Thread: indian army vs american army

Originally Posted by sniperdude411

Congradulations.

You have absolutely no idea what we're talking about, do you?

while bluffing the rest of her neighbours with large but ineffective forces."

Where would you put India into ? One that has large ineffective force ?
In short , how well do you think our guys are gonna fare against the commies.

Do you people discuss a Indo-China conflict with perhaps Pakistan trying a few tricks too ? Ofcourse a lot depends on where , how and for what.But you must have a general idea.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

Where would you put India into ? One that has large ineffective force ?

Well, first, I will have to qualify. The PLA regforce army currently consists of the Rapid Deployment Forces and what might be considered garrison forces. The RDF forces are the ones getting the money, training, and the new toys. The garrison forces mainly concentrates on individual training or at most company level training. Regiment and above exercises are mainly left to the RDFs.

There's another qualification here. These are Chinese standards we're talking about, not NATO.

As for the InA, I think I answered that question pretty well already. They have a very good army but one cumbersome by a very dated Strike Corps doctrine. The new Integrated Battle Group doctrine has yet to see fruitation.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

In short , how well do you think our guys are gonna fare against the commies.

The better question is how do both sides see battle and what are the answers each has for the other.

I don't know enough about how the InA see battle. However, from what I've seen (and it's quite limited), the Chinese are currently further ahead in establishing a new fighting force doctrine in the War Zone Campaign. It's a work in progress but it's alot further ahead than the Indian IBG. This being said, neither side is close to AirLand, let alone Force XXI.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

Do you people discuss a Indo-China conflict with perhaps Pakistan trying a few tricks too ? Ofcourse a lot depends on where , how and for what.But you must have a general idea.

The Captain Lemontree has been promising a sand table exercise for CDF for several months and we've been waiting for him to put the thing together so that we could jump through the hoops to see what comes out at the other end.

However, I will tell you that from my understanding, the 1962 Sino-Indian War is the model to study for WZC and that study had to include the diplomatic and political manouvering on equal status with the military action. India did not take the Chinese threat seriously and part of the reasons had to include Chinese political and diplomatic actions.

Sir
To be honest , i am able to understand only half of what you have said.Given my exposure to military , thats OK - or so i suppose.

However, I will tell you that from my understanding, the 1962 Sino-Indian War is the model to study for WZC

I could be bluffing here , but given the nature of IAs reaction in Op.Chequerboard wont the 62 model be a vastly out-dated one ?
India does consider the chinese threat seriously - or is it something that i imagine ?

You've just answered it! We came up with alot of reasons but none stand up to scrutiny. Internal Security? They already had enlarge the People's Armed Police. You've just told me that the Chinese could committ all their combat power in one theatre while bluffing the rest of her neighbours with large but ineffective forces. That makes sense!

Internal secuirty could play massively into it as well. Maybe that is how I read it also because of my other research on nations that armies have the role of keeping the locals in line.

Indonesia, for example, could cut their army by half probably and be just as capable if not more on the battlefield but keep units spread out to keep people inside from getting ideas. And they have a paramilitary force like the PAP in the form of Brimob (Mobile Police). People have been saying the same thing about Indonesia yet they more wish to expand the structure rather then reduce it. I have some articles under the "Total Peoples Defense" about it.

Having a bloated force does keep cover ones borders but it also keeps ones forces all around to keep internal control. Plus springboards to move around units to and through them.

The fact is that China has large powerful enemies on all sides, and because of that she cannot focus all her combat power on a single foe lest the others take advantadge of lightly defended borders.

For all the dog and pony show most nations in SE Asia hate China.

Indonesia hates China. Check the garrision on Natuna Island (which China claims) as easy proof. Or what excuse Indonesia used to invade East Timor. Or who backed the PKI (communist party) in 1965. Indonesia went so far as to not back anti Vietnamese forces in Cambodia during the 1980s as to allow Vietnam to remain a front againist China. And at the time Indonesia was the most anti Communist nation in SE Asia. And plus it does not take much in Indonesia to get the locals to kill Indonesians of Chinese orgin.

The Philippines hates China. Their whole plan for refitting their military is aimed at defending their waters from China. We let them stand alone which forced them to eat dirt.

Thailand also is not very fond of them either. Thailand was militantly anti Chinese in the 1970s. What changed it was China stopped backing communist guerillas in exchange for opening relations and Thailand being surronded by enemies and less then sure of us, plus we opened relations with China first.

Vietnam...

Hell a free Burma is probably a Chinese nightmare. You don't have a jackboot up your ass for 20 years and forget who supplied the jackboot along with the tanks.

Nations don't forget that China backed forces which killed their people because of trade... now what does Bush do is the question...

Originally Posted by troung

Hell a free Burma is probably a Chinese nightmare. You don't have a jackboot up your ass for 20 years and forget who supplied the jackboot along with the tanks.

The present day Burmese military junta is more friendly with the Indian gov than the Chinese. IIRC the Prime minister who was pro-china was sacked by the the General who is more pro-India now.Just a couple of days back , the Indian army had flushed out Burmese rebels fighting the Burmese army, out of its borders. Things are going in a positive direction between India and Burma. So you might see some change in Burmese attitude towards the Chinese in the coming days.

Just a couple of days back , the Indian army had flushed out Burmese rebels fighting the Burmese army, out of its borders.

I wouldn't smile too much about that.

So you might see some change in Burmese attitude towards the Chinese in the coming days.

Don't know. China arms the junta even though many officers have issues with the Chinese over the equipment, spying and of course how they are treated by Chinese advisors and techinitions.

China and Pakistan both arm the junta so India could get used as a tool with Burma playing them off each other.

I guess the question would be could you sleep at night knowing your nation armed a nation with forced 14 year olds into the army to kill 10 year olds?

Originally Posted by troung

I wouldn't smile too much about that.

This sort of co-operation with Burma is unprecedented.

Originally Posted by troung

Don't know. China arms the junta even though many officers have issues with the Chinese over the equipment, spying and of course how they are treated by Chinese advisors and techinitions.
China and Pakistan both arm the junta so India could get used as a tool with Burma playing them off each other.

Or India can build its influence with the Burmese army thereby reducing Chinese influence in its neighborhood. Ignoring the military junta all these years didnt help India much. It only pushed Burma into the Chinese sphere of influence. and now they have a listening post in the Bay of Bengal. We cant ignore Burma anymore.

Originally Posted by troung

I guess the question would be could you sleep at night knowing your nation armed a nation with forced 14 year olds into the army to kill 10 year olds?

Someone from the freeworld have to reach out and communicate. Shutting them out completely has been counter productive. (atleast for us). To answer your question, No I dont think so. But then I would have a lot of friends from the western civilization to keep me company.

Or India can build its influence with the Burmese army thereby reducing Chinese influence in its neighborhood. Ignoring the military junta all these years didnt help India much. It only pushed Burma into the Chinese sphere of influence. and now they have a listening post in the Bay of Bengal. We cant ignore Burma anymore.

What pushed them to China was weapons and loans to stamp out challenges to their rule. I do wonder if India not only has the equipment but the will to be the sugar daddy...

Here is the issue. Lets say India edges out China as the number 1 patron of the junta, arming, training and helping their forces stamp on their people. When those people finally get free despite India helping the Junta, India is going to be the one with mud on its face.

Look at Pakistani and Afgani relations today...

Someone from the freeworld have to reach out and communicate. Shutting them out completely has been counter productive. (atleast for us). To answer your question, No I dont think so. But then I would have a lot of friends from the western civilization to keep me company

Hey we wouldn't have a lack of sleep over helping Burma these days because America finally saw the light and sanctioned them. And our new round of sanctions have helped crush the economy more.

I'll lose sleep over Uzbekistan and Pakistan which still are not close to as bad on the dicator awards list as Burma... but we will still keep each other company...

They already had enlarge the People's Armed Police. You've just told me that the Chinese could committ all their combat power in one theatre while bluffing the rest of her neighbours with large but ineffective forces.

Sir, given the combat record of Asians, particularly India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Afghanistan etc etc, regardless of the enemy capability they get down to fight. So Chinese commiting their in effective troops would inturn be dangeorus for them. consider the fact that if the enemy forces start mauling Chinese forces, at this information age it will be abig moral beating for the Chinese. Defn Chinese propogandists would think about it, dont they??

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

The better question is how do both sides see battle and what are the answers each has for the other.

Sie, as you have been saying, China's way of perceiving victory is different from the western lot. But given the way Indian diplomats worked overtime during Kargil, I think India is also getting in to the same boat...political victory along with a military one.

I don't know enough about how the InA see battle. However, from what I've seen (and it's quite limited), the Chinese are currently further ahead in establishing a new fighting force doctrine in the War Zone Campaign. It's a work in progress but it's alot further ahead than the Indian IBG. This being said, neither side is close to AirLand, let alone Force XXI.

Sir, how would WZC can change the fighting forces across the Himalays? There is only so much you can do, given the terrain difficulties? right?? Do they have any special provisions for terrian and logistics in WZC?? Is it more generic or a little specific to South China sea and US intervention?? I'm not understating chinese capability, but there is only so much you can do.

However, I will tell you that from my understanding, the 1962 Sino-Indian War is the model to study for WZC and that study had to include the diplomatic and political manouvering on equal status with the military action. India did not take the Chinese threat seriously and part of the reasons had to include Chinese political and diplomatic actions.

Sir, much water has flown through since 1962. Indians still perceive China as number one threat in Asia along with Pakistan. So any skirmishes will be dealt with force to save face, not like what Nehru did back in 1962.

Originally Posted by troung

Here is the issue. Lets say India edges out China as the number 1 patron of the junta, arming, training and helping their forces stamp on their people. When those people finally get free despite India helping the Junta, India is going to be the one with mud on its face.
Look at Pakistani and Afgani relations today...

Very valid point. But India has been maintaining a good rapport with Aung san suu kyi as well. She was honoured with a Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding in 1995. India even now is urging Burma to return to democracy.But all said and done , it wouldnt hurt to have a cordial relationship with the Junta ,atleast for now.

Originally Posted by troung

I'll lose sleep over Uzbekistan and Pakistan which still are not close to as bad on the dicator awards list as Burma... but we will still keep each other company...

And Democratic Republic of Congo.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

Sir
To be honest , i am able to understand only half of what you have said.Given my exposure to military , thats OK - or so i suppose.

The only stupid question is the unasked one.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

I could be bluffing here , but given the nature of IAs reaction in Op.Chequerboard wont the 62 model be a vastly out-dated one ?

Don't confuse doctrine with operations.

Originally Posted by SamudraGupta

India does consider the chinese threat seriously - or is it something that i imagine ?

The GoI takes the Chinese threat seriously, the Indian military does not or rather the Indian military and the Chinese military are non-confrontational at the moment, ie neither side is preparing or even training for war specifically against one another.

Originally Posted by Troung

Internal secuirty could play massively into it as well. Maybe that is how I read it also because of my other research on nations that armies have the role of keeping the locals in line.

The PLA, like every other army, learns when it gets hurt and it got hurt big time at Tiennamen. The showcase Beijing Garrison had big time discipline problems. The People's Liberation Army has a very hard time shooting the People. Thus, the transfer of entire units over to the People's Armed Police.

Originally Posted by Jay

Sir, given the combat record of Asians, particularly India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Afghanistan etc etc, regardless of the enemy capability they get down to fight. So Chinese commiting their in effective troops would inturn be dangeorus for them. consider the fact that if the enemy forces start mauling Chinese forces, at this information age it will be abig moral beating for the Chinese. Defn Chinese propogandists would think about it, dont they??

The 79 Sino-VN War had taught the Chinese that you can't commit 2nd rate troops and expect a decisive victory. Let's not kid ourselves here, the Chinese won that war. All OPOBJs were achieved. And yet, it is the Vietnamese who claims the propaganda victory.

Originally Posted by Jay

Sie, as you have been saying, China's way of perceiving victory is different from the western lot. But given the way Indian diplomats worked overtime during Kargil, I think India is also getting in to the same boat...political victory along with a military one.

My head hurts.

Originally Posted by Jay

Sir, how would WZC can change the fighting forces across the Himalays? There is only so much you can do, given the terrain difficulties? right?? Do they have any special provisions for terrian and logistics in WZC?? Is it more generic or a little specific to South China sea and US intervention?? I'm not understating chinese capability, but there is only so much you can do.

You're confusing operations with doctrine. In this case, don't look for more than a regiment to be the decisive force.

Originally Posted by Jay

Sir, much water has flown through since 1962. Indians still perceive China as number one threat in Asia along with Pakistan. So any skirmishes will be dealt with force to save face, not like what Nehru did back in 1962.

And yet, neither side is confrontational.

I concur.Since the time i have been on the internet , i have never noticed a peace time exercise somewhere near the Indo-China border.All we have are massive exercises in the Pokhran desert.Or may be i was blind to them.

---

Most PLA watchers are always confused why the PLA is so bloated. They have a few good units and alot of bad ones. Colonel Denis Blasko, former US Defence Attache to Beijing and current Washington DC Blueteam (a government sponsored study group on the Chinese threat) member has often stated that the PLA could be reduced by 50% and still not lose any combat effectiveness which continually begged the question, why keep the dead wood around.

The PLA, like every other army, learns when it gets hurt and it got hurt big time at Tiennamen. The showcase Beijing Garrison had big time discipline problems. The People's Liberation Army has a very hard time shooting the People. Thus, the transfer of entire units over to the People's Armed Police.

I'm looking at this from someone who watches other armed forces and smaller ones at that.

Something about this still reminds me of the Kodam, Brimob and Kostrad and the B-2 plan to take Irian Jaya from the Dutch. The B-1 was to take the whole area in a fell swoop, the B-2 plan was to seize parts of the territory to make the Dutch go to the table and use the military to take a political win, and B-3 was raids by elite forces. Before the B-2 plan Indonesia was mostly raiding the area with Special Forces to get a feel for the Dutch and see if they could make some head way along with keeping it in the news. B-2 was seen as within their capability and as having more muscle then B-3. B-2 had the problem of leaving too much in the hands of the enemy after they started.

The Kostrad was formed as a mobile corps to undertake offensive actions in Irian Jaya not the mobile reserve it functions as today. It was made up of infantry, airborne infantry, artillery, engineers and armored units fighting under a unified chain of command. As the plan started to kick off America waffled and Indonesia scored a political win taking the territory on the table and not on the field. Like winning the WZC without even having to deploy the forces as in moving them was enough. Granted the Kostrad was still a paper headquarters with little command over the units as late as 1965… not the king makers they are today. Kostrad would be back then similar to the force for the WZCs in China.

The Kodams are normally considered bloated and not combat ready for a force past angry and poorly armed locals. But in fact the current mindset seems to expand them not reduce them. As in more bloated forces and not less. The Kostrad functions as not only reliable troops but a reserve for troubled areas these days. Indonesia also has paramilitary forces like the PAP but also has Kodams strung out along the country. Basically to do the same mission of internal security plus be a nucleus of resitance in case of invasion.

Foreign military watchers often point out that they could turn over roles and/or reduce their forces and save a lot of money and still be able to conduct the same operations but they are set to expand the Kodams to 17 from the current 10. I have read from military observers that they could probably drop half and keep just as capable as well as most of the soldiers actually do nothing.

The politics often get pointed out, but the Kostrad was opposed to removing the Kodams for a different main reason. Logistics. There as the Kostrad finds it easier to pass through a Kodam or to use their docks and bases to conduct combat operations. Now looking at things the Kostrad and some other units (Paskhas, Marines, Kopassus) are the pockets of excellence while the Kodams are the bloated local forces which often act as bureaucrats and as an army presence and the Brimob is very much like the PAP. Soldiers on the streets are often scarier then police in times of trouble.

Well what I think about China looking at it through a different set of eyes.

China's bloated local force not only can do internal work but hold the line against an attacker until the real soldiers show up or allow the real soldiers to use their logistics set up to execute other operations like the WZC and cover other areas of the border in case the enemy started another front. Without crappy forces sitting on the Indian border it could be harder to do a WZC with simply moving the elite forces there.

Sorry this is so confused as drawn out rather then being condensed... I can be long winded at times...

All OPOBJs were achieved. And yet, it is the Vietnamese who claims the propaganda victory.

Not all of them... no lesson was taught... which was the most important OPOBJ...