China is arming world's worst regimes - Page 3

Amaterasu · 09-24-2006, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xplore

The guy have no other problem then narrow mentality which is common in certain regions.

you are the one to talk. Haven't you done enough trolling/baiting as it is?

Quote:

Pakistan GDP growth is 6.8% annually for last five years and thats second biggest growth rate after china. Also its economy is growing positively for last thirty years.

thanks to all the aid you have been getting.

667medic · 09-24-2006, 09:11 AM

If growth rate is all that matters, then Afghanistan and Bhutan can kick China's ass

Taihang · 09-24-2006, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STIG

The problem is you talking out of your ass. Get your facts straight first.

No. India has a higher per capita income.

so what does that prove?

Who are these "guys" you are talking about? Is there a cabal that I don't know of?

It's obvious who's trolling dirty here.

What're the numbers of per capita income of India and Pakistan?

India, Pakistan and China are all poor developing countries with relatively large military expenditures spent on crapy arms. You are on the same level with little difference. It doesn't make any sense to point out which is the rich dude with credible military forces.

SLASH · 09-24-2006, 14:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xplore

The guy have no other problem then narrow mentality which is common in certain regions. Pakistan GDP growth is 6.8% annually for last five years and thats second biggest growth rate after china. Also its economy is growing positively for last thirty years.

HAHAAAHAAA...Your comparing yourself to China LMAO.Afganistan grew by 24% doea that mean Afganistan is a better place to business than China.

Your country was bankrupt in 1999 till 2001. Its only because of Uncle Sam's foreign aid that Pakistan is growing.What will happen once the foreign aid is stopped in 2009.How are you'll going to pay your postponed debt to the US?
Does Pakistan have a vision other than destroying its neighbours???

kams · 09-24-2006, 20:04 PM

Sigh.. if you guys are serious about a debate regarding economy and military strengths of India, China and Pakistan, I am enclosing a excerpt from a RAND publication.

Quote:

Regional Military Balance
India and Pakistan are at significantly different levels of development, a factor that influences their foreign policy approaches and capabilities. India’s political system is democratic and far more stable. The leadership is extremely vulnerable to public opinion and unlikely to engage in risky military adventurism. In contrast, the Indian economy
is also almost ten times the size of Pakistan’s. India’s GDP in 2003 stood at $599 billion, a sharp contrast to Pakistan’s $68.8 billion. Furthermore, the gap is increasing. India’s economy grew at approximately 5.8 percent from 1990 to 2002, whereas Pakistan’s growth lagged at 3.6 percent during this period. As a result, India has been able to sustain a far larger military capability than has Pakistan without unduly taxing its economy. In part, India’s political objectives have reflected its superior economic and military capabilities. The country’s leadership is comfortable with its position vis-à-vis Pakistan, and would prefer to maintain the status quo. Pakistan, as the weaker power, has great incentive to upset this balance with whatever means necessary, whether political, military, or nuclear. The dispute over Kashmir most clearly exemplifies the dynamic
between the two. Pakistan is far more willing to engage in risky military or guerrilla maneuvers to obtain an advantage in the territory, with the revisionist goal of denying India access to the area. Over the next decade, the military underpinnings of the “ugly stability” that has characterized South Asia for the last decade will be increasingly eroded as India amasses a substantial conventional military advantage over Pakistan. While the Indian military will continue
to suffer from institutional weaknesses and equipment shortfalls that will prevent it from achieving its full military capability, Pakistan will be unable to muster the economic, institutional, or societal resources to maintain a military capable of holding its relative qualitative and quantitative positions vis-à-vis that of India. This increasing conventional imbalance will be a source of near- and midterm instability,
although, in the long run it may prove to be stabilizing if it
forces Pakistan to reconsider its position on Kashmir.

Conventional Forces
India’s military superiority over Pakistan has long been recognized. It has largely prevailed tactically over Pakistan in every war that the two states have actually fought. Moreover, in 1987, at the time of the Operation
Brasstacks crisis, U.S. military attachés apparently estimated that if a war had broken out, Pakistan would have been defeated within a month, barring Indian military incompetence or a unilateral Indian decision to end the fighting. Indeed, both countries have long recognized that foreign intervention to end a conflict between them was the only means by which Pakistan could stave off eventual
military defeat. As a result, Pakistan has designed its military strategy to ensure that it has important postconflict bargaining leverage when it is saved by foreign intervention, and India has sought the military capability to quickly defeat Pakistan and achieve its politico-military objectives before it is forced to agree to a ceasefire by outside parties.

The defense spending trends of China, India, and Pakistan reflect very different trajectories. While all three states need to modernize their forces, only India and China have the resources to do so. In 1990 India outspent Pakistan by about 3.1:1, and by 2003 this ratio had increased to 4.6:1. Equally important, as illustrated in Figure 3.3, India has been able to increase its defense spending without increasing the burden on its economy, a trend that
is likely to continue over time as India’s economy continues to expand at a rapid clip. While Indian defense spending must also account for a possible, if unlikely, threat from China, this can be of little comfort to Pakistan. Pakistan, for its part, has had to maintain a relatively greater burden on its economy to maintain its defense posture, suggesting that it would be difficult for it to narrow the gap
with India by increasing defense spending. China outspends them both, although Beijing’s security focus is largely elsewhere. China, like India, must also worry about multiple threats. However, unlike India, it must also confront the very real possibility of a conflict with the world’s remaining superpower, the United States.

The magnitude of Pakistan’s defense dilemma is illustrated by the Indian government’s proposed 2004–2005 defense budget. With this budget the Indian government plans to increase its spending on the procurement of military equipment by roughly $13.2 billion, an increase of 59.8 percent over the previous year’s planned expenditure,
and a figure equal to 91.4 percent of Pakistan’s entire 2003 military budget. This procurement spending allows India to continue the process of modernizing its military, which continues to possess, as does China’s, a large number of dated weapon systems. Pakistan, for its part, simply lacks the national wealth required to modernize its military or to be militarily competitive with India. Indeed, without external assistance Pakistan will have great difficulty even maintaining its current relative military position.

Money alone is not a definitive measure of a state’s military capability because military power also depends on the quality of equipment purchased, the abilities of the personnel operating that equipment, and how those personnel and equipment are employed. Absent the test of actual conflict, true military quality is difficult to determine. One crude measure of military quality, however, is the
amount of money spent per soldier. This observation reflects the simple fact that, all other things being equal, more money spent per soldier generally means better training, better equipment, better maintenance of equipment, better health, better living conditions, and the recruitment and retention of better educated and motivated soldiers.

If one is interested in any serious debate, I will be more than happy to provide the full 122 page publication as well as several more I have. But some how I seriously doubt it.

**Officer of Engineers** · 09-24-2006, 20:35 PM

Nice article. Now, what would change if you see the Pakistani Army as a Chinese Army?

kams · 09-24-2006, 21:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Nice article. Now, what would change if you see the Pakistani Army as a Chinese Army?

PLA enjoys huge numerical superiority. Having said that, the terrain of Indo-China border, lack of Power projection capability of PLAN in to IO, modernization of IAF some what diminishes PLA's deemed superiority.

Here is the link to the RAND publication. It has some nice charts which I could not paste. Please note that some of the data used is nolonger valid.

War and escalation in South asia

I do have many publications dealing soley on China's military modernization and its implication. If you are intrested, I will be happy to provide the link to same and then we can have a healthy debate

.

**Officer of Engineers** · 09-24-2006, 21:11 PM

I'm the moderator at China-Defense.com Forum, I'm well versed in all of the PLA's dealings. However, the Indian members have been quoting me lately in that "The Chinese are perfectly willing to fight India down to the last Pakistani."

Now, do you realize the strategic implications of that?

kams · 09-24-2006, 21:39 PM

I misunderstood your question.

If we consider Pakistani army as an extention of Chinese army, it can cause some serious headache to India. However the politico-military scenario is rapidly evolving, with US involved. Lets wait and watch.

kams · 09-24-2006, 22:38 PM

OOE a question for you.

How vulnerable is the US logistic chain to a Computer Network Attack by Chinese Information Operations. Due to Computer networks, China in a way enjoys long range surveillance and attack capability which can seriously affect the rear area logistics. You may also answer the question from 'How capable is Chinese Information Operations is?'.

**Officer of Engineers** · 09-25-2006, 04:51 AM

HORSE PUCKY!

What can a computer hacker do to a network that tanks cannot do better. During the Cold War, we expected our computers to go down not because of any hacker but because of tanks overrunning our CP. NATO CPs had an expected survival time of 10 minutes. We've deviced tactics and procedures to deal with that.

Now, what can hackers do that would overcome that?

lemontree · 09-25-2006, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taihang

What's your problem with my comments? Ain't the two economies on the same level as compared on per capta basis? Ain't the two buying more than selling? To put it in a positive way the two countries have similar growth rates.

Where did you get this info from? Have you been reading last years fudged financial report from the Pakistani PM.

Quote:

You guys must come up with substances other than bold statement like:
"They are handicapped by a poor economy that cannot sustain an effective military force."

So educate us, why we are wrong.

kams · 09-25-2006, 19:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

HORSE PUCKY!

What can a computer hacker do to a network that tanks cannot do better. During the Cold War, we expected our computers to go down not because of any hacker but because of tanks overrunning our CP. NATO CPs had an expected survival time of 10 minutes. We've deviced tactics and procedures to deal with that.

Now, what can hackers do that would overcome that?

Chinese strategists don't think CNO as HORSE PUCKY

. Some of the writings of Chinese strategists suggest that IO/CNO as useful suplement to conventional warfare. They also think deployement phase is US weakness (based on Gulf war I) and US dependence on computer systems for logistics can be exploited to disrupt the operations. DoD uses civilian unclassified computer network such as NIPRNET for many of its operations and these networks are easy targets for CNA.

Sure Tanks are more effective than a computer hacker. But can the computer hacker delay, disrupt deployment of these tanks long enough to give a edge? Can he screw up the logistics just enough to delay the delivery of crucial spares to keep these Tanks functioning or ammunition for the tanks diverted to wrong sector?

Jay · 09-25-2006, 19:58 PM

I listened to a BBC Business report today morning, and looks like PRC is in the forefront of hacking networks throughout the world (particularly US DoD and UK CINS). No only did they get in get out in 10 mins (that number was real), they also installed backdoor trojans in almost all of the machines to use them later.
Now I dont know the implication on the US war fighting capability.

Chinese companies are also involved in espionage. Some of the Chinese employees in a UK company were responsible in transferring sensitive info to PRC, and they said they are not the only ones.

**Officer of Engineers** · 09-25-2006, 20:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kams

But can the computer hacker delay, disrupt deployment of these tanks long enough to give a edge? Can he screw up the logistics just enough to delay the delivery of crucial spares to keep these Tanks functioning or ammunition for the tanks diverted to wrong sector?

ROTFLMAO!!!! No.

There is something called the Sergeant's Network ... and that cannot be hacked. I know. I tried.

09-24-2006, 09:11 AM	#32 (permalink)
667medic *Military Professional* Join Date: 07-22-05 Posts: 1,532 Country:	If growth rate is all that matters, then Afghanistan and Bhutan can kick China's ass __________________ Seek Save Serve Medic

09-24-2006, 20:35 PM	#36 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers *Military Professional* Moderator Scotch taster Join Date: 08-06-03 Posts: 17,064 Country:	Nice article. Now, what would change if you see the Pakistani Army as a Chinese Army? __________________ Chimo

09-24-2006, 21:39 PM	#39 (permalink)
kams *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-22-06 Location: Piscatawy, NJ Posts: 1,462 Country:	I misunderstood your question. If we consider Pakistani army as an extention of Chinese army, it can cause some serious headache to India. However the politico-military scenario is rapidly evolving, with US involved. Lets wait and watch. Last edited by kams : 09-24-2006 at 22:11 PM.

09-25-2006, 19:58 PM	#44 (permalink)
Jay Tamizhanban *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-06-03 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 6,492 Country:	I listened to a BBC Business report today morning, and looks like PRC is in the forefront of hacking networks throughout the world (particularly US DoD and UK CINS). No only did they get in get out in 10 mins (that number was real), they also installed backdoor trojans in almost all of the machines to use them later. Now I dont know the implication on the US war fighting capability. Chinese companies are also involved in espionage. Some of the Chinese employees in a UK company were responsible in transferring sensitive info to PRC, and they said they are not the only ones. __________________ A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-24-2006, 21:11 PM	#38 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers *Military Professional* Moderator Scotch taster Join Date: 08-06-03 Posts: 17,064 Country:	I'm the moderator at China-Defense.com Forum, I'm well versed in all of the PLA's dealings. However, the Indian members have been quoting me lately in that "The Chinese are perfectly willing to fight India down to the last Pakistani." Now, do you realize the strategic implications of that?

09-24-2006, 22:38 PM	#40 (permalink)
kams *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-22-06 Location: Piscatawy, NJ Posts: 1,462 Country:	OOE a question for you. How vulnerable is the US logistic chain to a Computer Network Attack by Chinese Information Operations. Due to Computer networks, China in a way enjoys long range surveillance and attack capability which can seriously affect the rear area logistics. You may also answer the question from 'How capable is Chinese Information Operations is?'.

09-25-2006, 04:51 AM	#41 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers *Military Professional* Moderator Scotch taster Join Date: 08-06-03 Posts: 17,064 Country:	HORSE PUCKY! What can a computer hacker do to a network that tanks cannot do better. During the Cold War, we expected our computers to go down not because of any hacker but because of tanks overrunning our CP. NATO CPs had an expected survival time of 10 minutes. We've deviced tactics and procedures to deal with that. Now, what can hackers do that would overcome that?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments	oneman28	International Defense Topics	96	06-23-2008 01:49 AM
Most needed in US NAVY	Praxus	Naval Forces	345	05-17-2008 20:36 PM
Analysis: Spratly Islands	Ironduke	South Asian Defense Topics	31	02-01-2008 11:54 AM
China's foot in India's door	Neo	International Politics	29	07-08-2007 03:31 AM
Where is Taiwan as China rises in the global IC industry?	oneman28	Political Discussions	0	09-12-2005 13:58 PM