Most probably upgrade to their current F16s and additional F16 from third country for carrying out strikes in Iran.
India-US Relations
- Thread starter Butter Chicken
- Start date
Most probably upgrade to their current F16s and additional F16 from third country for carrying out strikes in Iran.
IRIS-T is German. Two different systems each with their own set of advantages. Let's not throw good ole PAC into the bin.
- IRIS-T is better for: Point defense, shorter-range threats, mobile operations, and cost-effective deployment for specific high-value targets
- PAC-3 is better for: Area defense, longer-range threats, ballistic missile defense, and comprehensive air defense coverage
Trump is unpredictable on the best of days. But the new US cabinet (Lutnick, Hegseth and Gabbard) seems to driving at least part of the agenda wrt India. From trade to Pak, we're suddenly on the back foot. Personally, I think it's time for quiet diplomacy rather than making grandiose statements at think tanks and interviews. Wolf warrior diplomacy is not going to work for us right now.
There's a possibility Trumpy will abandon Taiwan to China and just wants more oil from Middle East and as such he wants to use Pakistan to secure US hold there by crushing Iran. It seems he wants to use Pak and Israel to deal with Iran as he promised to Americans he will NOT send US troops to get involved elsewhere. At this rate I think 90% of Trumps voter base won't care what happens to Taiwan, they probably don't even know the place's importance, as such he doesn't care about confronting China and doesn't care that much about India anymore.
There is still a 10-15-year window in which the USA can blunt China's rise. As with the SU, Commie China is a civilizational threat. It goes against the American way of life. After all the anti-China rhetoric (wrt Hunter Biden) in the 2024 election, Trump can't be seen as going soft now.
Secondly, if Trump abandons Taiwan, you can expect NATO and Five Eyes to unravel pretty quick, while allies like Japan and SoKo will quickly develop N-weapons of their own. The last thing Trump would want is to lose the GCC club to China.
As for Pak, their rent-seeking ways are not without limits. On the one hand, China will tighten the screws if Pindi falls out of line. The debt roll-overs will stop, and CPEC (which is not profitable anyway) will come to a grinding halt. The Pakistani awam will not take kindly to US and esp. Yahudi forces operating from their soil. Public pressure to free Imran Khan will only increase, which would upset the delicate balance of power in Islamabad.
The US has other ME bases like Al Udeid and Al Dhafra (w/long-term basing rights) that can be used for ops in Iran, and Afg. Pak is just back-up, I'd say.
It’s very easy, almost lazy, to say that India should simply "cozy up" to the United States to counter China. But geopolitics is not that simplistic. The India–US relationship is layered, and it demands far more nuance than blind alignment. There is a reason why successive Indian governments, from the Cold War era to Vajpayee’s time and even today, have remained cautious about overcommitting to Washington’s strategic orbit.
Yes, the China threat is real. But jumping headfirst into a US-led alliance system carries long-term consequences. Becoming too close to the United States opens the door to pressures that may not align with India’s national interests. This is precisely why liberalisation slowed even under pro-reform leaders like Vajpayee. Strategic decisions must be made on our terms, not out of fear or ideological alignment.
The United States rarely offers open-ended partnerships. It offers terms, often with expectations of alignment on issues that may not serve Indian interests. Strategic autonomy is not just a slogan for India. It is a core doctrine. Take Japan as a cautionary example. In the 1980s, as Japan's economy surged and began rivaling that of the US, Washington intervened aggressively. The Plaza Accord of 1985, pushed by the US, led to a sharp appreciation of the yen, which in turn triggered asset bubbles and eventually the Japanese economic crisis of the 1990s. This was not just economic diplomacy, it was an imposition that reshaped Japan's trajectory. On the strategic side, decades of dependence on US military protection have limited its ability to act independently in its own neighbourhood. Is that the direction India should move toward?
Now imagine a scenario where Pakistan Airforce fires a missile that destroy a part of Kartavya Path in Delhi. Do we wait for clearance from the Pentagon before retaliating? Do we consult State Department mood boards before deciding how, when, and where to defend our homeland?
Take example of South Korea, allegedly in March 2010 a South Korean Corvette, Cheonan was sunk. And according to some reports North Korea was behind it. Public sentiment was boiling and they wanted a retaliatory action. But according to some analysts a certain entity wasn't in favour of such action. Thus nothing happened.
India cannot and should not allow its security priorities to be dictated by the political calculations of another country, however friendly it may be.
This is why India maintains a transactional, issue-based, and interest-driven relationship with the United States. We cooperate on defense, technology, trade, and climate. But we do not bind our sovereignty to the strategic imperatives of any other power. We will engage, we will collaborate, we will partner—but we will not surrender our independent decision-making.
India deals with the United States not as a client state, but as a civilisational power with its own path and priorities. To some it might sound like just a slogan or some beliefs. However, we are doing this because our policy makers have realised the problem with over committing to the west. The goods and the bad, the merits and the demerits. Don't forget we have been trying to court US since the times of Nehru. Even Rajiv Gandhi tried to go above and beyond to court USA, which lead to what? Whose pressure stopped Vajpayee government from punishing Pakistan for Kargil? Who's pressure do you think has pushed us to make those ridiculous ROEs? The same USA. We are already comprising a lot to please them. How much can we to sacrifice to the great satan? We have already sacrificed the body enough, shall we also sacrifice the soul?
@_Anonymous_ What do you think about my assessment of relationship between us & the great satan?
Our foriegn policy has its constraints. We can't abandon Russia. 80% of our mil hardware is still of Russian origin. While the Biden admin had showed some understanding in this regard, Trump/Lutnick has made it clear they find it unhelpful. Handing the US a few billion dollars worth of defense deals every couple of years isn't going to work. The msg is this: You're either with us or against us. There was bound to be some blowback (coup in Bangladesh, F404/Apache delays, wining and dining Pak CAS in the WH, trade deal shenanigans).
The US is now removing restrictions on chip mfg tech sales to China, while trying to make a hard bargain (pushing for GM crops, dairy market access) with India. If we try to accommodate too much, we could lose what little leverage we have.
Given Trump's sweeping mandate, he seems to be hell bent on getting his way.
Interesting times.
Last edited:
Man Hydra sir, every time news comes out that Pak is buying US weapons you act like Pakistan is going to get a UFO with laser weapons for free from Area 51.
F16 is not survivable at all infront of India. Literally they are big fat targets for S400 and Kusha, and even MRSAM. Doesn't matter if they get fancy new missiles. I feel you have a weird fetish for F16 because last time you were freaking out more on the news of Pak potentially getting F16V rather than J35!!!
Pakistan having pl15, which is bettet than aim120d on paper. Still pak is going behind it. Says everything.
And how many f16 got shot down by s400 in op sindoor? F16 with aim 120d will give enough bvr capability to paf to have check on our superior standoff strike capabilities.
Who knows maybe an F16 did indeed get shot down! It's not like Pak will reveal it's losses. Even Indonesia accepted PAF had losses. Unless F16 is armed with most capable AGM88 ARM its toast against S400 or Kusha. Heck even Tejas Mk1A with Astra Mk2 can give it trouble.
BTW, PL15 likely made us lose an entire Rafale, and paired with IWB of J35, it's comparison to F16 will be like a comparison between an ape and a gorilla (hint: F16 is not the gorilla in this comparison lol).
I am forced to use a bit strong words here. So what do you think India should do? How do you think India could not let this happen? Since you think India is at fault here. It is India who is letting this happen.
Do you think it was India at wrong for retaliating to Pakistan's terrorism? Should we have let US dictate our policy and we had not done anything post may 9th attack to please them to not let this happen? If tomorrow US ask India to not take revenge against Pakistan's future terrorist attack on Indian soil, should we comply to please them like 26/11? Shall we go back to the era where there was no retaliation from us to any Pakistani action, so there won't be any unhappiness among the western countries. We were preparing dossiers, while Pakistan was preparing next terrorist attack.
I'm simply asking you Hydra where India is at fault here for retaliating against Pakistan in recent years. And what do you would you do if you were the PM rn?
If you say India should just suck upto US. Is there any guarantee me it won't give aid and help to Pakistan? Trump literally says he will trade with both. US has always been an unreliable ally. Where were they when the shah of Iran fell? Where were they when the Afghanistan government fell to Taliban? US values it on interest above everything else as any country would do. How much you might try to please them, if Pakistan is useful to them for something, they will not abandon it how much we plea. Look at the whole Greece-Turkey situation.
Last edited:
Yes, 100% agree here. I think US is a very demanding ally. It has been very demanding to even it's legacy allies like SK and Japan. It borderline wishes to dictate your internal politics and your own NatSec decision. If we accept an alliance with them on their terms and conditions, they might stop us in the future from ever taking any strong action against Pakistan in case of another misadventure from Pakistan? Which is absurd, a country like India would naturally not accept anything like that.
Ally? LMFAO. They are just partners of compulsion. They need India to counter China, we need them to support our economy. But there is no love lost between India and USA. They are our biggest covert enemy and have been so ever since our independence. Their ultimate goal is a uni-polar world ruled by US and like it or not, India is their final frontier to achieve that target.
Read, pak's opinion of chinese weapon after sindoor.
I don't have twitter. And it's obvious PL15 on J10 or JF17 was successful in hiting something. PL15 in IWB of J35 is 100x deadly compared to F16. India can easily crush F16. The AIM120D which makes you hard for some reason only has a range of 160 km or so , maybe 200 km, which means an F16 carrying that is turkey shoot for S400 and Kusha! Not to mention Meteor armed Rafales or Astra Mk2 armed Tejas Mk1a and Su 30.
Blk52 f16's radar can't even take full advantage of aim 120c's max range.
"But saar some pakees on twitter saying noodle weapon bad so of course 1970s origin 4th gen jets is better than 2010s 5th generation figher with AESA seeker"
If given option, Pakistan would choose US/Western weapons in a heart-beat over Chinese ones. If they're NOT getting J-35s then US would give them something more advance. Honestly even F-35 is not out of realms for them.
Anyways, I still think PAF will get 40 odd J-35s by the end of this decade. Let's see.......