US and Indian troops to begin training together for war

J

John

Guest
Air-Land doctrine. Land formations forces the enemy to mass so that the birds have something to hit. It's part of the same package, not seperate from one another.

If one part is missing, ie land component as in the Kosovo War, the enemy disperses and bury themselves and effectively shielding themselves from air attack. I remind you that during the Kosovo War, only 12 pieces were destroyed and the 3JA was 85-90% still combat effective after 45 days of bombing.

The same thing at Karbala where US attack choppers were chewed up by Iraqi triple As when there was no ground component to drive them out.

Apples and oranges comparison here.

You've got to be kidding me! You want to ask the other two Indian Army Officers on this board about that? The good Major Deltacamelately and the Brigadier Ray?

I like to see a source for the beyond repair. As far as I can check, only two ABRAMS were written off, the others got shipped back to the US for factory repairs.

Aside from that, whenever you decide a bet between armour and engineers, always choose the engineers.

They're light infantry and light infantry is always considered a step above physically to mech and motor infantry.

Ok, you're talking about civilian infiltration. You do know that is against the GC of which India is a signatory. Legally, they can be classified as spies and be shot on the spot.

More or less in a similar standing with India. You know more in one area. We know more in another.

Not India, you. And you will find Canadian military history is filled with as many exploits as yours. For one thing, we were a WWIII Army, as in my brigade was tasked to cover the retreat of VII Corps against 2 Soviet Armies.

And you will stand again, win again, and lose again.

India, in her history, has found some wars to be worth fighting and some not. I cannot see that changing for the future. You will find some wars worth fighting and some not.
During Kosovo the infamous F-117 was shot down, Iraq war 80 beyond repair, source: Discovery Mega factories: Abrams documentary. Sure GC conventions, who gives a ****, all is fair in war, besides our infiltrators never get caught. some old farts sitting in Geneva are supposed to dictate what we can or cant do...**** em, if we are attacked we will defend. We know more in all areas, please dont be moronic enough to put Canada on the same level as India. yes Canada was a WW-2 army which is why they don't mean jack now.

The first overseas deployment of Canadian military forces occurred during the Second Boer War, when several units were raised to serve under British command. Similarly, when the United Kingdom entered into conflict with Germany in the First World War, Canadian troops were called to participate in European theatres. The Canadian Crown-in-Council then decided to send its forces into the Second World War, as well as the Korean War. Since 1947, Canadian military units have participated in more than 200 operations worldwide, and completed 72 international operations. Canadian soldiers, sailors, and aviators came to be considered world-class professionals through conspicuous service during these conflicts, as well as the country's integral participation in NATO during the Cold War, First Gulf War, Kosovo War, and in United Nations Peacekeeping operations, such as the Suez Crisis, Golan Heights, Cyprus, Croatia, Bosnia, and Afghanistan. Battles which are particularly notable to the Canadian military include the Battle of Vimy Ridge, the Dieppe Raid, the Battle of Ortona, the Normandy Landings, the Battle for Caen, the Battle of the Scheldt, the Battle of Britain, the Battle of the Atlantic, and the strategic bombing of German cities.

At the end of the Second World War, Canada possessed the third-largest navy and fourth-largest air force in the world, as well as the largest volunteer army ever fielded by the country; conscription for overseas service was introduced only near the end of the war, and only 2,400 conscripts actually made it into battle.


In the 20th century, the British Indian Army was a crucial adjunct to the British forces in both the World Wars.
1.3 Million Indian soldiers served in World War I (1914-1918) for the Allies after the Britain made vague promises of self-governance to the Indian National Congress for its support. Britain reneged on its promises after the war, following which the Indian Independence movement gained strength. 74,187 Indian troops were killed or missing in action in the war.
In World War II (1939-1945), 2.582 Million Indian soldiers fought for the Allies, again after British promises of independence. 87,000 Indian soldiers died in the war.
India gained its Independence, in part due to the sacrifices of Indian soldiers in the two World Wars.

you wanna compare history, you can't we are a civilization older than the Chinese, much more ancient than the Egyptians and we border lines with the Mayans, beginnings of human wisdom originated in India. Canada hardly has a history. we had more troops in both WWs. Today for us every war is worth fighting when the security of our nation and our people is in jeopardy, you will find me and many of us over here pulling impossible odds at the front line as well. we will not loose never, our losing days are long history. If your just too blind or just too stupid to see that we will evolve into the largest and the deadliest force the world has ever known or seen. Already we have positioned ourselves among the top 4 most technologically advanced countries, and no China or Canada is not one of them.
 

Officer of Engineers

Professional
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
650
Likes
11
What is the p!ssing contest you want to compare yourself to? My brigade had tac nukes. Had any of yours? My CF-104s were to drop nukes on the Warsaw Pact. Had any of yours even make a training run? We had nuke tipped BORMACs. CF-101 Voodoos had nuked tip AAMs. We went through the entire nulcear spectrum even before you exploded your 1st nuke. So, don't tell me you know a hell of alot than us. We got things to teach you that you haven't even dreamt of, especially about the nuclear battlefield.

We're part and parcel to the AirLand doctrine. I told you that 4th Brigade was to stand against 2 entire Soviet Armies. One brigade against 2 SOVIET ARMIES and we know that there was at least 9 nukes to be thrown at us. At us, 4 Brigade, not our cities, at us. So, get off your high horse, you know a lot less than you pretend to know.

The Royal Canadian Navy won the Battle of the Atlantic. Has your navy fought a war across an ocean? If you want to compare service, the BIA had more men than us. We had 1 million in uniform but our contribution sure far outstrip yours. For one thing, had we lost the Battle of the Atlantic, Britiain would have fallen.

Maybe you could have replaced our numbers but you certainly did not replace our equipment. Canadian made Valantine tanks were found at Stalingrad. JUNO was the 2nd most fortified beach on D-Day and after MARKET-GARDEN, The 1st Canadian Army, numbering with over 300,000 men guarded the northern flank.

And as of today, the Canadians are the forefront at the recce brigade. We did more work in that area than anyone else on this planet, including the Americans. We've got lots to teach you about finding the enemy and blinding the enemy.

You defenitely know more about COIN than all of NATO combined but maneuver warfare is something you have yet to master. For someone who spouses to be able to meet the Chinese blindfolded with one hand tied behind your back, you don't even know the logistics required for such a feat. For a tank force to travel 100 miles in 3 days is an astounding performance of logistics that I didn't even touch.

And I strongly suggest you ask your countrymen in uniform what they think of India's signature in the GC. The honour of your country comes first each and everytime. The well being of your men comes next. The comfort of an officer comes last. With that, do you seriously think your officers will allow anyone to break India's word on the Geneva Conventions?

Don't start this p!ssing contest. You won't like where it ends up.
 

Ratus Ratus

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
114
Likes
0
Going back to the original media release:

But Yudh Abhyas 2009 will impart a different trajectory to the military-to-military relationship. This is no longer about raids on insurgent hideouts or terrorist camps; strike corps training is for fighting a full-scale war together. This year, American and Indian mechanised forces will synchronise operations, planning, manoeuvring and firing together to capture a simulated objective.

Reading many posts and based on some of their content in this thread I wonder if this exercise will have any chance of real cross learning experiences.

the High and Mighty road is for the arrogant, the Look, Learn and Listen is for the intelligent. Choices.
 

deltacamelately

Professional
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
134
Likes
6
Thirdly we can spot the chinese miles away, but they can't spot a single Gurkha standing right in front of them. Plus Gurkhas, nagas, gharwals, kumaouns etc are taught to speak and understand Chinese. Same way we can spot a Pak miles away but they can't spot a single punjab regiment jawan right in front of them. our bio-diversity helps in wartime.
John,

Now you are making the InA look like a 3-D Animated Super Game Army.
We are good, we are tough, so are soldiers far from our shores, but are we the best?
 

deltacamelately

Professional
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
134
Likes
6
Soldiering is all about learning and implementing. Finding flaws in one's art and rectifying.
Finding flaws in the enemy's art and encashing upon it. Its all about overestimating the enemy's strength and making contigencies and its NEVER about overestimating one's own strength and ranting about it.
 

Antimony

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
487
Likes
14
Question to OOE and DCL

I will answer that, Major. You are the best at what you do.
Stupid civvie question here.

Is that COIN, or High Altitude warfare or something else? Because I get the feeling its certainly not large scale warfare involving tanks and planes, if for nothing than for a technological disadvantage vis-a-vis NATO and Russian forces
 

Officer of Engineers

Professional
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
650
Likes
11
Actually, as of right now, India is better at Corps level ops than NATO. Brigades and Division are still up to par but the Generals and the Sergeant-Majors who can make decision with a Corps HQ on the move are retiring or near retirement. The last two campaigns were fought from fixed HQs, not mobile ones.

The current operational tempo is no help since those people who need to learn are needed doing their jobs.

Something has to be done within the next 5 years to retain this knowledge base. Whether it is to expand the NTC format or delay retirement.

It would remain a big challenge for Corps level expertise to be passed on before retirement denies the knowledge forever. Hell, there are even jokes about drafting us old warhorses back in.

I wasn't laughing.
 

Antimony

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
487
Likes
14
Actually, as of right now, India is better at Corps level ops than NATO. Brigades and Division are still up to par but the Generals and the Sergeant-Majors who can make decision with a Corps HQ on the move are retiring or near retirement. The last two campaigns were fought from fixed HQs, not mobile ones.
Thanks Col.

As usual, you force me to reexamine my approach and look at things from a totally different angle. Now I will have to go back and understand what this implies.
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
9,351
Likes
27,267
The fact is our Gurkhas are not even SOF, they are just an infantry regiment, we have many of such regiments, lets not even talk about Indian Special forces, they have no parallel in the world both in training and mission effectiveness. The fact is in places like AP on the eastern India, we have a lot of Chinese living in India and there is no difference in accent or looks. You wont know all these things till you go over there, i did go to these locations last year.

The fact is bro i don't know how they do it in Canada, besides what does Canada know about war?? Indian army has often pulled impossible odds in many battles, so don't even begin taking about war with us. sure they are not supermen and we'll still have losses, but he who dares wins. Except for the Chinese defeat which will never happen again, India has stood its own many a time. Soon there wont be an enemy in the world that India cant stand against.
Gurkhas don't consider themselves as Indians. They consider themselves as Nepalese.

By the way, India has been invaded countless times, so that puts your statements in the trashcan right there.

And you are basically asking enemies to come into your home and rape your mothers and sisters when you could have stopped them far away from your home, which the Americans and Canadians and other NATO countries are doing. They are bring the fight to the enemy's territory. In the last four wars, I haven't really seen India bringing the fight to the enemy's territory and killing the bad guy. The 1971 doesn't really count because India didn't bring the fight to Islamabad.

So don't go too cocky on your statements. India has a long way to go before it can prove itself along with USA and Soviets, and others.
 

Officer of Engineers

Professional
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
650
Likes
11
But it is something that can be quickly relearned, right?
That depends if the expertise has left or not. If the expertise has not left, you're looking at around 3-6 months to field a mobile corps HQ. If the expertise has left, you're looking at a year while people go through the books and exercise themselves out.

That is not to say that currently corps HQ could not move nor function right now but it's not as tight ship nor efficient as it could/should be.
 

wild goose

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
245
Likes
46
Gurkhas don't consider themselves as Indians. They consider themselves as Nepalese.

By the way, India has been invaded countless times, so that puts your statements in the trashcan right there.

And you are basically asking enemies to come into your home and rape your mothers and sisters when you could have stopped them far away from your home, which the Americans and Canadians and other NATO countries are doing. They are bring the fight to the enemy's territory. In the last four wars, I haven't really seen India bringing the fight to the enemy's territory and killing the bad guy. The 1971 doesn't really count because India didn't bring the fight to Islamabad.

So don't go too cocky on your statements. India has a long way to go before it can prove itself along with USA and Soviets, and others.
Mate,

Gurkhas are recruited from both Nepal and Northern India.
Those form Nepal are Nepalese and those from India is definitely Indian.
Anyway they fight for India.

In 1947-48,the war was fought entirely in the disputed Kashmir region.If India had opened other fronts,imagine the political leverage Pakistan would have got by picturing India as the agressor state.And definitely the fate of kashmir would have been something else.

In 1965,India did enter Pakisthani soil in the Punjab Sector and attacked Sialkot and Lahore.Infact Indian Army was very close to Lahore when Pakistan stopped Indian armoured corps from entering Lahore town in the nick of time.Pakistan is celebrating victory day every year for this acheivement.Please don't take their glory away.

Why you don't count 1971! Then there was West and East Pakistan,you can take the fight to the enemy either way.Islamabad is not the only place to put up a fight.Moreover, the Indian plan was to reach Dhaka as quickly as possible while holding the western border intact thereby not giving Pakistan anything to bargain for later.

In 1999,really it would have been better if India had crossed the LOC.Atleast it would have saved some lives(Indian) by avoiding frontal attacks against a strategicaly well placed enemy.

And I definitely agree with you regarding the fact that Indian Army has a long way to go before criticising others. 100% true that they are not the no.1

And buddy,
The way US & Co are 'fighting your enemies' in their own land US,Canada and NATO is infact creating more enemies.

Lastly,

From your words like "India been invaded", "raping your mothers and sisters" ,"1971 doesn't really count" etc, you don't sound like an American. I smell rather green.Yankees might have used the word fcuk rather than rape I suppose.

Regards,
 

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
27
agree with Goose here that the IA might not be the best in the world technically speking but it can hold its onw against any force in the world and have very capable officer corps and its growing at an Indian pace (after all the Babudom and political hogwashing ) but as the Indian Artillary Regiment's Motto says for the Indian army
it has been always sarvata Izzat-o- Iqbal
 

Officer of Engineers

Professional
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
650
Likes
11
agree with Goose here that the IA might not be the best in the world technically speking but it can hold its onw against any force in the world
*** sigh *** 173 divisions backed by 30,000+ nukes against 87 divisions backed by 22,000 nukes.
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
1971 ghost- nixon

India would have taken out islamabad in the 1971 war, but for nixon's affinity for pakistan. Do some googling u will find how the US threatened the soviets of an escalation of war in the sub-continent into a nuclear holocaust thereby prompting moscow to ask indra gandi to refrain from invading west pakistan. Otherwise pakistan would be history.
 

icecoolben

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
Not a nuclear one

YOU'VE GOT TO BE SH!TTING ME! Moscow Not wanting the US to be tied up in another war?
if moscow wanted US to be at a nuclear war, they would have let the cuban missile crisis to explode, not back off with some US concessions. India was under the soviet nuclear umbrella, so retaliation would mean USSR VS US. thats something any responsible super power would avoid. So did the soviets.
 

Officer of Engineers

Professional
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
650
Likes
11
if moscow wanted US to be at a nuclear war, they would have let the cuban missile crisis to explode, not back off with some US concessions. India was under the soviet nuclear umbrella, so retaliation would mean USSR VS US. thats something any responsible super power would avoid. So did the soviets.
You will have to show me some proof that India was under the Soviet nuclear umbrella which meant that India took orders from Moscow.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top