Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 157

Thread: Indian Defence News & Discussions

  1. #136
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    My post was aimed at DE and Anti. They need to come up with solutions instead of questioning every time. I read 10s of articles everyday about Pakistan and some about China. I am getting obsessed answering their posts. I won't do it anymore. Do your own research.
    Then you should be able to field questions with ease.

    As about civil war, it happens when there is a leadership crisis.

    Who's in Pak Punjab? How in the hell will I know who in Pak Punjab India can or will cultivate? I am not a spook. Not all those Pak Punjabis are terrorists. I said India can use Pushtuns and Balochis, DE asks me what grievances would India exploit in Pak Punjab. Is that even a question to ask?
    I'm going on the Bangla model. Now, in the 60s if I asked this question people would say the same thing. Who knows.

    We got an opportunity in '69 where the results of the election were annulled because a Bong was deemed unsuitable to rule over Punjabis. This created a ready bed of resentment that coalesced around a leader. Mujib. Once we toppled the govt, he moved in. Succession, everything all sorted. No occupation. VFM solution. Redrew the map regardless of what the world thought.

    Pak Punjab is the hotbed of terrorism in Pakistan. India should use the Pushtuns and the Balochis or other mercenaries available for hire to tear apart Pakistan. Our grievances are Pakistan sponsored terrorism, it is not region specific, and we should use Pakistani fault lines wherever & whenever we get the opportunity.
    All we can do here is support insurgents. Given our own stance it puts us at odds with such a policy. So its effects are marginal at best as we don't push this too hard.

    A policy that makes the PA bankrupt itself ? when we start to read articles in the Pak press questioning why the PA gets such a large share of the budget then we are making progress. This is a long game though.

    Cold start made the Paks develop tactical nukes. Those aren't cheap. If we give them the impression we are changing doctrine then they will need more. So we have to spook them now & then.


    On a different note, India should create opportunities inside Pakistan. What good is the economy, if we can't hit them hard every time there is a terrorist attack.
    We've already demonstrated an ability to hit inside Pakistan. This can be repeated if necessary. Not every time as you say otherwise it loses its effect. Every now & then with clear objectives like at Balakote.

    It's funny, Balakote happened end Feb this year, which makes it just only 4 months ago, yet it feels to me anyway that much more time has passed. They will let the govt settle in some more and hit us again.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 10 Jul 19, at 16:08.

  2. #137
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    My post was aimed at DE and Anti. They need to come up with solutions instead of questioning every time. I read 10s of articles everyday about Pakistan and some about China. I am getting obsessed answering their posts. I won't do it anymore. Do your own research.
    Better people than them have tried actual experiments instead of research. The results were Murphy screaming his head off (What can go wrong will go wrong - at the worst possible time - and all at once) about the Law of Unintended Consequenes. You need look no further than Afghanistan. Pakistan broke that couintry up and instead of controlling that country, we had a Taliban supporting 11 September and the resulting mess.

    In short, you can do as much research as you want. No one has a damned clue what will happen if and when Pakistan collapses. As bad as Pakistan is, it is a devil we do know. No one wants to deal with a devil we don't know. If anyone tells you otherwise, he's sweet talking you into bending over.

  3. #138
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    As about civil war, it happens when there is a leadership crisis.

    Who's in Pak Punjab? How in the hell will I know who in Pak Punjab India can or will cultivate? I am not a spook. Not all those Pak Punjabis are terrorists. I said India can use Pushtuns and Balochis, DE asks me what grievances would India exploit in Pak Punjab. Is that even a question to ask? Pak Punjab is the hotbed of terrorism in Pakistan. India should use the Pushtuns and the Balochis or other mercenaries available for hire to tear apart Pakistan. Our grievances are Pakistan sponsored terrorism, it is not region specific, and we should use Pakistani fault lines wherever & whenever we get the opportunity.
    How well can we influence matters in Afghanistan. This is as good a dry run as we can get : )

    India must change its risk-averse stand on Afghanistan, given new Russia-Pak-China bonhomie | Print | Jul 05 2019

    India needs to step up its diplomatic engagement with elements within Afghanistan that have been and continue to be victimised by Islamabad. In coordination with Washington and Kabul, it is now time for New Delhi to open renewed lines of communication with those in Afghanistan who seek to assert their country’s sovereignty vis-à-vis Pakistan. India would also do well to pivot towards providing support to marginalised minorities in the Afghan state that have often viewed Pakistan’s involvement with suspicion.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 10 Jul 19, at 21:14.

  4. #139
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    What good is the economy, if we can't hit them hard everytime there is a terrorist attack.
    This is a question that needs to be asked of the Indian military. If they cannot deter an adversary with seven times more military budget then they ain't gonna do it with ten times as much.



    Better explanation of the defense budget. No increases. But for the first time pensions exceed salaries.

    1 lakh crore = 1 trillion or 10^5 x 10^7

    Govt used to charge customs duty to the military for import of arms !!

    They thought about it and have decided to waive customs for the military from THIS YEAR ON.

    WHY ?

    Customs detained a consignment of Mirage spare parts because customs duty had not been paid !!!

    If ever India fired an ICBM at the US, it would have to stop on it way at Karachi until customs looked up warhead exportation in a big book -- PJ O'Rourke
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Jul 19, at 12:53.

  5. #140
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,210
    How India Walked a Tightrope to Ink the S-400 Missiles Deal With Russia

    The signing of the S-400 Air Defence Missile System (ADMS) deal is good news for India and its military. However, the uncertainty that dogged the inking of the contract till the last moment – it was not clear until this morning if this would happen – was suggestive of the looming shadow of the United States on India’s foreign policy. This cannot be good for the future of India’s bilateral engagements with other countries, especially Russia.

    Military criticality
    But first, the military criticality of S-400 for India. India has bought five regiments/units or 40 launchers (each regiment/ unit will have two batteries with four launchers each), and about 1,000 missiles. Interestingly, 70% of purchased missiles are of very long range (400 km) and long range (350 km) category and the rest have lower ranges of 300km and 250km. The S-400 surveillance radar with the range of 600 km and 360 degree coverage can track 70 targets. The S-400 is not an upgraded version of S-300 ADMS – this was offered to India in 1998 – as is commonly believed, but has an entirely different technology, radar capability and missiles.

    While S-400 will have no transfer of technology or defence offsets, Russia has agreed to set up maintenance facilities in India; help integrate the S-400 with India’s indigenous Akash surface to air missile system (which was made with Russian hand-holding and is still not more than 40% accurate); expedite procurement despite having a full order book till 2022; and consider the transformational S-500 system (with capability to kill low-earth satellites) currently under trial, for sale to India.

    Interestingly, the Indian Air Force (IAF) intends to use S-400 in the ‘offensive air defence’ role rather than its designed role of protecting high-value targets like Delhi, for which it was originally proposed. Through ‘offensive air defence’, the IAF wants S-400 to take out enemy Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) — an airborne radar meant to control the battlespace by helping direct fighter aircraft to their targets. The AWACS — a major force-multiplier — would be extremely threatened within S-400’s 400km range.

    Once enemy AWACS have difficulty in command and control of the battlespace, enemy aircraft would not be able to operate at all altitudes, making them vulnerable inside Indian airspace. So, when the chief of air staff, Air Chief Marshal B.S. Dhanoa said that he would use 36 Rafale and S-400 to ‘plug the gaps’, he was referring to this role for S-400 to make up for his fighter aircraft deficiencies. However, destruction of enemy aircraft with expensive S-400 missiles would not be its cost-effective battlefield utilisation; hence it is likely to be avoided, though the shorter-range missiles might be used for this purpose.

    For the protection of high-value targets, the Air Headquarters has made a strong case to purchase the United States’ National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System (NASAMS). This is ironic, because while S-400 can destroy hostile ballistic missiles, NASAMS cannot do so. It can only kill cruise missiles and other aerial platforms. The thinking at the Air Headquarters is that since there is no understanding on use of ballistic missiles – especially with Pakistan – both sides are likely to avoid use of ballistic missiles with conventional warheads lest they are misread and leads to nuclear accident. So NASAMS may probably never be called upon to take on ballistic missiles.

    The looming shadow of the US
    While the military requirement of the S-400 ADMS programme has been clear from the beginning, the political willingness became murkier over the years. Several times the government of India came close to signing the contract but always dithered at the last moment. Even today’s contract signing was preceded by weeks of uncertainty, stemming from the fear about US slapping Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanction Act (CAATSA) upon India.

    Apparently, a month ago when Russian officials came to India to do the groundwork for the impending summit meeting between Prime Minister Modi and President Putin, national security advisor Ajit Doval told a senior member of the Russian delegation that he would not commit on signing of any contracts till he had consulted a few friends. To leave none in doubt, he added that he would be travelling to the US soon, and only after his visit would the government make up its mind about inking the contract.

    Obviously, he was looking for more than an assurance from the US that India would be exempted from CAATSA. This was clearly humiliating for the Russian delegation, which comprised senior members of Kremlin’s inner circle. The government of India continued to send mixed signals to its Russian counterparts, so much so, that till this morning nobody knew for sure if the deal would be done.

    Traditionally, summit meetings are prepared well in advance. Both sides know what commercial agreements would be signed, because they require a lot of paperwork, which has to be prepared in advance and vetted by both sides. What’s more, most defence contracts involve several sub-contracts with different entities. Till Putin’s departure from Moscow for India, his aides had no clue about which contracts, if at all any, would be signed during this visit. The only thing that they had clarity about was that the contract for additional Mi-17IV helicopters would not be signed due to lack of funding during this summit meeting, the Indian ministry of defence had informed Russia weeks ago.

    This is nothing short of embarrassing for a government that projects itself as the sole custodian of national security and upholder of strategic autonomy. That the government of India was constantly looking over its shoulders for approval to sign a contract for a system critical to its national security, does not bode well for its relationship with Russia, which has stood by India, politically and militarily. Remember the May 2018 Wuhan summit followed by the Sochi summit in which Modi sought out Putin as the guarantor of his peace talks (on disputed border) with President Xi Jinping after the June 2017 Doklam crisis. This is not all. Russia is the only country which has given restricted technologies to India.

    There is a strong lobby in Russia which wants to have deeper defence relations with Pakistan. Since the June 2015 visit of Pakistan army chief, General Raheel Sharif to Moscow and the sale of four Mi-35 helicopters (for counter-terror operations), Pakistani delegations regularly visit Russia. At the recent Army-2018 defence exhibition held in Russia in September this year, I saw many Pakistani officers hobnobbing with Russian defence companies. They were interested in everything, from fighter aircraft, air defence systems to even joint defence ventures with Russian companies.

    Many Russians, I met during the Show, argued that since India has drifted towards the US, why should it object to Russia selling arms to Pakistan. Kremlin has been resisting the pressure from its defence industry in the hope that India would reset its ties with Russia.

    Given the volatility of Indian neighbourhood, it is critical that New Delhi understand the importance of balancing its relations with major powers instead of pushing its luck with one.
    DE, you were right about S-400 plugging the gaps. And it was Putin who egged Xi to talk to Modi and resolve the Doklam crisis.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  6. #141
    New Member
    Join Date
    13 Jul 19
    Posts
    1
    Euro T20 Slam is the world's first ever Continent based T20 cricket league. Europe.
    Euro T20 Slam a new T20 Cricket League is in the town.
    The New Eouropean T20 Cricket League will be held at Ireland, Scottland
    euro t20 slam league live streaming
    euro t20 slam league live score
    Euro T20 Slam 2019
    Euro T20 Slam schedule 2019
    Euro T20 Slam draft 2019
    euro t20 slam venues 2019
    euro t20 slam draft 2019
    euro t20 slam draft
    Go Watch Right Now For Free

  7. #142
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,251
    Really weird one to figure out ? Why is a US senator offering ways to bypass their own sanctions in this manner.

    Name:  pompeo-jaishankar-7.jpg
Views: 93
Size:  41.6 KB

    Why isn't Pompeo, the one with the winning smile doing this ?

    Graham: I Told Turkey They Can Avoid Sanctions If They Don’t Activate Russian Radar | Defense One | Jul 25 2019

    BY KATIE BO WILLIAMS
    SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT

    JULY 25, 2019

    Sen. Lindsay Graham says President Trump asked him to make the call.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on the request of President Trump, called Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu with a simple pitch on Wednesday: Just don’t activate the Russian-made S-400 missile defense system.

    “I’m in the camp of, if they don’t activate the S-400, the sanctions don’t have to be applied. My hope is to persuade Turkey not to activate the system because it’s so disruptive to the relationship,” Graham told Defense One. “My pitch to Turkey was, let’s stand down on the S-400, let’s start free trade agreement negotiations.”

    Turkey took possession of components of the system earlier this month, prompting the White House to boot Ankara out of the F-35 program and triggering the possibility of U.S. sanctions.

    If Turkey turns on the advanced air defense system, Graham said, the U.S. relationship with NATO ally Turkey “takes a very dark turn.”

    Trump has expressed some ambivalence about punishing Turkey for buying the S-400, which military leaders have said would compromise the F-35 and other NATO systems. (Years ago, Turkish President Tayyip Recep Erdogan had sought to purchase the U.S.-made Patriot system, but the two sides could not come to terms.)

    Some lawmakers have pressed to quickly implement congressionally mandated sanctions on Turkey, a NATO ally that has now purchased proscribed Russian defense equipment. But at a private meeting with Republican senators on Tuesday, Trump asked lawmakers for “flexibility” in responding to the purchase, NBC News reported.

    After that meeting, Trump “told me to call Turkey,” Graham said on Thursday.

    “I think there’s space to do a free trade agreement if we don’t activate the system,” he said. “If the system gets activated, there are no options left, the [sanctions] law is clear.”

    The White House declined to comment.

    Trump’s decision to contact the Turkish foreign minister via a U.S. senator, rather than a Cabinet-level administration official, raised eyebrows on Thursday. It’s the second time in a week that Trump has chosen an ally in the upper chamber to handle a sensitive diplomatic issue; last week, he tasked Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., with meeting with the Iranian foreign minister last week.

    “Why Graham? Where’s the secretaries of State and Defense? Isn’t this their job?” said former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, in an email.

    Other Republicans have also expressed ambivalence about coming down too hard on Turkey for purchasing the system. House Armed Services Ranking Member Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, on Wednesday said that while cutting Turkey out of the F-35 program is an appropriate step, additional sanctions against a NATO ally “is a harder question.”

    “Maybe you would look at certain sanctions, but I think it’s important not to just go too far in a way that would make it hard for Turkey to reconcile back with the United States and NATO, post Erdoğan. It’s a fine line,” Thornberry told reporters on Capitol Hill.

    “Turkey is and continues to be a very important country, a very important NATO ally, we have lots of things that we do with them. You want to send a message, but you don’t want to alienate them forever.”

    Some analysts were baffled by the proposal.

    “I guess I’m not seeing how — ‘They buy it, but they don’t turn it on’ — I’m not sure what problem that’s solving,” said Andrew Hunter, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “If the message is, ‘we won’t sanction you until you turn it on,’ it could be an effort to play for time” until the U.S. is able to persuade Ankara to return the system to Russia, he suggested — ”but it seems like that’s a bridge that’s already been crossed.”

    “And of course,” he noted, “it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense from the Turkish perspective.”

    The Russian-made system cost Turkey $2 billion.

    Marcus Weisgerber and Kevin Baron contributed to this report.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 26 Jul 19, at 20:56.

  8. #143
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,251
    Another by AIM. Though he gets panned in the comments section.

    No the IAF does not want to be the arab swordsman who gets shot by Indiana Jones revolver. This analogy by AIM is to suggest the IAF is more into kinetics than electronics. And LM is the revolver salesman.

    F-16 never stood a chance to be in IAF fleet. Lockheed Martin messed it up so much | The Print | Jul 30 2019

  9. #144
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,210
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  10. #145
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,210
    Name:  Screen Shot 2019-08-24 at 09.43.39.png
Views: 16
Size:  368.3 KB

    InsAllah-e-Barracuda will add muscle to the Indian Navy, if true.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  11. #146
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,377
    Swedish GOTLAND AIP SSK - $100mil US
    Frendch BARACUDA SSN - $1.4bil US

    For the price of 1 French SSN, you can get 14 Swedish SSK. There are of course vast difference in technology and capabilities but can you really match 1 SSN against 14 SSKs?

  12. #147
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,031
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Swedish GOTLAND AIP SSK - $100mil US
    Frendch BARACUDA SSN - $1.4bil US

    For the price of 1 French SSN, you can get 14 Swedish SSK. There are of course vast difference in technology and capabilities but can you really match 1 SSN against 14 SSKs?
    Very true, specially if the main goal is the coastal defence of India and the imediate area. But don't forget the political side. Just the word "nuclear" has a power all of it's own; note that the french, apparently, were originally ofering a non-nuclear AIP version of the Barracuda...

    As for "vast diferences in techonology and capabilities"... I'll acept an SSN has more internal room for more weapons. Other than that?...

  13. #148
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    As for "vast diferences in techonology and capabilities"... I'll acept an SSN has more internal room for more weapons. Other than that?...
    You run out of liquid oxygen long before you run out of nuclear fuel.

  14. #149
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,031
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    You run out of liquid oxygen long before you run out of nuclear fuel.
    Afaik, the 1500 ton Gotlands can sail for close to 14 days on the AIP, and that's with a first generation system. Unless India wants to send boats into the Pacific, that should be enough. I imagine the version proposed for the 4000 ton "Shortfin Barracuda" offered to Australia (which doesn't want nukes, note) will be better.

  15. #150
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Afaik, the 1500 ton Gotlands can sail for close to 14 days on the AIP, and that's with a first generation system. Unless India wants to send boats into the Pacific, that should be enough. I imagine the version proposed for the 4000 ton "Shortfin Barracuda" offered to Australia (which doesn't want nukes, note) will be better.
    I agree. The more I think about it, the more I see no Indian need for a SSN. The only scenario for any SSN is to kill SSBNs before they can launch their birds. No way in hell are Indian SSNs going to get close enough to American and Russian SSBNs to do that. Indian SSNs would need to punch through Chinese screens of destroyers/SSN/SSKs to get through to Chinese SSBNs. Even then, AIP SSKs would also have the same capability provided they top up before they submerge for action.

    Hell, for the price of one BARRACUDA SSN, you can buy and crew a GOTLAND SSK for its entire life cycle. The GOTLAND sounds like a much better buy more and more.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. China Auto News and Related Discussions.
    By Inst in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11 Dec 09,, 20:02
  2. Pak-American viewpoints of Indian ABM defence
    By Tajmahal in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22 Dec 08,, 13:44
  3. Naval Discussions
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 25 Nov 07,, 16:09
  4. Future Defence Purchases by the Indian Army
    By Su-47MKI in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 17 Aug 05,, 17:27
  5. Indian defence minister to visit Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan
    By Ironduke in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15 Nov 03,, 09:28

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •