Thread: Never-seen battle in Indian skies (Mig-35 vs Super Hornet)

A good reason as to why the rest of the country has made the word "communist" synonymous with "traitor".

This is OT, but when you talk about the "rest of the country", you're mainly referring to urban middle or upper class households in India. The Naxalites seem to be well loved by the tribals and adivasis-in fact, reading a bit about the history of the Naxalite movement would be an eye opener for you.

Gamercube,

Do you stand by your signature:
"Hasta la Victoria siempre!"

And Che?

Do you stand by the murdering thug that used it?

The WAB is an open forum of Gentlemen exchanging ideas.
Che would not tolerate that.
He hated open expression of free ideas.
Counter Che and you would be shot.

Is this the mind set you bring to the WAB?

Were it in your power, would you, like Che, shoot people who disagree with you?

GAU-8,

Strange questions you ask me. I think you should know that the reason Che turned to violence was because of America's repeated overthrow of democratically elected governments in Latin and South America and their replacement with murderous dictatorial regimes. There are numerous examples: Jacobo Arbenz Guzman, Salvador Allende, João Goulart etc. With such a "wonderful" record of supporting human rights in Latin and South America, forgive me if I do not take your post seriously, for it is obvious that you have no right to take the moral high ground here.

Maybe if the US were to nurture rather than strangle democratically elected governments in the Americas, then Che would not have felt the need to overthrow those regimes and turn them into communist countries which (in his view), would guarantee equal opportunity to all instead of just to American business interests.

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

If you're going to continue with those tests, I'd rather you not have super hornets. Anyone who still wants those weapons has no respect for them what so ever.

f-18 sh is surely a very capable plane, but is'nt it built mainly for naval purposes, and not a land based fighter ?? just asking.

They are navalized, but regular hornets serve in the Air forces of Australia, Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia, Spain, and Switzerland. Australia has ordered 24 F-model Super Hornets to replace the F-111.

Originally Posted by gamercube

The Naxalites seem to be well loved by the tribals and adivasis-in fact, reading a bit about the history of the Naxalite movement would be an eye opener for you.

They don't really have an option,kinda hard not to profess your love for them when they are the ones wielding guns,not you,wouldn't you say?Also,the Naxalite movement today is a far,far cry from what it originally set out to do in Naxalbari....I don't understand your comment,lots of people in Punjab dislike the Congress' role in the militancy days of Punjab,does that mean they support Khalistan?

They don't really have an option,kinda hard not to profess your love for them when they are the ones wielding guns,not you,wouldn't you say? Also,the Naxalite movement today is a far,far cry from what it originally set out to do in Naxalbari....

I don't think it's that simple. Without local support, a guerilla force fighting against the establishment would not survive. Also, it is not possible for them to threaten everyone-the simple fact that a "red corridor" exists in India today is a testament of the trust and support enjoyed by these Naxalite groups among those at the lowest economic rung of Indian society. Until the government takes action to alleviate poverty among the tribals and adivasis and stop their exploitation at the hands of rich landowners, they will continue to flock to the Naxalites. Violence, especially organised violence targeted at the Indian state does not achieve anything. The government needs to talk to the Naxalites and find out ways to address their grievances, not try and crush their movement with military force, as this will only exacerbate the problem.

I don't understand your comment,lots of people in Punjab dislike the Congress' role in the militancy days of Punjab,does that mean they support Khalistan?

Exactly my point. Don't put labels on someone just because he holds a point of view contrary to yours. Try to understand why he holds that point of view and then conduct a debate. It is easy to label someone as "communist" or "traitor" or "Khalistani" and thus negate everything they're saying.

Originally Posted by gamercube

I don't think it's that simple. Without local support, a guerilla force fighting against the establishment would not survive. Also, it is not possible for them to threaten everyone-the simple fact that a "red corridor" exists in India today is a testament of the trust and support enjoyed by these Naxalite groups among those at the lowest economic rung of Indian society. Until the government takes action to alleviate poverty among the tribals and adivasis and stop their exploitation at the hands of rich landowners, they will continue to flock to the Naxalites.

Doesn't it occur to you that they may be getting covert support from outside?The simple fact that a "red corridor" exists in India today is testament to the fact that once the commies sieze power,they will go to any lengths to cling on to it.Poverty cannot be eliminated as long as their is instability in the region!Like it or not,exploitation of the helpless is actually in the favour of Naxal war-lords,for it it were not so,then there would be no way for them to justify their actions under the guise of social justice.

Violence, especially organised violence targeted at the Indian state does not achieve anything. The government needs to talk to the Naxalites and find out ways to address their grievances, not try and crush their movement with military force, as this will only exacerbate the problem.

I agree,violence targeted at the Indian state does not achieve anything.Their methods speak for themselves.No matter how they present it,its sheer terrorism and needs to be dealt with severely.Be advised that you are justifying the acts of terror.

Exactly my point. Don't put labels on someone just because he holds a point of view contrary to yours. Try to understand why he holds that point of view and then conduct a debate. It is easy to label someone as "communist" or "traitor" or "Khalistani" and thus negate everything they're saying.

I see where you are coming from.I stand corrected.

Originally Posted by gamercube

Exactly my point. Don't put labels on someone just because he holds a point of view contrary to yours. Try to understand why he holds that point of view and then conduct a debate. It is easy to label someone as "communist" or "traitor" or "Khalistani" and thus negate everything they're saying.

I'm not negating what you are saying. I'm just pointing out that you are wrong. And no, I'm not throwing labels around; you have proven yourself to be a communist sympathizer in several successive threads. And hence the connection; Indian communists have always and will always wish worse for the country. When India needed to test its nuclear bomb in '74, at that time, they were up in arms about testing the bomb; and now, India has no real need to test a nuclear device as its priorities lie elsewhere, and now the commies are making a huge ruck ass about testing the bomb. I'm not pro-nuclear deal or anti-nuclear deal here; but i'm just pointing out the bad intentions of the commies.

Tronic,

I don't care what the intention of the communists is. I'm not their spokesman. I'm not here to argue a topic on their behalf, and by labelling everyone opposed to the deal as "commies", you're doing a great disservice to the diversity of opinion in the country. Just FYI, the BJP is also opposed to the deal and you'd be surprised to know that my reasons for opposing the deal are much closer to theirs than to the communists.

Originally Posted by gamercube

Tronic,

I don't care what the intention of the communists is. I'm not their spokesman. I'm not here to argue a topic on their behalf, and by labelling everyone opposed to the deal as "commies", you're doing a great disservice to the diversity of opinion in the country. Just FYI, the BJP is also opposed to the deal and you'd be surprised to know that my reasons for opposing the deal are much closer to theirs than to the communists.

The discussion we were having had nothing to do with the deal. The point raised was about the supply of spare parts for the Super Hornets if India goes for them. You contradicted my earlier statement where I had stated that India would rather grow economically then conduct nuclear tests. There is no need to conduct anymore tests, atleast in the near future; because growing economically and raising the living standards of one's own people is much more important then conducting some nuclear tests especially since the nuclear stand-off is already pretty much locked down. So to say that Super Hornets shouldn't be bought because of fear of sanctions if India tests more nukes, is quite a moot point. If there is no plan to test a nuke, then why would anyone raise that point (Indian commies are an exception)?

There is no need to conduct anymore tests, atleast in the near future; because growing economically and raising the living standards of one's own people is much more important then conducting some nuclear tests especially since the nuclear stand-off is already pretty much locked down.

There is a need to conduct nuclear tests if we want to have a credible nuclear deterrent. It has been stated time and again that our nuclear deterrent at the moment has not reached a level of sophistication comparable to the N-5. To have a credible deterrent, our draft nuclear policy calls for a triad of air, land, and submarine based systems. Now these systems are practical only if we manage to reduce the size and improve the yield of our nuclear warheads. Even for MIRV use, our warheads need to be reduced in size.

Unless we test, all these technologies that are dependent on the quality of our warheads will count for little. At the same time, if we are denied spares for 200 planes because of nuclear tests, it will be a disaster.