Thoughts ? Pakistan has built military power, India a military force

[Khafee]

There was an unwritten rule in the congress that another Gandhi would never be the PM , they will always be heading the party . the PM candidate IMHO this time around will be P Chitambaram !!!

This reminds me of Narsimha Rao (hope I spelled his name correctly). He was not given enough credit, for his economic reforms. Quiet guy, who achieved quiet a lot?

 

[Joe Shearer]

This reminds me of Narsimha Rao (hope I spelled his name correctly). He was not given enough credit, for his economic reforms. Quiet guy, who achieved quiet a lot?

A huge achiever! He was also a very effective foreign minister in his time.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I did, i spent a lot of time writing the reply only to have it washed away due to technical reasons. give me till night will do so again.

REALLY sorry to hear that, J. What you outlined verbally was most convincing. Take your time, but do include all those facets:

1. The Pros and Cons of the defence against the Chinese PLAN;
2. The South China Sea;
3. The Straits of Malacca;
4. Defence of the East Coast and of the Bay of Bengal;
5. Guarding the fishery assets of an already diminished and severely polluted Bay of Bengal;
6. Regional alliances; are the Aussies any good? or should we look further away?
7. The need to broaden the footprint of the Unified Command;
8. Guarding the western seas: counter-attacks and our own vulnerability;
9. The Pakistan objective;
   1. Submarines with the PN;
   2. Aircraft component devoted by Pakistan for maritime duties;
   3. Surface ships;
   4. Chinese intervention;
   5. Poseidons vs. Su 30 MKI with maritime intervention stand-off weapons;
   6. Helicopter carriers;
10. Any need for strategic intervention;
11. The tussle between IN and IA for marine forces;
12. Equipment for such interventions;
13. Does the IN need carriers? How many? Why?
14. Are carriers alone enough? What else is needed?
15. Land-based maritime search and attack aircraft;
16. Places to develop ship-building capacity.
17. Time horizons needed - 10 years or a 100 years?
18. Interfaces with other two services.
19. Strategic weapons and their deployment.

 

[Khafee]

REALLY sorry to hear that, J. What you outlined verbally was most convincing. Take your time, but do include all those facets:

1. The Pros and Cons of the defence against the Chinese PLAN;
2. The South China Sea;
3. The Straits of Malacca;
4. Defence of the East Coast and of the Bay of Bengal;
5. Guarding the fishery assets of an already diminished and severely polluted Bay of Bengal;
6. Regional alliances; are the Aussies any good? or should we look further away?
7. The need to broaden the footprint of the Unified Command;
8. Guarding the western seas: counter-attacks and our own vulnerability;
9. The Pakistan objective;
   1. Submarines with the PN;
   2. Aircraft component devoted by Pakistan for maritime duties;
   3. Surface ships;
   4. Chinese intervention;
   5. Poseidons vs. Su 30 MKI with maritime intervention stand-off weapons;
   6. Helicopter carriers;
10. Any need for strategic intervention;
11. The tussle between IN and IA for marine forces;
12. Equipment for such interventions;
13. Does the IN need carriers? How many? Why?
14. Are carriers alone enough? What else is needed?
15. Land-based maritime search and attack aircraft;
16. Places to develop ship-building capacity.
17. Time horizons needed - 10 years or a 100 years?
18. Interfaces with other two services.
19. Strategic weapons and their deployment.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Poor fellow, he actually outlined all of it.

 

[Hithchiker]

Guys whenever you post something, as a rule, please provide a link to OP.

Thanks!

Noted for future compliance

 

[Joe Shearer]

Khafee bhai Joe is going to get my foot up his royal behind , he knows i hate typing , damn fellow gave me some more homework .
@Joe Shearer i am not your student mate , think of the pain i will cause the next time we meet ....

Done.

Just so long as you write.

I'm writing up a trip I made; I want you to see it in private before I send it on.

 

[I.R.A]

I will leave the defense / war strategy and technical stuff to be discussed by experts, not my area ........ for me what I read on this thread, it looks like India needs an ally and only long term reliable ally it will find is Pakistan ........ not for fighting wars, but for rising and claiming its true status.

Don't believe my analysis though ............. my childish side still believes that miracles do happen ...........

So getting that out of the way I will try conveying my thoughts on more political sides like

Modi’s foreign policy, the authors say, is more optics than substance.

I would say he has been active, with all those hugs and tea parties, lets give the man the credit where its due ........ he attracted a lot of attention and tried fighting the case for his country, he may have started wholeheartedly with noble intentions, you know that feel new role, new office and that excitement to prove yourself up to the task ......... but went wrong in my opinion is uncontrolled emphasis on hurting Pakistan and trying to isolate it (at least in his own public's eye) ........ he couldn't maintain the balance, it may have been because of the back end pressure and all those promises he made when he hadn't seen the inside of the office ...... if he backtracks he loses his God like reputation in India and chances of another tenure in office go doubtful. So all this gymnastic we see.

They also say that India is the only country in the world where foreign policy with nations having disputed borders- China and Pakistan- is made with regard to military advice.

Okay I thought .... that blame...... was left for Pakistan only.

The other strong and significant argument that Sawhney and Wahab put forward is that the government of India should open unconditional talks with everyone alienated from the national mainstream, irrespective of their professed public positions.

Difficult a government to reverse doing of every past government, however, a step in this direction has to be taken one day. So yes authors are correct in their advice.

Anyhow, so in a hypothetical scenario Modi and India are suppose able to curb the insurgencies and address the grievances would that mean downsizing of the force(s)? Or would they want to keep the numerical superiority viz a viz Pakistan and trying to match up with China? A large force would need a bigger budget to become a modern force and would remain prone to be inefficient etc?

Taking this point of discussing matters and applying it to International relations with neighbors ........ again difficult, it is yet to be seen ....... inviting then Pakistan PM and landing in Pakistan to attend the marriage were stunts performed by Modi in his individual capacity ........ based on his personal relations with NS ....... or did these stunts have India's backing as a state? To me it appears more like personal relations with NS, because India consistently denied any talks and sports with Pakistan. The other thing is domestic pressure, India has presented Pakistan as a thorough evil to majority of Indians ......... still Modi has shocked once so lets see.