Lack of pugnacious attitude in civilian leadership since Rajiv Gandhi is a major reason of our failure in optimally utilising our resources to build a robust military force. IG was best PM in this regard we ever had. Now with Modi we have an ambitious leader which is helpful in improving our defences but the rot has now become very deep in these past decades, with outright traitors in responsible posts on several occasions. We require at least a decade of hard work to improve the situation with full cooperation of civilian leadership and a military leadership with foresightedness and very high ambitions.
Military Mediocrity - Who Will Bell the Cat?
- Thread starter Saaho
- Start date
Both are not the same. Turkey is a NATO ally, and NATO considers the Greece and Cyprus problems as bilateral issues. Pakistan worked in the shadows and has seen punishment for it. The US has no choice but to work with Pakistan or risk going to war with Iran.
Kashmir is not in their favour. It's the opposite. They gave up fighting India is 1965. They tried to fight in the shadows and failed, both Kargil and terrorism.
You are talking about something else entirely. All you are saying is they are shameless animals, nothing more.
They are incapable of doing any of that anyway. They can't even manage to compete with us at the LoC. So your fears are unfounded.
It has nothing to do with those. As I said, we need to be 1/3rd to half as powerful as the US if India is to change status quo. We are not Turkey or Pakistan. When we attempt to change status quo, the backlash we will experience will be many times worse, since it's considered as a challenge to the superpowers. Entire policies have been made to curtail India, like the NPT and NSG. It's only recently, because other countries need us, that we are being seen in positive light again.
We are a direct threat to superpowers. 50 years from now US will be to India what Britain is to the US. The US can't compete with us in the long run. And here you are seriously comparing it to the piddly things that Pakistan or Turkey have attempted? It goes to show you do not understand how complex the subject is. Indian diplomats get direct threats and they are told what to do or not to do by the US and even the Soviet Union. Until we get stronger, we need to take permission to do what we want. They can cut us off from SWIFT, they can shut off the oil tap, they can prevent imports of high end electronics, they can shut off access to their markets, they can cut us off from their financial markets. It's pretty much a gang type system out there. They can do anything they want to push India into the stoneage, just like they did to Iran and North Korea, and there's nothing we can do to stop that. Until we get rich ourselves they have us by the balls. It's all because we are a big country and a direct threat to the existing world order. Not the case with Pakistan and Turkey. So, as long as we keep our nose clean, everything's good for them. Hence the need to be silent on world issues, as we have been since independence.
A $10T economy will go unchallenged. And that's what we have to wait for.
Finish the assignment. Then we'll talk.
PS: I didn't read your post.
Well here is a live example. The country of Morrocco.
Morocco's Air Force Reloads: And Now, The Training... - Defense Industry Daily
French Mirage F1s (click to view full) Morocco's combat air force currently flies 2 squadrons of old F-5 fighters, and 2 squadrons of only slightly newer Mirage F1s. T-37 light jets serve as high-end trainers. Their neighbor and rival Algeria flies MiG-23s of similar vintage, but the Force...
www.defenseindustrydaily.com
Dogfight at the Casbah: Rafale vs. F-16 - Defense Industry Daily
Dassault Rafale(click for cutaway view) France's Rafale is part of a set of European 4+ generation fighters that were developed and fielded during the 1990s-early 21st century, with the aim of surpassing both existing offerings among America's "teen series" fighters, and Russia's Mig-29 Fulcrum...
www.defenseindustrydaily.com
Simple, in 2006 Morrocco decided to upgrade its airforce. Look at the timeline. In June 2006 they were negotiating with France for Rafales. Towards the end of 2007, this negotiation was falling apart and Morrocco went for F-16s. Morrocco had experience of operating mirages and F-5s. They went with F-16s blk 52 along with trainers. Order confirmed in Dec 2007. Total order 24 jets for 2.4 billion dollars with some support equipment and trainers. First 4 jets delivered in Aug 2011. Last 3 Jet in Aug 2012. Total six years or less.
India? Where shall I begin!
2004 RFI issued. May 2012 Jet selected. 2014/15 Order cancelled and new order placed. 2020 first 5 jets land (AFAIK). Last jets to arrive in 2021 or 2022. Total 18 agonizing years. Yes people 18 years to buy 36 jets. Thats 3 times the time Morrocco took to buy a similar jet.
Why should I till you don't tell me why is it even relevant.
PS : I don't do things that are meaningless.
PPS : I don't care if you read.
PPPS: You are neither my professor or boss so about time you do you own hardwork and find sources for your claim and calculations for your reasoning. You are not so special that other people will do work on your behalf or google for what ever delusions you have.
Last edited:
Excuses, excuses and more excuses.
In engineering, this is typically called overfitting. Developing models that do not generalize but fit the initial data very accurately. Each time a new data comes, you have to adjust the model so that the model still fits.
Similarly, when people have such perception of reality, its the excuses they are searching and NOT the reasons. Its called a belief in belief and is often found in religious zealots.
Here the belief is that somehow a figure of 1/3rd size of a "superpower (WTF is that?)" or 10 Trillion dollar economy are the ONLY means to achieve *ANY* strategic goals or *Any* change in status quo.
'Cause the one to beat is the US, not Pakistan.
You want India to destroy Pakistan, first you need the ability to prevent the US from bombing you, or at the very least sanctioning you. That's when we reach 1/3rd to half their economic might. But then you live in the made up world where India is already half of US economy.
Hence, you should finish the assignment. Or else you are a completely lost cause.
Did North Vietnam sought US approval to annex south vietnam?
OR
Did China sought world approval to annex Tibet?
OR
Did India sought US approval to divide Pakistan in '71?
If you have issue with GDP PPP, then refute it by publishing a paper in a major economic journal. Till then, yes, India is already half size of US economy as measured by GDP PPP.
BTW, economies produce and consume goods and services. Dollars and INR are intermediatry and merely store of abstract value. If Indian economy does not externalizes every barber and cardiologist in global market then that does not mean its smaller. Domestic market and economy is best captured in PPP terms. Financial flows in global markets are more purview of nominal figure. Since major expenses in India's defence (Budget of MoD) are still domestic in nature ie salaries, training, maintenance and pensions, PPP is the way to go. Rest is your delusion.
Last edited:
BTW here is a simple anecdote that I have for you to understand how much real PPP is.
I sponsored my parent visit to Canada sometimes back. They cann't get medical insurance in Canada as public health care does not cover visitors. So we got some limited traveller's cover. Thats all. Had they met an accident or major illness in Canada, we would have give them basic treatment and RUSH them out of Canada because healthcare is damn expensive.
My job is identical in both Canada and India and produces identical value for my employer. Yet in Canada I get about 5 times in nominal figures what I was getting in India. EVEN then, affording health care in Canada without insurance would have been a drag on my finances.
In India, we have no insurance what so ever. I have often paid medical cost for my parents and that included major surgery as well. I didn't even have to take a second look at my monthly expenses. The doctor and surgeons we got were every bit world class in India and comparable to those in Canada.
The same job (my job) and same consumed service (healthcare) produces 5 TIMES or EVEN WAY MORE differential in nominal figures in production and consumption data in two economy. And then you wonder where does that differential comes from.
Did at some point in that story include an order for a battle tank or two?
I wonder what's the common factor here.
Well, total weapons imports to India is 3 billion dollars in 2019. Throw in 1 billion dollar worth of fuel. Bring the total 4 billion dollars. Hardly a figure worth consideration in a MoD budget of 66 billion dollar. Majority of expense is still domestic. Even salaries alone (20 billion or so) are 5 times this import.
Sources SIPRI database and Times of India.
Good that you brought. How much of economy of USA is services? 80% +
Services prices are much more likely to be according to local market : health care, lawyer etc come to mind. Any wonder why USA has such a high GDP?
I rest my case. US economy is twice the size of India as measured by GDP PPP.
What we really need is anywhere between $50-100B a year. The armed forces are asking for a minimum of $30B a year at the very least, considering we are gonna put off any sort of fighting for 10 years. Even then it's only $300B a year, which is pretty much what China can spend in just a year if they want to, while they are actually spending that amount in 2 years.
Right now we are spending $15B a year, whereas the Chinese are spending 10-15 times more than us.
But you haven't understood this subject. And you happily skip all the questions I ask, so there's no point discussing this with you.
So the service sector makes battle tanks? Or maybe ships?
We need to spend 50-100B on equipment and supplies a year to fight even Pakistan? LOL! If that is the case then it means just one thing : An absolute and total failure of India's diplomacy because that means we cann't even make counter alliances against China in a situation of our actions on Pakistan. Brings back my point that Indian issues in defence is NOT economic, its in south block. You cann't throw money on all problems even if you have massive amount of money. After a point, money stops returning the worth.
Lets see things from China's perspective, shall we?
China has India in south. USA pacific fleet and Japan on eastern front. They have to deal with a behemoth having 750 billion dollar a year wroth of war machine and history of war experience and training (something which china does not have).
So, if you are saying that ENTIRE 225 billion dollar (which is MASSIVE over-estimation, IMHO) worth of equipment that China is procuring each year (ie cap-ex) according to you, will hit us while keeping their own eastern underbelly undefened against USA, then my friend I have a bridge to sell to you.
If our defence needs have to factor in China and Pakistan, then Chinese expenses cannt be solely attributed to India. In war, they won't be able to mobilize their entire expenses worth of equipment they have made against India while keeping themselves undefended against USA.
Last edited:
You are getting dumber and dumber with every post. We had the ability to defeat them even in the 70s. What have you been reading? We are absolutely overwhelming today. We are completely overwhelming.
But we need permission from the US to do it. And the US won't give it because we are not in the big boys club. Even China openly says we are a third rate power during their meetings with the US.
Forget it, you don't know what you're talking about.
China's overall security budget is estimated to be well over $400B, internal and external.
China dramatically boosts spending on internal security
China has substantially increased spending on domestic security, official figures show, reflecting mounting concern about threats inside its borders as...
www.marketwatch.com
This is from 2017. So you can expect it to be well over $200B today and that's entirely separate from their military budget of $179B for 2020. I bet you had no clue what the Chinese actually spend on security until you read this post today. We spend $10B.
Sell your bridge to someone else. You don't know this subject at all. They have 13 frigging strike corps, all with twice the firepower of our own strike corps, and we don't even have 1.
You need to finish the assignment I gave you. You don't even have the common sense needed to understand this subject. The US, with a 2 times bigger economy according to you, is buying 100+ F-35s a year.
US Orders 78 New F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters
Lockheed Martin was awarded $4.7 billion to build 78 new F-35 fifth-generation combat aircraft.
thediplomat.com
Lockheed Martin handed over 134 F-35s in 2019, 91 aircraft in 2018, and 66 in 2017. Last year, 81 F-35s were delivered to the U.S. armed forces, 30 to international partner nations, and 23 to Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers. This included 102 F-35As, 25 F-35Bs, and seven F-35Cs.
They plan to buy 250 F-35s A YEAR.
China is currently inducting over 100 fighter jets A YEAR, not counting the J-20. This is an economy that's merely 2.5 times bigger than India's according to you. In just a few years the Chinese induct more ships per tonne than our entire navy put together.
China’s vast fleet is tipping the balance against U.S. in the Pacific
The Chinese navy now controls the seas off its coast. The United States, which now sails warily in these waters, has been caught napping by Beijing's advances.
To put that in perspective, the IN's total operational tonnage is less than 600,000 tonnes.
And over here, we are struggling to just sign a contract for a mere 114 jets with a delivery schedule of 12 years with a grand total of 12 A YEAR. We are hoping to induct some 40-50 jets per year from 2030 instead. So yeah, definitely, US and China are just 2 and 2.5 times bigger than India's economy. Wow. You literally only needed to apply common sense and you still failed.
Unless you finish that assignment, all you will do is keep making a fool of yourself.
Errr... Why do we need US's permission?
We didn't take it in '71, did we?
Neither did North Vietnam in 67.
Nor China in 62 or 50s.
So why do we need US permission now?
Or even 10 years back? Or in 80s?
Why only India needs permission?
Last edited:
Lemme guess, before you were talking about Chinese military budget. Now you are adding their internal security budget to it and bring it to 400 billion. Jeez! Unless you are suggesting that whole of Chinese police departments are coming to attack us. Or their coast guards.
Ofcourse their internal security budget will be 200 billion dollar! All those snazzy face recognition tech does not come cheap. Nor the great firewall of China. Nor their massive nation wide phone/email etc tapping network. Running a police state is not cheap, surely.
But what the "fluff" does it have to do with Chinese military attacking India? WHY IS THIS INTERNAL SECURITY BUDGET IS EVEN RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION?
Man, its not even funny anymore!
When you add Chinese police budget to their military budget and use it as a scarecrow, I don't know anymore. Thats beyond desparate.
You seem to have selective comprehension issues. I had already pointed out we need the support of one superpower or the other.
All these examples had either US support or Soviet Union support. Nothing happens without their support.
India had SU support in 1971, and that was only for liberating Bangladesh. Against West Pakistan, we did not get support from either superpower, hence no war. In the 1980s, we didn't get US or SU support to deal with Pakistan permanently for obvious reasons. Nobody wants Pakistan taken out because they need Pakistan as a counterweight to India's rise.
North Vietnam had Chinese and Soviet support. How can you not know this?
China backed out in 1962 because they did not have superpower support. Hence the unilateral ceasefire and withdrawal. Still they had Soviet support at the time, whereas we did not have support from either superpower. It was only after the Sino-Soviet split in 1969 that we became close to the SU.
Today, without US support, nothing's gonna happen. We in fact need US and Russian support to take out Pakistan today. US support because they are the only superpower. Russian support because we need them to block of Central Asia against terrorists and to dissuade China from taking action. An alternative is to become as strong as the US and then do whatever the hell we want. We can even go invade Sri Lanka after that. The point is we need the ability to sink the USN with our military strength and pull countries away from the US and into our sphere of influence, that's the only way we can change status quo by ourselves.
Did you forget the US sent their navy after us in 1971? That was done in order to stop us from attacking West Pakistan.
Haha. You make such posts 'cause you don't get the subject. Everything in China relating to security is relevant to India. All these troops are trained to fight wars. Google People's Armed Police and their three core objectives.
But I see that you have avoided the economic aspect completely. Can't believe that merely 2x stronger US can induct 250 F-35s a year?
Okay, simple answer to your posts... The day we can induct 50-200 Rafales or equivalent a year, then we can fight wars. If you don't agree with that, then cool, you are free to go back to whining as usual.
I think the rest of the Arab world should thank their stars he didn't include the Red Sea & the Persian Gulf too.
Chinese were meaning less back then. Not a power.
As far as soviet goes, the confrontation was directly with USA. All soviet did was to provide some 3000 soliders. Thats all. Later North Vietnam received soviet weapons but mostly they fought on their own.
No, China DID NOT back out in 1962 completely. They only withdrew from Arunanachal Pradesh because of logistic issues of supply lines. India actually HAD asked for US help but US was too busy with Soviet Union. For that matter, China still holds Askai Chin AND portions of Himachal Pradesh which they occupied POST that war in fact POST 1969.
So you forgot Operation Meghdoot or did we have support of superpowers for that? It was due to that operation we still have Siachen.
For that matter, we also annexed Goa in a small conflict. At that point, Portuguese had full diplomatic support of US. Soviets only policy at that point was to oppose whatever US is supporting. Indian operations were not with support of Soviets its the other way round. Soviets supported us because we took the initiative against their enemies.