I don't understand why no one sees the risk in importing missile shields to our country from the likes of Anglo-Saxons. They are trojen horses that can hit our own country if they want it to. Like Saddams missiles dropped dead when they needed it, these missiles shifted can drop dead or worst made to hit our strategic locations. We never know the future.
Imported Missile Shield a risk
- Thread starter CountryFirst
- Start date
I wasn't suggesting buying Russian either, but it is better to buy from them than US. And you wouldn't be pointing sanctions for considering them if it was shit. Why do we even have to bring this talk up when it is just nonsense??
But what I was saying was, some things, like the Boeing planes and missiles shields, anything with a brain inside it and can fly, are double edged swords, they can be controlled by its makers, and as we have seen, similar things have happened in the past.
Last edited:
Which missiles are coming from the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand or the other Anglo-sphere countries?
True, but you put your trust in missiles like this:
Now I'm not suggesting India and Israel spit anytime soon, but if the future can't be known, why trust an Israeli system either? Or Russian? Isn't the possibility of a beef between India and Israel possible given India's ties with Iran and Israeli opposition? Wouldn't Spyder constitute the same risk given Israel's known cyber capabilities and penchant for self-preservation above all else? There's definitely a greater risk to India from the US then Israel, know doubt, the same risks are still there if "We never know the future".
FYI, Norway, whom is the developer of this missile system India is interested in (or speculated to have purchased depending on your sources), isn't an Anglo-Saxon country. Few in Europe or the Americas are. Just the Anglo-Sphere, which ironically, includes India to an extent as well.
Because the harsh facts are India’s domestic military industry cannot meet the quality demands of the Indian armed forces yet. USA supplies the best stuff on time with superb maintience and readiness rates.
Now of course India is diversifying into domestic industries and international allies like France and Israel. But certain things you can only get from the big players. Your choice is Russia or USA for those things.
I don't think we're going to buy NASAMs , we don't need it. I consider it all hot air by bikaau Media.
Purchase french !
We are a trully good friend of us.
The NASAMS is just a small contract compared to the size and scale of our purchases. We are buying it for the defence of Delhi. And if the Americans screw around with us, they will lose a lot of credibility. And Norway is also involved, and these people are very careful about who they sell to. It's a defensive system, so it is very unlikely for the Americans to tamper with the system. The communications system will be Indian anyway.
Wasn't the architecture empowering the Iraqi defences French, while the missiles were Russian? Wouldn't that mean either country was an unreliable supplier or partner too? Take the KARI network. Russian doctrine for integrated air defence, but a mix of French and Russian electronics.
SAMs? SA-2 - Russia. SA-3 - Russia. SA-6 - Russia. Roland - France/Germany. SA-8 - Russia. SA-9 - Russia. SA-14 - Russia. I-HAWK - United States. Aircraft? Mirage F1 - France. MiG-25 - Russia. MiG-29 - Russia. SU-24- Russia. AA Guns? ZSU-23-4 - Russia. S-60 - Russia.
Mostly Russian, with some Chinese and French. Why did Saddam's KARI line fail? Largely because it was facing a superior adversary techologically and tactically. Electronic warfare assets like the EF-111, EC-130 and EA-6B blinded Iraq's integrated air defences.
The F-117 hit critical command infrastructure.
And Tomahawk virtually annihilated the Iraqi's command and control capabilities within hours of the war starting.
During the US invasion in 2003 it wasn't any better for a still depleted Iraqi military. Iraq's missiles didn't fail because of nefarious behaviors from unreliable partners, they failed because they were faced with a superior adversary with superior capabilities to attack them with both kinetic and electronics means. And it wasn't just Saddam's KARI network either.
We are buying from them. They aren't forcing it on us.
Engines for Tejas and Arjun which they have sold are not available to all countries. Its more a partnership due to goodwill.
But I do agree. Actions like the WMDs of Iraq shave a lot of trust. We would be smart to be on our toes.
Which missiles are coming from the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand or the other Anglo-sphere countries?
True, but you put your trust in missiles like this:
Now I'm not suggesting India and Israel spit anytime soon, but if the future can't be known, why trust an Israeli system either? Or Russian? Isn't the possibility of a beef between India and Israel possible given India's ties with Iran and Israeli opposition? Wouldn't Spyder constitute the same risk given Israel's known cyber capabilities and penchant for self-preservation above all else? There's definitely a greater risk to India from the US then Israel, know doubt, the same risks are still there if "We never know the future".
FYI, Norway, whom is the developer of this missile system India is interested in (or speculated to have purchased depending on your sources), isn't an Anglo-Saxon country. Few in Europe or the Americas are. Just the Anglo-Sphere, which ironically, includes India to an extent as well.
Israel is in grave danger and faces serious threats. Israel can't afford to betray India even if it wanted to as India also faces similar threats but is much stronger due to large population. India will survive without Israe but Israel will find it difficult without India.
India just wants technology which it ca learn to make its own weapons. S400 is to make XR-SAM. NASAMS is to make QRSAM. Indian scientists want to verify if their design is correct or not by understanding other similar systems
LCA Tejas uses USA engines as UPA was installed by CIA. If USA had not given F404, India would have developed Kaveri on its own. To avoid this scenario and to create a kind of balance, USA gave F404 to India
And we still don't have a working Kaveri. Your theory is, magically, the necessity would have forced the scientists to master engine tech. They will take their sweet time.
Again. The BJP has bought whole Rafale jets. M777s. Drones. Nobody forced us. A salesman will advertise.
Your reaching into eccentric conspiracy theories of CIA is simple fear mongering. A boogeyman.
space tech or super computing it has always been the case where they deny it and finally when we are close to mastering it they offer help/support. Super computers were denied and then ironically cray computers went bankrupt.
Here is a gem where India was denied beryllium diaphragms which were actually made from ore exported from India.
To Make in India, give a break to our tech & talent - Times of India
And you are saying that Kaveri was not made because scientists could not? Do you know that UPA cut down funds for Kaveri and in 2009 Aero India itself, its director was complaining that government was not releasing funds? If India had no engine from imports, then there would have been serious pressure on UPA to release funds as otherwise it would raise eyebrows everywhere. They were trying to deceive and it can't be done openly.
BJP has bought only those things which can be useful in learning technology or items of critical needs. Rafale was bought for some technology, not just bought off the shelf. Even if France does not give blueprint directly, they know that India can open up their meteor missile and find how it works to make the SFDR.
Drones were purchased recently? India wanted drones from USA but it was not accepted. Again, the drones are high end reaper drones which has some advanced technology..
Only a fool like you will think that these are simply purchases to maintain squadrons or minimum deterrence. Parrikar had openly told that Su30 was enough and rafale was not needed to start a hard bargain.
First India is not Iraq or Argentina, and we are not waging war against the British or the Americans.
Our conflicts in all reality in the western theater would be of Air Domination, and in the east of containment. In either case we are not looking at India being wiped off the map, and after a War if anything defense spendings go up.
Which sane manufacturer would want to jeopardize on of the biggest customers it will have in the next century for supporting a Pakistan or a China.
I saw a couple of quips about Russian equipment, when has equipment been deliberately sabotaged by Russians in the past? Please show me on instance, same applies to the french, brits, or other euro equipment.
Next comes to procurement of equipment, Design Failure mode analysis is extensively carried out on frontline systems and tested before implementation, that is one of the reason you see so many Indian subsystems being installed into brand new system that are bought, they are there either to alleviate operational or design risks.
When you buy a Mirage 2000 and performs exceptionally in combat, guess what happens? > a mega deal for equivalent or better platform ensues.
Similarly when a Mig27 Conks out in combat , pretty soon it falls from the grace of the operator, and sees hurdles for repeat orders of equivalent or better platform.
Just under-performance is death of further business avenues, guess what would happen when there is connivance?
Design Verification are done by comparison with other system bought at exorbitant prices like the S400 ? This quite a bit of news to me. Please do explain more. Also examples of other systems whose design verification was validated by purchasing comparable foreign systems rather than an actual initial launch containment matrix which used to be standard norm, would be extremely enlightening.
Also you seem to be claiming rampant plagiarism by all of the teams of Indian Scientists on these projects, do you have any reference for such?
I do disagree with buying any critical weapon systems from US or UK. They are simply an unreliable and untrustworthy partners. US threaten sanctions in the blink of an eye, and walk away from agreements if you disagree with them on anything.They walk away from international treaties like no other country. US expectations of a partnership is agreeing with them on everything under the sun. US is the most technologically advanced country and they are very important to us, but we should show wisdom and not give them opertunity to hold us hostage.
Russians, French or Israel on the other hand is much more trustworthy nations. Their idea of partnership is not slavery. Nations like France and Russia supported us and refused to impose sanctions on India even after our 1998 nuclear test. Better stick with the time tested partners than jumping ship to those who are historically unreliable.