If US wants to have stratigic relations with India, then why propose to see outdated equipment to India???
How about F22 Raptor, Predator (already being given to Pakistan) and MIRV Technology (can be shared by Negative response method just like France)
But I am sure the government would go all out to please the Pakistan loving US and procure outdated technology instead of going on with Russia for 5th generation fighter which would be BETTER than the Raptor.
Re: Re: Re: Re: US
by vikas sethi on Aug 09, 2010 12:39 PM
You are right Hari. This 5th generation aircraft will atake time as it is under development.
Hence the need for 126 fighter aircraft now.
@SK As far as I know, T72 and T90 are Main Battle Tanks. I'm not sure of the name given to the new Aircraft being developed.
Re: US
by Manu Tandon on Aug 09, 2010 12:15 PM
Even if India goes for the outdated technology then it should at least get Masood Azar, Dawood, Saeed and Laqwi killed if not deported to India.
Well, if it serves India's foreign policy objectives, I do not see any harm in India buying US planes.
The fact is, there is hardly anything to choose from amongst the top 4 suppliers. All aircrafts have their positives and negatives in different terrains.
However, I feel, India may not buy all the 126 fighters from any one supplier.
I find the tone of articles, in this rag, increasingly pressurizing India on all fronts, that includes articles like Why Kashmiris like to Protest & Detest India and the above misleading gibberish, seeking to push India to buy US Defence equipment.
Re: I wonder who Owns Business Standard
by Argumentative Indian on Aug 09, 2010 11:37 AM
I'm no expert on Defence Equipment and wouldn't know a smart bomb from a dumb one, even if I was hit by one or the other.
However, what I DO know, is that it was the George W. Bush (India's first real & meaningful friend in the US) Administration that did the heavy lifting for India in the nuke deal. He's been replaced by a Socialist Leaning (Read Forbes' Aug '10 issues editorial please), Pakistan Loving President. A President, who's only reaction to tangible proof on Wikileaks about Pakistan's conspiracy with the Taliban resulting in loss of innocent US Armed Forces' Personnel's lives, is that these are already in the public domain!
Why on earth should India reward this lover of Rawalpindi & Islamabad, with a defence deal?
Re: Re: I wonder who Owns Business Standard
by vikas sethi on Aug 09, 2010 12:07 PM
Well, if it serves India's foreign policy objectives, I do not see any harm in India buying US planes.
The fact is, there is hardly anything to choose from amongst the top 4 suppliers. All aircrafts have their positives or negatives.
However, I feel, India may not buy all the 126 fighters from any one supplier.
Re: Re: I wonder who Owns Business Standard
by IMTIAZ KHAN on Aug 09, 2010 12:13 PM
Argumentative Indian : Fantastic post. I wish to add one more angle to your well written post.
The mess in the Af-Pak region as also potency of Pakistan's inimical stance towards India is a creation of the US and bolstered by it. Our region and the security of India is in turmoil essentially as a manifestation of US policies over 3 decades if not more. Once the US leaves the Af-Pak region, I do not expect it to leave the region in lesser turmoil, but as a matter of fact the turmoil will exacerbate.
We have genuine interests in a stable and friendly Afghanistan. The road to that stability goes thru Moscow, the Central Asian Republics and Tehran. Since geographically these powers would have a greater stake in the stability of Afghanistan and are likely to take a more long term view unlike the US which is pandemically short sighted.
We would therefore be much more well advised to conduct our policy in conjunction with these countries rather than the US.
We have been inclined towards the US so as to benefit technologically so as to make India a high tech manufacturing hub to take us past China. But the US is dithering on Dual Use and Defence technology and on the other hand powers that matter consider us to be pro US.
We should therefore ensure our political interests are well served by working in conjunction with these countries at the same time pursue the US for the tech benefit. Putting all eggs in their basket is not advisable.
Re: Re: Re: I wonder who Owns Business Standard
by vikas sethi on Aug 09, 2010 12:32 PM
Hi Imtiaz,
You have a very valid point. But we need to manage not only Russia but also US & other western countries.
In the case of nuclear power plants, India has given contracts to Russia, US and France. We have signed a N deak with Canada for Uranium. We have kept UK in good humour by giving the Hawk Trainer Jet contracts.
We are jointly developing 5th Generation Fighter Aircraft with Russia on the lines of Brahmos. We are buying Drone like radars from Israel.
I guess we need to balance all of them & it seems govt of India is doing exactly that.
As regards AF-Pak, US can deliver more to India and can also help check Pak. India, Russia, Central Asian countries and Iran all have a stake in keeping Taliban away.
We need to quickly find an alternative route to reach Central Asian countries bypassing Pak so that we can engage them in business.
Re: Re: Re: Re: I wonder who Owns Business Standard
by IMTIAZ KHAN on Aug 09, 2010 05:11 PM
Vikas - you are perfectly correct in terms of the need to balance.
The impending defence deals are huge and will not only cost us in terms of the weapons but also their support infrastructure and spares. We will remain dependent on the supplier for a very long time.
Normally it is thought aircrafts have a fair life of 30 years. Can we trust the US over that period of time? These are conjectures, which the GOI would be thinking in and out to come out with a balanced proposition.
Nothing is free for India while Pak gets it all for nothing. The resolution by the US Senate to forge strategic ties with India, as also the visit of B Hussan O, are meant to sell outdated arms technology and firmly undermine the autonomy of Indian foreign policy.
Re: India in the US-UK orbit
by hari on Aug 09, 2010 11:00 AM
no friend pak is paying a very heavy price..it has practically sold its country and jawans to US and China. It can shout over Kashmir..but US enters its soil anytime and kills..china butchered ulighur muslims..pakis could not utter a word.
Re: India in the US-UK orbit
by Argumentative Indian on Aug 09, 2010 11:30 AM
There is no FREE LUNCH. Intelligent people hate the FREE LUNCH, more than even starvation, as usually, the PRICE of a FREE LUNCH is too enormous to be articulated.
Pakistan, has moved from being a third world country comparable to India, till at least 1991, to a failed nation, bankrupt, non - industrialized, bleeding in a war, dependent on the mercy of other nations for its very survival. It other indicators, like education, nutrition etc. are best left unsaid.
Forget about India, which also used plenty of Aid in the earlier years. Look at China, which is a better example of a self respecting hardworking entity, whether and individual or country. The Chinese, did not make it a national pastime to beg around global capitals, but rather focussed on infrastructure growth, industrialization, population control. Its not been a pleasant journey, there are gaping holes, China's environment management stinks, their workers live badly (compared to the West, NOT India), sometimes their buildings just topple over, and globally their manufactured products quality enjoys the reputation of being Cheap.
However, still China, has done a lot better than India and ofcourse Pakistan, because it despised the free lunch.
India should sign the deal with US in exchange of works in IT / BT sector. It should also demand stopping of military & financial aid to Pak. India should overtake Pak in getting proximity to US as it is the need of the hour. India cant afford to deviate from its developing track just because of ruining Pak.
China is completely correct in saying US to be away from South China sea. What is US interest to interfere in others regional problems except for showing as Gunda of world. Also to India and India media, When Pakistan was struggling in East Bengal to retain its power, US did not help him, however during those time US was biggest supporter of Pakistan. Whey then, Indian media and Politician think that US will help if there will be any problem with China. US can occupy small country(Afghanistan), wage war on the name of WMD (Iraq), can fight against poor (Vietnam) but it can not react against China (case of Taiwan), Bangladesh (Case of India), Russia (Case of checen and Abakazia) etc.................so India should look for its own dominance and own ground in the world Politics and Power. Do not end up as Japan whose PM has to resign because he can not full fill his promise to its people that he will relocate US base in Okinawa.
Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by Himesh R on Aug 09, 2010 10:33 AM
Why are you showering so much love on China (enemy of India) on this Indian forum ? Go troll somewhere else !
Re: Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by pradeep m on Aug 09, 2010 10:40 AM
himesh,,, i know u back is in fire seeing development of chings,,,,,,, hahaha
Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by hari on Aug 09, 2010 10:33 AM
US dint help PAKISTAN in 71!!!??? noor..Nixon dispatched the US seventh fleet to bay of bengal with a nuclear threat to India. USS Enterprise reached its station in the bay ready to attack India and evacuate pakistanis..only then russian Nuclear submarines were dispatched from vladivostock to tackle US seventh fleet..and this detered Nixon!!!!
Re: Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by vikas sethi on Aug 09, 2010 12:00 PM
Hari,
I agree with your views. Not only did US dispatch its Seventh Fleet to bulldoze India (eventually it did not do anything bcoz of Russian N Submariens as pointed out by you), it also pressurized India not to attack the western part of Pak. As a result, India handed over captured Pak territory on India's western borders.
Pak military is incapable of taking on India. Their doctrine is based on calculation that in an event of war, the west will interfere and call for a ceasefire. So the war will be a short duration war. Hence it has always attacked by rushing into Indian territory, capturing part of it. By the time, India captures Pak territory & begins to throw out Pakis, there is a ceasefire due to international pressure. This is sufficient for the Pak army to fool its citizens that they captured Indian territory.
Kargil is yet another example of this thinking. Musharraf thought world will order ceasefire between Nuclear powered neighbors and they will hold captured territory and declare victory. Alas, the world did not play his game, & India evicted Paki army from Mountainous heights even though they held strategically promising positions.
The entire Paki military structure is based on bluff.
Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by vikas sethi on Aug 09, 2010 12:15 PM
Noor, why do Pakis always depend on others to bail them out?
They blame US for not helping them in B'desh war. What about China? Gen Niazi delayed surrendering to India as he was informed that China will soon open a front against India & together they will defeat India. Despite your confidence even China did not attack India & never will even in a future war.
Re: Why not look for the Atlantic sea and Pacific sea
by Raghu Rangaswamy on Aug 09, 2010 10:09 AM
Relationship between countries is like relation between individuals.Every country has to bargain and protect itself.India also has to do that.
The youths join in the Army not because of their patriotism or to show their heroism but to earn their daily bread. Release Prisoners of War Immediately. Before starting any kind of dialogue or peace initiative between two nations, the soldiers who were caught during war must be released. It must be the first action to be taken after declaring the end of the war. Any kind of dialogue or peace initiative between two nations is meaningless without their release. Soldiers are soldiers and certainly not enemies and therefore, they must be respected irrespective of which country they belong to. What crime did they do to put them behind bars forever? During peace, they were ordered to do slavery. They had to wash even undergarments of the wives of their bosses. They were ordered to take their bosses’ dogs for morning walk and to escort them for loo. They were given waste quality food items that even their bosses’ dogs will not eat. Then one day, they were forced to wage war by those who were controlling them. They were used. I repeat they were used. They had no choice. If they had decided not to go for war - always not due to fear but to avoid killing others, they would have been labelled as deserters, treated as criminals and would have trialled under Army Act.
Re: ARE PRISONERS OF WAR CRIMINALS OR HEROES?
by Sebastian Cherukanam on Aug 09, 2010 09:58 AM
Even those soldiers who had never done any harm to anyone, not even to animals, were given weapons and were ordered to consider the soldiers from the other side as enemies and to kill without even any provocation from their side. If they had not killed, they would have been killed. If they had died, there would have business even on their coffins and the maximum they could expect was crocodile tears from the stupid leaders and the public who, when these solders were waging war, would have watched cricket matches keeping Pepsi bottle in one hand the remote in the other. Then the same leaders from both the sides will hug each other in the name of peace initiatives and composite dialogues when the Prisoners of War are still behind bars with no hope left for their future. How can Manmohan Singh and Yusuf Raza Gilani can hug each other and can dinner together when those soldiers who waged war for their respective nations are still under captive? Stupid leaders, in fact you are the criminals because it was you who had initially declared war at the first place and then imposed this war on the people and the soldiers. Now you may blame terrorism but earlier it was only your bloody rhetoric, political blunders and visionless decisions which paved the way for bloody wars. Even now I emphatically say it is your irresponsible, annoying and stupid rhetoric are the real culprits.
Re: Re: ARE PRISONERS OF WAR CRIMINALS OR HEROES?
by Sebastian Cherukanam on Aug 09, 2010 09:59 AM
When this is the ground reality, why the Prisoners of War are kept captive forever? What crime did they do? What crime did their parents, wives and children do to live all these years lamenting on the plight of their beloved ones? Why should their children live without experiencing the love of their fathers? Is this the reward for the sacrifices their fathers did for their respective country? If anyone did crime, it is those who had ordered these soldiers to wage war. I question you and my question is very straight forward. You must give precise answer to it and certainly not excuses. Is waging war against a nation by simply obeying the commander’s order is a crime? If your answer is no, then don’t wait for giving further explanation, just release all Prisoners of War immediately. And if your answer is yes, I want to know, if it is a crime and as you were aware it was a crime when you ordered them to wage war, on what ground you had asked them to commit that crime? Aren’t you the real criminals? Yes, those who declared war and those who ordered the soldiers to wage war are the criminals. Soldiers who had just obeyed what they were ordered are innocents and therefore, release the Prisoners of War immediately.
Re: Re: Re: ARE PRISONERS OF WAR CRIMINALS OR HEROES?
by Sebastian Cherukanam on Aug 09, 2010 10:00 AM
No number game entertained. If India has one million Pakistan Prisoners of War and Pakistan has just one Indian Prisoner of War or vice versa, everyone must be released. Their lives are as precious as yours and your children. You cannot ask them to suffer forever when you and your children enjoy the freedom and luxury. My only concern here is it can be a reason for the Prisoners of War not to be captured but be killed immediately after they are captured and in this case it is up to the soldiers to decide what treatment they should give to their ‘fellow’ soldiers. Hello UN General Secretary, an international law must be enacted with immediate effect to give justice to these hapless ones.
Re: Re: Re: Re: ARE PRISONERS OF WAR CRIMINALS OR HEROES?
by S K on Aug 09, 2010 12:51 PM
Shame on you for de-grading Indian Army like this.. I am sure you are either not an Indian or from traiter community..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ARE PRISONERS OF WAR CRIMINALS OR HEROES?
by S K on Aug 09, 2010 12:54 PM
For your Kind Info.. every 7 out 10 kid (or may be even more) always try to get into Indian army at least once in his life time.. and the soldiers you see in the army are nothing but the Best out of those applicants.. But as your name suggest..a traiter can never understand all this..
This is teh right time to take charge of righting 'US tilt' towards our western neighbour. Why should our RM and Foreign Secy complain on the 'end use' of US weapons being gifted left, right and centre to those who will eventually use them against our soldiers? If US is sincere in its intent of India being its natural strategic partner, its time to show them the our financial muscle. If Indian government awards these contracts (6 Bn already given ...isn't that enough for the 'heavy lifting done for nuclear deal?') to US without solving their preference for the source of al our troubles, it'll have blood of our own soldiers on its hands. We have the right leverage and the opportune time is NOW.
