@Joe Shearer @KAAFIR
The Galwan conflict, of course, we can't just look at one-sided reports. For this kind of incident, any unilateral written report can only explain the position of the reporting party, and cannot restore the truth of the incident.
We have not seen the live photos and videos released by India. This kind of border activity, the India military definitely has live photos and videos, but we don't see it. If India friends have these photos and videos, they can be provided.
China released photos and videos of the scene long after the incident. You should be able to find these photos and videos easily.
Wikipedia's account of this incident, the Chinese version and the English version, also differ a lot.
But in this incident, there are some things that everyone agrees on. We can use these consensuses to analyze the situation.
1. The duration of this conflict is relatively long. Judging by the pictures and videos, it lasts from the afternoon until late at night. ---------- this indicates that both sides are calling for reinforcements.
2. Judging from the on-site photos and videos of the Chinese side, at the beginning of the day, there were only about 10~20 Chinese soldiers fighting against more than 100 India soldiers. ----------Who's ambushing whom? It's obvious.
3. In the evening, Chinese reinforcements arrived, and the situation on the scene reversed. The conflict is over! It doesn't matter how ---------- ends. That's not the point of our discussion
I'm not trying to discuss who is right and who is wrong. From the analysis of these situations, this was an ambush operation launched by the India military. But I don't know, is it the decision of the India military or the decision of the Modi government? ---------- if there is a dispute about this point, you can provide photos and videos to discuss it.
In the border areas, both sides must have known the deployment of each other's forces. Knowing that the other side had a large number of troops deployed in the rear, it also launched an undulating attack on the front-line patrol. What is the purpose of their decision? Why did attitudes towards China change dramatically in India after the conflict?
That's what I want to look into
============================================================
加勒万冲突事件,我们当然不能只看单方面的报道。对于这种事件,任何单方面的文字报道只能说明报道方的立场,无法还原事件的真相。
我们没有看到印度公布的现场照片和视频。这种边境活动,印度军方肯定有现场照片和视频,但我们没有看到。如果印度朋友有这些照片和视频,可以提供。
中国在事件发生的很久之后,公布了现场照片和视频。你们应该可以很容易找到这些照片和视频。
维基百科关于这次事件的记载,中文版本和英文版本,也有很多不同。
但这次事件,有一些事情是大家的共识。我们可以用这些共识来分析情况。
1、此次冲突的持续时间比较长。从图片和视频来看,从下午持续到深夜。----------这说明,双方都呼叫增援。
2、从中方的现场照片和视频来看,白天刚开始的时候,大约只有10~20名中国军人在与超过百名印度军人对抗。----------谁在伏击谁?很明显了。
3、晚上,中方增援部队到达,现场局势逆转。冲突结束!----------结局如何,不重要。这不是我们讨论的重点
我并不是想探讨谁对谁错。从这些情况分析,这是印度军方发起的一次伏击行动。但我不清楚,是印度军方的决定还是莫迪政府的决定?----------如果对这个观点有争议,可以提供照片和视频来讨论。
在边境地区,双方肯定是知道对方的兵力部署。在明知对方在后方部署有大量兵力的情况下,还对前线巡逻队发起伏击行动。他们做出这种决定的目的是什么?为什么在冲突之后,印度国内民众对中国的态度就发生巨大变化?
这是我想研究的内容