Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
Because :
a. North Korea for all its bravado has not militarily harmed US or even South Korea in recent past. How much cross border shelling happens on Korea LoC? How many cross border incursion happen on Korean LoC?
b. IF North Korea crosses the LoC and occupies or sends in infiltrators doing terrorist attacks, US will flatten it.






And you think North Korea doesn't fund, arm and equip terrorists in the Middle East against NATO interests?


Next up:

And then, can we talk about Iran and why US hasn't invaded Iran either? 4 times the population and 50 times the economy. Should I now list out all the terrorist-related activities of Iran?
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
What is being said about AF is also true for army. All the gears of land forces like tanks and artillleries take almost an year to be produced in a significant numbers. Whereas they would be consumed within weeks. You also need to keep in mind that in a full blown war these manufacturing units would be one of the first target of enemies. Hence chances are you won't be able to produce more even you want to.

So China will bomb the factory in Tamil Nadu? With what? A nuke?

Consumed within weeks? How so? You do realise for any war to last years, it takes into account that the Chinese have failed to successfully invade even a few hundred meters into our territory, with both having mounted a very successful air defence campaign, so how will the Chinese take out artillery that's located tens of kilometers inland?

With every passing second, you are losing out on logical reasoning.

As for infantry, I don't have any problems if a war is fight with them only, even for ages. But that too would end quickly thanks to modern automatic rifles and explosives. Then you will need significant amount of workforce to produce tons of ammunitions which would be used by that force, And there are other factors too like feeding and providing proper clothing. Forget about protection as you won't be able to produce enough BPJs and BHs for them. Above all you would need to keep the economy going.

Modern rifles, explosives, or anything modern the infantry carries cannot finish war quickly.

Millions of rifles, BPJs, helmets, clothes, boots etc can be produced every month, forget every year.

You don't need significant amounts of manpower for any of this. Just 200 people will produce 70000-100000 AK-203s in India per year. If a person assembles merely 20 rifles a day for 365 days, he will have produced 7300 rifles. Put a 1000 people on this task, you get 7.3 million rifles in that same year. Pretty much the same with everything the infantry uses.

This discussion is going nowhere. Simply a waste of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironhide

shaxm

Well-Known member
Sep 7, 2019
713
498
India
So China will bomb the factory in Tamil Nadu? With what? A nuke?

Consumed within weeks? How so? You do realise for any war to last years, it takes into account that the Chinese have failed to successfully invade even a few hundred meters into our territory, with both having mounted a very successful air defence campaign, so how will the Chinese take out artillery that's located tens of kilometers inland?

With every passing second, you are losing out on logical reasoning.



Modern rifles, explosives, or anything modern the infantry carries cannot finish war quickly.

Millions of rifles, BPJs, helmets, clothes, boots etc can be produced every month, forget every year.

You don't need significant amounts of manpower for any of this. Just 200 people will produce 70000-100000 AK-203s in India per year. If a person assembles merely 20 rifles a day for 365 days, he will have produced 7300 rifles. Put a 1000 people on this task, you get 7.3 million rifles in that same year. Pretty much the same with everything the infantry uses.

This discussion is going nowhere. Simply a waste of time.

How can one person make 20 rifles in a day?
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
How can one person make 20 rifles in a day?

It apparently takes 20 min to fully assemble an AK series rifle by practiced hands. Novice hands can take a few hours though.

What you are referring to is full production from raw materials. The longest time is in creating the production facilities required for full production followed by the ordering of raw materials. Once the factory is set up by the lead contractor and all the suppliers, and with all the raw materials available, full production to a fully functioning rifle should take 4 to 6 weeks. So the assembly is the fastest portion of the build cycle.
 

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,920
1,398
Earth
And you think North Korea doesn't fund, arm and equip terrorists in the Middle East against NATO interests?
1. South Korea is not USA. It is US ally. And south korea herself is reluctant to fight North Korea.
2. 1980s is not recent

Lemme tell you what happened when US's own soil was attacked. They hunted down Usama and invaded Afghanistan.

And then, can we talk about Iran and why US hasn't invaded Iran either? 4 times the population and 50 times the economy. Should I now list out all the terrorist-related activities of Iran?
Iran is major concern for Israel and Saudi Arabia. US has armed both to teeth. And when it came to the fighting, US took out Baweja's equivalent in Iran with a drone. Lemme know when Indian army can dare take out street rats like Masood Azhar or even Dawood.
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
1. South Korea is not USA. It is US ally. And south korea herself is reluctant to fight North Korea.
2. 1980s is not recent

Lemme tell you what happened when US's own soil was attacked. They hunted down Usama and invaded Afghanistan.


Iran is major concern for Israel and Saudi Arabia. US has armed both to teeth. And when it came to the fighting, US took out Baweja's equivalent in Iran with a drone. Lemme know when Indian army can dare take out street rats like Masood Azhar or even Dawood.

Sure, only non-nuclear powers are targets. Not even North Korea. And the US is hiding behind their allies instead. You do realise the US is treaty bound to protect S Korea from any and all attacks.

A superpower attacking some guy outside his country isn't anything great. Let's see what they do about actual nuclear powers.
The original plan was to replace a large part of Russian components in the radar with Indian components from the ToT received. And as usual, we delayed even that by a decade.

Rest it's like Bofors things, expertise lying around unused. While DRDO is reinventing the wheel.

There was no such thing planned.
 

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,920
1,398
Earth
Sure, only non-nuclear powers are targets. Not even North Korea. And the US is hiding behind their allies instead. You do realise the US is treaty bound to protect S Korea from any and all attacks.
You are talking about this : Mutual Defense Treaty (United States–South Korea) - Wikipedia , right?

First its mutual.
Second its "faces external armed attack".
Indeed if North Korean forces started to move into South Korea, it will cause war.

BTW, you DO realize that North Korea became a nuclear power much more recently, right? When the last terrorist attack you mentioned happened, in 1987 or so, North Korea had not tested any nuclear weapons.

Hence, you argument "Sure, only non-nuclear powers are targets. Not even North Korea." is wrong. All the terrorist incidences you mentioned predate North Korea's status as a nuclear power. By almost 2 decades.
 

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,920
1,398
Earth
So now you are trying to draw differences between a terror attack and a conventional attack? Mutual defence means what I said it does.

As for nuclear power, that's what I meant. The US hasn't even bothered to take revenge on non-nuclear powers, even North Korea, whereas we even attacked the sovereign territory of a nuclear power.
Its rather simple :
1. When US faced a terror attack on their OWN soil, they went with full military options.
2. When it happened on a foreign soil then they did not. Why? Most likely, south korea never asked to intervene or escalate a terror incidence into a war. Had it been regular forces of NK entering SK, sure as hell US would have responded militarily.
3. US territory has not been attacked after world war 2. AFAIK.

Now, the nuclear angle that you are trying to bring in does not apply. All the incidences you mentioned are before 1990. NK became a nuclear power in 2006. Nuclear weapons were not even a consideration at the time when these incidences happened.

What matter was what I said above. The attack was NOT on their soil but on ally's soil. Attackers were irregular with plausible deniability. And the attacked ally herself did not escalate it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
Its rather simple :
1. When US faced a terror attack on their OWN soil, they went with full military options.
2. When it happened on a foreign soil then they did not. Why? Most likely, south korea never asked to intervene or escalate a terror incidence into a war. Had it been regular forces of NK entering SK, sure as hell US would have responded militarily.
3. US territory has not been attacked after world war 2. AFAIK.

Now, the nuclear angle that you are trying to bring in does not apply. All the incidences you mentioned are before 1990. NK became a nuclear power in 2006. Nuclear weapons were not even a consideration at the time when these incidences happened.

What matter was what I said above. The attack was NOT on their soil but on ally's soil. Attackers were irregular with plausible deniability. And the attacked ally herself did not escalate it.

Then what about the 1998 Embassy Bombings? Embassies are sovereign territories of a country. Or is it selective here as well?

As for nuclear power, that's exactly what I'm saying. NK wasn't even a nuclear power and the US still did nothing even after repeated terrorist attacks.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India

That's no different from the surgical strikes or Balakot bombing. But you were talking about heavy punishment, of the sort the GoI has not done yet. So the US has also not done anything more than what India has done.

As I said, India is the only country in the world to have launched an attack on sovereign territory of a nuclear power. No other country has accomplished this. If that doesn't satisfy you, then nothing will. So I think we are done with this.
 

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,920
1,398
Earth
That's no different from the surgical strikes or Balakot bombing. But you were talking about heavy punishment, of the sort the GoI has not done yet. So the US has also not done anything more than what India has done.

As I said, India is the only country in the world to have launched an attack on sovereign territory of a nuclear power. No other country has accomplished this. If that doesn't satisfy you, then nothing will. So I think we are done with this.
If you read about "Operation Infinite Reach", it was an action against a non-state violent actor. US targetted two different countries. Plus, they ensured that the targets were destroyed. Lastly, US invaded Afghanistan later and killed Usama.

India? Well, India was interested in rushing to declare victory, the very next day. Later we found that none of the targets were hit. Even when Pakistan escalated by attacking India AND capturing one indian pilot, India cowered and ducked.

US was a blunt military action. India was a showbiz sold as "surgical strike".

As I said, India is the only country in the world to have launched an attack on sovereign territory of a nuclear power.

Uhhh.. a certain Iran comes to mind. They launched attack on US military bases with ballistic missiles.

And then there is US itself which drone bombed anywhere in Pakistan they felt. Killing anyone they felt like.

Oh, did I forget Pakistan? They attacked India on Feb-27. Heck they did it in broad daylight and they told us before they hit. And their attack was successful in bringing down one of our fighter and capturing its pilot. We have Microsoft Paint images to claim that we shot down a F-16. We did not even retaliate to that attack.

India is certainly NOT the only country to attack in territory of a "Nuclear Power".

Also, Pakistan is one tenth of India. Nuclear detterance is over-rated.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
If you read about "Operation Infinite Reach", it was an action against a non-state violent actor. US targetted two different countries. Plus, they ensured that the targets were destroyed. Lastly, US invaded Afghanistan later and killed Usama.

India? Well, India was more "Its OVER Its OVER Its OVER" mode the very next day. Later we found that none of the targets were hit. Even when Pakistan escalated by attacking India AND capturing one indian pilot, India cowered and ducked.

US was a blunt military action. India was a showbiz sold as "surgical strike".



Uhhh.. a certain Iran comes to mind. They launched attack on US military bases with ballistic missiles.
And then there is US itself which drone bombed anywhere in Pakistan they felt. Killing anyone they felt like.

Nuclear deterrence is overrated.

Afghanistan wasn't even considered a sovereign nation. And in 1998, all they did was do a missile strike. It's even less than what India did in both our recent strikes.
 

Saaho

Senior member
Dec 27, 2019
1,920
1,398
Earth
Afghanistan wasn't even considered a sovereign nation. And in 1998, all they did was do a missile strike. It's even less than what India did in both our recent strikes.
Their attack destroyed the targets. Our attacks did not. All independent sources suggest that our bombs missed. All satellite images show that our bombs missed.

US attacks till the operation goals are met. We are in too much of hurry to end hostilities and declare victory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arsalan123

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
Their attack destroyed the targets. Our attacks did not. All independent sources suggest that our bombs missed. All satellite images show that our bombs missed.

US attacks till the operation goals are met. We are in too much of hurry to end hostilities and declare victory.

All our bombs hit their targets with the exception of one, where the bomb did not fire.

Satellite images also confirmed it.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironhide

TARGET

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
575
464
If you read about "Operation Infinite Reach", it was an action against a non-state violent actor. US targetted two different countries. Plus, they ensured that the targets were destroyed. Lastly, US invaded Afghanistan later and killed Usama.

India? Well, India was interested in rushing to declare victory, the very next day. Later we found that none of the targets were hit. Even when Pakistan escalated by attacking India AND capturing one indian pilot, India cowered and ducked.

US was a blunt military action. India was a showbiz sold as "surgical strike".



Uhhh.. a certain Iran comes to mind. They launched attack on US military bases with ballistic missiles.

And then there is US itself which drone bombed anywhere in Pakistan they felt. Killing anyone they felt like.

Oh, did I forget Pakistan? They attacked India on Feb-27. Heck they did it in broad daylight and they told us before they hit. And their attack was successful in bringing down one of our fighter and capturing its pilot. We have Microsoft Paint images to claim that we shot down a F-16. We did not even retaliate to that attack.

India is certainly NOT the only country to attack in territory of a "Nuclear Power".

Also, Pakistan is one tenth of India. Nuclear detterance is over-rated.
we could have escalated if Pakistan did not agree to sent back Abhinandan. it's a responsible behavior of a country ... we shouldn't behave like a warmongering nation. Pakistan tries to bomb day time since they don't have the capability to bomb in the night time and in the day time also they couldn't able to drop the bomb correctly? All the bombs they dropped failed to hit the target even they hit in the day time lol. Ask PAF to give a statement that IAF showed an MSPaint radar image.