started during the same time. You wanna argue about legality of results for that war too?

Patience indeed.

[Tuor]

First one sounds like a hearsay, not a fact. "My aunt totally said the thing". Especially considering how Portugal back then used to supress independence movements. Indians were killed regularly. Like, common, look at who was in power, what war started during the same time. You wanna argue about legality of results for that war too?

What i've heard, in a documentary, was that the common sense after Goa invasion was that the goese were disapointed for Portugal not being able to protect, some of them have been promised that Portugal would come and pick them up back to Portugal, something that never happened.

I can't say the same for Daman and Diu were people was more aligned with India.

The idenpendence moviments in portuguese África were totally not related with the common feeling in portuguese India.

The dictaship didn't helped, that is a fact.

Patience indeed.

If they had waited, the would have gotten Goa without any problems, that, or we would have granted independence to Goa.

[ParanoiD84]

That's a easy one, none of them.

But if I had to pick it would be India fuck china.

[Saltysquidoon]

India, beyond the obvious self-interest that Australia needs another power to rise up in the region to stymie china, India is a far more westernised and far more democratic country then china ever will be without a regime change.

I mean sure India has the caste system and the Pakistan thing but at least they aren't supervillain tier like china. Beyond that India is a rising power, it plays its cards right more cheap manufacturing could pivot there and the country would go through the same gentrification china went through.

[DingDongKing]

India, beyond the obvious self-interest that Australia needs another power to rise up in the region to stymie china, India is a far more westernised and far more democratic country then china ever will be without a regime change.

I mean sure India has the caste system and the Pakistan thing but at least they aren't supervillain tier like china. Beyond that India is a rising power, it plays its cards right more cheap manufacturing could pivot there and the country would go through the same gentrification china went through.

Democracy in India is a bit of a joke. It’s always just about who tricks the uneducated the best. As far as ‘westernised’ goes, you’re looking only at the main cities. The rest of the country is still in the past. Worse still, the current regime is pitting communities at each other on a far more dangerous scale than even Trump is. Even though I’m from India, I wouldn’t support them. Neither would I support China. They’re both equally bad.

[Shadowferal]

Always startling to hear of the high illiteracy rate in India. And is it still 50% for women? I have to wonder at the "world's largest democracy."

[Gaidax]

Always startling to hear of the high illiteracy rate in India. And is it still 50% for women? I have to wonder at the "world's largest democracy."

They have a huge amount of well educated and talented people that are exploited right and left for pittance, but their countryside is really stuck in past.

India can and will economically become another China in 30 years from now, they can do it and hopefully can do it without the draconic measures and grip China has on the populations.