• cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Because it’s part of Tibet? Idk, why does India need to claim it? Why does India need to own Assam for that matter? Why can’t Bangladesh have it? Or be its own state like Nepal or Bhutan? Historical claims are just like that, they’re not objective and they often overlap. Who’s to say who’s right and who’s wrong?

      • Hello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        Because it’s part of Tibet?

        Nope, it’s part of India. Look at a globe.

        and yea, anyone can claim anything. But if you continue to claim the river that feeds 600 million people, expect not to be cooperated with

        • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Well it depends whose globe i look at doesn’t it? One side says one thing the other says another.

          The point i was making is that most of the lines on the map that we call borders are really arbitrary and the arguments why they should be one way and not the other depend on your point of view. And the border between India and China is especially dubious in legitimacy because it was drawn by the British, and at a time when one of these two countries didn’t even exist/was a colony and the other was too weak to defend its sovereign interests and territory.

          And i don’t understand the point you’re making about rivers.

          • Hello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yes. Look at a globe and then touch the relief textures. Arunachal is part of the Indian continental landmass, which is very very clearly defined by the Himalayas, Hindu Kush, and Arakan mountains

            Simple!

            • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              Ok but we’re talking about countries not geographical regions. You do know there’s a difference between the country called India and the Indian subcontinent, right? There are more countries on the subcontinent than just India.

              Countries and their borders are political constructs. You are of course free to think that a country should have its border on this or that geographical feature like a river or a mountain range, but reality is often more messy than that.

              Geography is just one of many considerations that factor into where borders between two countries ultimately end up, there’s all sorts of political factors like history, demography, economic and strategic importance, etc.

            • Vritrahan@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              Which is exactly why China only claims it and doesn’t hold it. They had occupied all of it way back in the 62 war and would’ve held on to it if it made sense. At this point, the claim is just a pressure tactic against an India that regularly takes potshots at China to impress US.

          • Hello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah right they will take over the river of which the upper stream is already in tibet.

            look at a globe, cracker

            the river does not originate in Tibet, 90% of it originates in the mountains of Arunachal

                  • Hello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    you literally can’t keep track of the argument lmao. done

                    the original argument was “losing arunachal = water insecurity”

                    you countered with “uhhh the tsangpo is acktshyually in Tibet” and ignored the massive amounts of water (snow) from Arunachal itself

                    somehow you can’t admit that you’re wrong, or you can’t keep track of what was said 4 comments ago

                    Hint: wanna actually disprove what I said? look at the volume flow rates for all those rivers on your map, and show me that a large amount of it originates from before it hits Arunachal

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      Tibet is a significant front for China and anything they can do to maintain military security of the region against foreign meddling is strategically valid for them.