But if India is doing that wouldn't adversary try to counter that by doing the same on their side and maintaining the gap? And why would the adversary wait for 3 years?
Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates
- Thread starter Shashank
- Start date
But if India is doing that wouldn't adversary try to counter that by doing the same on their side and maintaining the gap? And why would the adversary wait for 3 years?
Ain't that the same speech chacha gave post 1962 inorder to justify loss of aksai chin and NEFP
Anyways
Preach this rubbish of yours to those who were in power for last 60 years
They kept india both poor and weak , obviously people like you and your ilk had no problems then
Lastly
I don't like going back and forth with people , especially people like you
Reason why I make it a point to never reply to your posts . I prefer to keep it that way .
You are welcomed to your opinions and for all it matters I simply ignore them , no point wasting time
Last edited:
Is this how you read history? By going back as much as you want to fit an argument.
This is like the tweet i read recently 'Eventually Bharat eliminated all its conquers', If you are willing to stretch history everyone will be dead end of the day!.
Obviously, I am taking about modern China. Only from deng xiaoping they become pragmatic. Nationalistic Jingoists where sidelined to give priority to economic prosperity. Which was the 'peaceful rise of china' slogan is all about.
Its hilarious to assume China had a 'strong military during early cold war' and thats why economy prospered. Is that why core issues like Hong Kong or Taiwan were sidelined? Was strong military behind rise of all other SA countries? From South Korea to Taiwan?
After replying you want to ignore
Cool. #BlameNehru
Where in Gupta uncle is clueless but can't admit to it openly yet has an episode to can. Hence...
Last edited:
Please someone tell them that matter has now gone way beyond the fist fight
You assumption is that conflict lasting long enough. From what we have seen, modern conflicts are getting shorter and more intense. Add to that geography of the region. This kind of scenario made sense in world war 2 kind of conflicts which lasted for years. To replenish stocks, manufacturing which takes months will likely be of little use in a conflict that will last just weeks.
Sorry dear but someone needs to correct you. Chinese did NOT wait but prioritized order of conflicts. When it came to protecting their vulnerable parts, they first conquered Tibet. To protect Tibet, they conquered Aksai Chin. It is more like they did not shied away from conflict that was needed.
I dont think Vietnam and korea are that distant in history. I used Chandragupt only to emphasize that it is more of a rule rather than history.
Yes and no. It depends on the scale of the war. Currently, we have the ability to fight the Pakistanis, but we definitely need at least some equalisers when it comes to the Chinese, but we will get more than that over the next 3 years.
On land, we have enough new specialized artillery to take on the Pakistanis, the 100 K9 Vajras. But when it comes to the Chinese, we are still in the process of getting the M777s. In 3 years, we should have enough. This will also give more time for other types of tube and gun artillery to come in, Pinaka (9 new regiments by 2022), Dhanush (114 by 2022), get all the Bofors working etc. The same with many types of infantry weapons, including the AK-203. We need enough time to familiarise ourselves with the weapons we are inducting today.
In the air, obviously we will have the full complement of Rafales with ISE, along with upgraded M2000s, Jaguars and Mig-29s. All our other jets will also start receiving new weapons by then, particularly long range BVR missiles. It will also allow time to develop tactics for the new systems. New light helicopters are needed, and a decent number will be in operation by then.
Almost our full SAM component will be operational as well. All the SPYDERs, MRSAMs and most of the S-400s. A large component of the QRSAM and Akash 1S will also be in the middle of induction. Delhi will get NASAMS. We will also likely see some significant movement on the BMD program, if it hasn't been done already.
At sea, we will have the P-15Bs and P-17As introduced. Our full complement of Scorpenes as well. Also the MH-60s.
Almost everything I named above has already been initiated. Also, everything I named is for delivery under peacetime schedules. There should also be plenty of stuff we know nothing about in the works as well, like new C&C nodes, bases and bunkers.
The Chinese, either deliberately or inadvertently, made their move when we were just starting the process of modernisation.
This isn't going to be a one and done deal either. No matter the result, or how much territorial boundary gets changed, it'll be a hot border like LoC.
Going to war in defence of the nation is very different from willy nilly attacking a powerful country. Do you advocate the invasion of Tibet and freeing the entire country of Chinese presence at this time?
Creating a relatively powerful military before the economy takes off is a prerequisite anyway.
No, we don't need to wait 2-3 years to achieve this. But by waiting for 2-3 years, a lot of our soldiers' lives will be saved. Point being, if the Chinese attack, we must defend, but if the Chinese don't attack, we need to wait 2-3 years at the bare minimum.
Some people have so defeatist mindest that they will justify India signing instrument of Surrender with the Chinese. Stockholm syndrome in full flow here....learn something from the chinese , they didn't continue to whine over their century of humiliation , they treated it as a lesson and now they have succeeded ,while you people keep whining
The production of indigenous missiles shouldn't be a problem. For example, we have the ability to produce over 1000 Akash missiles per year, peacetime.
Production and supply of foreign missiles will also not be a problem, but it will be expensive. The only solution to that is to develop our own, like Astra Mk2. Some companies like MBDA want to manufacture missiles in India.
The numbers you are expecting is something out of WW2, where countries produced thousands of planes every year.
Agreed man, Chinese follow Sun Tzu, all the battles he won from a position of 'weakness' and less resources. Indians follow Gandhi, basically beg the enemy to forgive you.
I am not asking for invasion of Tibet. we will need to do a lot of ground work to do that but we can librate our territory which under chinese occupation thru a limited war and we are now well poised to do that.
Can you please tell me one battle which he had won using these tactics from "art of war"?
Good question but that's not how it works. We had a good edge over PAF could/did we maintain it? NO. These things are non-linear. Both our adversaries have reached saturation in defence acquisition in the short term and neither have any upcoming major inductions. We have a huge room for upgradation because we practically wasted away 10 years. Whenever your base is low there is more room for growth
Here you go ... This is a graduate dissertation of how The Art of War was an influence on the chink side in the 62 war.
Are you trying to suggest that he instead used a gandhian approach to win his battles? Watch this video to get a introduction.
That's what @hellbent wanted, a full invasion of Tibet. And that's what @Tatvamasi replied to. So the context was lost in your reply to him.