DM: Forces repeatedly changing requirements for Indian weapons

[sgarg]

I know the actual reason why India's military is so fascinated by imports.

China did not send its soldiers to Western academies for fear of mental corruption. India did.
The officers that went to Soviet Union got influenced by that country. Afterwards officers got influenced by Western countries.

People can act weird even at the prospect of a foreign trip. Greed is what drives men rather than abstract ideas like service to nation.

India allowed its officers to get corrupted by foreign influences. These officers in turn rejected everything Indian. The contempt that army has or air force has for DRDO etc. is systemic and not really tied to actual results.
@Ray is an old school officer, defending everything in the military. This is the problem with the military men - they become impervious to change.

 

[no smoking]

I know the actual reason why India's military is so fascinated by imports.

China did not send its soldiers to Western academies for fear of mental corruption. India did.

Each year, CCP is sending hundreds of thousands Chinese public officers to study overseas, how can they worry about the mental influence upon their soldiers.
No, it was Western academies denied Chinese attempt of sending their military officers. Americans don' even want her allies to train together with Chinese forces for the fear that Chinese may learn US tactics.

The officers that went to Soviet Union got influenced by that country. Afterwards officers got influenced by Western countries.
People can act weird even at the prospect of a foreign trip. Greed is what drives men rather than abstract ideas like service to nation.
India allowed its officers to get corrupted by foreign influences. These officers in turn rejected everything Indian. The contempt that army has or air force has for DRDO etc. is systemic and not really tied to actual results.
@Ray is an old school officer, defending everything in the military. This is the problem with the military men - they become impervious to change.

Well, that is wrong again.
According to India strategist, Chinese is her No.1 potential enemy and India can only win by archiving quality superiority, which means that India must maintain a technology edge over Chinese weapon.
Now the situation is that Chinese keeps upgrading the technology faster than most of people expected while India industry clearly doesn't have the capability to keep up with Chinese pace. So, in order to keep this balance, your military planners have to come up with new requirement.

 

[pmaitra]

Fair enough.

Thank you for seeing my PoV.

If the DRDO lagged behind without results for years and the world technology moved to 120mm and so did our adversary, what do you think we should do? Hang around to 115?

I will simply add the years to quantify the delays or time taken to reach the milestones.

GSQR 326	1972	Initial requirement was finalized.
GSQR 431	1982	The 115 mm main gun was already tested prior to this year. New changes were requested: (1) Increase in width and height, (2) 120 mm main gun, (3) improved FCS.
GSQR 467	1985	Prototypes were already built by this time. Now, even more changes were requested: (1) increased lethality (whatever that means), (2) APFSDS through rifled barrel - possible but challenging, (3) semi-combustible cartridge cases and high energy propellants (meaning, new metallurgy and redesigning of the barrel and breach), (4) modification of FSC and sighting systems, (5) night vision capabilities, (6) Kanchan armour.

References:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/264-development-indian-arjun.html
http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2008/apr/r2008042813.pdf

Want India to fight outgunned?

Imagine fighting with a .303 repeat loading when the adversary has 7.62 semi or fully automatic.

You be the judge, jury and prosecutor.

It is true, if the adversary introduces new technology, or, if technology in general across the globe evolves to something new, the GSQR must reflect those. That is not my point of contention. My point of contention is, just like DRDO has missed the timeline at times, it has also met the timelines many times. I have seen detractors of the Arjun count the number of years beginning with 1972, but those that do, are simply lying. From a technical perspective, if we look at the various iterations the Arjun went through, we have to say, we have attempted to make three tanks, and I am not even counting Arjun Mark II.

I don't have a problem with the Army going for the first batch of T-90s. I have a problem with going for the second batch. That was unnecessary, IMHO.

Abrahms maybe OK for the US strategic perception of their perceived battle grounds. Not for India.

Well, if you can use that type of weight in the desert and in semi soft sand, forget about soft sand, then please use it.
And don't forget the bridge classification.

GSQR are not flight of fancy gone wild. it is also vetted by the DRDO before finalised.

Sir, everything you are saying is valid.

I will present two options now:
Either we settle for a light tank where the crew will get fried on being hit by an RPG (refer to the Kiev regime's BMPs, or even the T-72s in Ukraine), or, go for a heavy 70 ton vehicle that will guarantee high crew survivability, but won't be able to cross many bridges. There is no way to have the benefits of a light vehicle with high crew survivability rolled into one tank. This is impossible.

Sir, many requirements are indeed flights of fantasies. Here is one example from an article by Dave Majumdar:

The idea was to develop multiple vehicles based on a common 20-ton lightweight chassis with the same survivability as an Abrams, so that an entire brigade could be deployed in eighteen hours to anywhere on the planet. However, physics intervened. It quickly became obvious that a 20-ton vehicle could never hope to match the protection of a 70-ton tank—short of some sort of miraculous breakthrough.

Pardon my cynicism, because I have to make this caustic remark: Same survivability as Abrams, but about 20 tons? What were these people smoking? Or did these people fail every single physics and math class in school, and somehow ended up being in some committee that writes requirements?

How come the same 69+ ton Abram tanks , Challenger Tanks, Leopard Tanks were working well in Middle Eastern deserts, Afghanistan highlands and almost every part of the world but Arjun, a less heavy tank is not good for Indian requirements? Actually, the future for Arjun seems quite intriguing now. There are possibilities that Pakistan may get Turkish Altay tanks. I wonder how will Indian DGMF plan for that eventuality??

Army's GSQR writing still seems quite heavily influenced by General G G Bewoor's philosophy of putting in such a way that no local system can ever match it !!

Armata concept leads the way. The only way to have a reasonably light tank with high crew survivability is to have:

• a crew size that is no more than 3;
• a crew-less turret;
• autoloader;
• empty weight no less than 45 metric tons.

 

[archie]

The Question is Why not take a few tanks and see how good they are in the actual place where they are intended to operate .. Wont that give a better idea.. why is the Army brass sulking to even look at the tank and simply sticking to Imports just looking at paper?? that reluctace is what makes me wonder .

 

[Ray]

I know the actual reason why India's military is so fascinated by imports.

China did not send its soldiers to Western academies for fear of mental corruption. India did.
The officers that went to Soviet Union got influenced by that country. Afterwards officers got influenced by Western countries.

People can act weird even at the prospect of a foreign trip. Greed is what drives men rather than abstract ideas like service to nation.

India allowed its officers to get corrupted by foreign influences. These officers in turn rejected everything Indian. The contempt that army has or air force has for DRDO etc. is systemic and not really tied to actual results.
@Ray is an old school officer, defending everything in the military. This is the problem with the military men - they become impervious to change.

Once again self opinionated, knowledge and experience denied, mish mash of no worth.

A large majority of officers who went abroad for specialised training went to USSR since the equipment was of USSR origin. There were hardly anyone who went to the West for training, except one or two who were either selected for Staff College or Higher Defence Management. Yes, my good man, thousands to the USSR and one or two to the West.

Let facts speak and not be cloud by pseudo nationalist pretensions.

That puts paid to your silly rant of no value as far as knowledge of the Military goes. But you must pose as a knowledgeable person even on if there is life in Mars. But maybe you have visited Mars, which none other has.

Since it is the soldiers and officers life is on the line, and not some civilians with pseudo pretentious nationalist jingoism, only the equipment suited to the operational imperatives are selected, be they Indian or Foreign. Many an Indian equipment has been selected over foreign equipment, or else the INSAS would not have been the staple for so many years and still continue to be, nor would the Gurdial Gun, the 105 mm Indian Field Gun was designed by the Armament Research and Development Establishment, various Night vision devices, signal equipment so on and so forth.

That again indicates your shallowness of knowledge and slanderous comments of no worth.

Since the military man's life is on the line, he would hardly buy foreign equipment that would be a dud or a lemon.

But armchair 'experts' like you with pseudo and pretentious nationalist jingoism, whose life is not at stake, will rave and rant, just to play to the gallery.

 

[Ray]

I also said one in hand is better than two in bushes.
do not forget battle of longewala.
Even with limited resources they were able to defend.
If I have a lower weapon against a higher weapon I will be happier than the one without any weapon.

Technical details:Even i do not have reliable quotes but by what I know there is hardly any difference when it comes to pressure exerted and its a prooven fact that Arjun has performed better than T90.

Is the issue regarding AC in T90 being resolved and who resolved it.
Is Arjun or Is it not better than T90 ?

The Battle of Longewala was won no doubt.

But, purely from the military history point of view, if you study it, you will realise that there was good luck that played a major role. The Pakistanis made serious errors and the stoic defence of KS Chandpuri's lads and IAF led to the victory. That said, it does not in any way diminish the bravery of the soldiers of our.

If I have a lower weapon against a higher weapon I will be happier than the one without any weapon.

If there are no weapon, then the question of fighting does not arise.

Fighting with an inferior weapon to the enemy's superior weapon is but a fait accompli. But the result will be what happened in 1962.

Yet, if you have the option to have a better weapon, what would you do. Fight a superior equipped enemy with inferior weapon or get something that is of equal, if not better, capability?

Arjun weighs 62.5 tonnes. T 90 weighs 47.5 tonnes. (from open sources). Therefore the ground pressure is evident.

Some of the issues I learn, were that the Arjun uses a manual loader and has a crewman to reload the gun. T90 has an automatic loader.

Further, the Arjun was planned to be equipped with the Israeli LAHAT missile, plans to fit it to the tank were later dropped; the missile has an effective range of 6,000 meters, but it could not meet the Indian Army's requirements of engaging targets at less than 1,200 meters. An indigenously-developed anti-tank missile I believe is being created for the Arjun.

The fact that a foreign Missile was dropped should debunk @sgarg's accusation that Indian military goes for only foreign goods. If an equipment fails, be it Indian or foreign, then it is not selected. Period.

 

[Ray]

I will simply add the years to quantify the delays or time taken to reach the milestones.

GSQR 326	1972	Initial requirement was finalized.
GSQR 431	1982	The 115 mm main gun was already tested prior to this year. New changes were requested: (1) Increase in width and height, (2) 120 mm main gun, (3) improved FCS.
GSQR 467	1985	Prototypes were already built by this time. Now, even more changes were requested: (1) increased lethality (whatever that means), (2) APFSDS through rifled barrel - possible but challenging, (3) semi-combustible cartridge cases and high energy propellants (meaning, new metallurgy and redesigning of the barrel and breach), (4) modification of FSC and sighting systems, (5) night vision capabilities, (6) Kanchan armour.

References:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/264-development-indian-arjun.html
http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2008/apr/r2008042813.pdf



It is true, if the adversary introduces new technology, or, if technology in general across the globe evolves to something new, the GSQR must reflect those. That is not my point of contention. My point of contention is, just like DRDO has missed the timeline at times, it has also met the timelines many times. I have seen detractors of the Arjun count the number of years beginning with 1972, but those that do, are simply lying. From a technical perspective, if we look at the various iterations the Arjun went through, we have to say, we have attempted to make three tanks, and I am not even counting Arjun Mark II.

I don't have a problem with the Army going for the first batch of T-90s. I have a problem with going for the second batch. That was unnecessary, IMHO.



Sir, everything you are saying is valid.

I will present two options now:
Either we settle for a light tank where the crew will get fried on being hit by an RPG (refer to the Kiev regime's BMPs, or even the T-72s in Ukraine), or, go for a heavy 70 ton vehicle that will guarantee high crew survivability, but won't be able to cross many bridges. There is no way to have the benefits of a light vehicle with high crew survivability rolled into one tank. This is impossible.

Sir, many requirements are indeed flights of fantasies. Here is one example from an article by Dave Majumdar:

Pardon my cynicism, because I have to make this caustic remark: Same survivability as Abrams, but about 20 tons? What were these people smoking? Or did these people fail every single physics and math class in school, and somehow ended up being in some committee that writes requirements?


Armata concept leads the way. The only way to have a reasonably light tank with high crew survivability is to have:

• a crew size that is no more than 3;
• a crew-less turret;
• autoloader;
• empty weight no less than 45 metric tons.

First of all, there has been revised GSQRs for two reasons, as I can comprehend.

(a) to keep up with the latest technology. It obviously was in consultation with the DRDO, MOD and other agencies and not unilaterally. And it was accepted as valid, or so I presume.

(b) accepting outdated technology would put the military back vis a vis adversaries since once an equipment is accepted, it cannot be canned within a few years because the assembly lines etc costs a fortune to include the ancillary sector which cannot be discard owing to the Govt's social responsibilities. It is the same reason as to why non profitable Ordnance PSU, like the Parachute and Military Clothing factory etc cannot be junked.

How many years have our MIG 21s been operational inspite of all the problems? Why was it not junked and instead upgrades continues with accidents not going away?

Unfortunately all fighters are designed primarily for air superiority but end up in the more hazardous low level close support role.

This was also the case with the MiG 21.

From the 1980s the MiG switched to the close support role. New upgrades to make the type suitable for close support also meant a steady increase in weight. The aircraft became more sluggish and unwieldy particularly during the landing and take off and in circuit where the aerodynamic control forces decline as a square of the flight velocity but the inertias remain the same. The weight increase affected the wing, power and span loadings.

So, for a country like ours which has very little leeway to squander our meager wealth, it is always mix and match.


Now, it it is THREE tanks, so be it. There is a simple way it is done Mk I, II and so on. Still, no matter how many Mks, it must come up to expectation compatible to the operation requirement and technological pace.

Do you drive an Ambassador? I would say given the road conditions, it is still the best, even if the performance is not matching today's cars. And what would really come into question is the cost will be near similar, but in fuel expenditure, it will burn a hole in the pocket compared to the modern vehicles.

I agree there is no way, a light tank can be compatible with an MBT.

But an MBT must be compatible to India's operational requirement and not a white elephant that is of no use to man or beast. As I said in a post, the desert in the Thar is not similar. There is soft sand and there is firm sand. Even this firm sand has a certain load bearing capacity and is not the same as hard earth in the plains. This is where the ingenuity and expertise of the scientist come into play and test, beyond their promising the moon.

I presume the wider tank specification in one of the GSQR would be a DRDO input since increasing the size of the contact area on the ground (the footprint) in relation to the weight decreases the ground pressure. So, it would not be solely the Army's. I am sure that other modifications were similarly after consultations and not unilateral. Of course, you and I would not know and so can justifiably be inflamed.

As far as Dae Majumdar's article it is not India's.

It is The Russian Army's Secret Weapon: Enter the Armata Program. Yes, it sounds out of Sci fi. But have you heard of DAPRA? They also dabble in Sci Fi. I am sure they the Russian and American Sci Fi chaps deliver. Heard of Velcro? Check the history of development.

 

[DingDong]

Defense Minister has spoken the truth. Forget about the frequently changing specs, in several instances the end-user doesn't even know what it needs and ends up wishing for things right out of the Comic Books.

 

[pmaitra]

@Ray Sir, I agree with your post. My reference to the US GSQR, for want of a better term, was meant to highlight the unrealistic expectation the user comes up with. It was a hyperbole, of course, in reference to IA complaining when Arjun's weight went up to 58-59 tons, but IA was not being as unrealistic as those US chaps.

P.S.: Dave Majumdar's article was about the Russian Armata but that excerpt I presented was about a proposed American tank.

 

[Ray]

I will simply add the years to quantify the delays or time taken to reach the milestones.

GSQR 326	1972	Initial requirement was finalized.
GSQR 431	1982	The 115 mm main gun was already tested prior to this year. New changes were requested: (1) Increase in width and height, (2) 120 mm main gun, (3) improved FCS.
GSQR 467	1985	Prototypes were already built by this time. Now, even more changes were requested: (1) increased lethality (whatever that means), (2) APFSDS through rifled barrel - possible but challenging, (3) semi-combustible cartridge cases and high energy propellants (meaning, new metallurgy and redesigning of the barrel and breach), (4) modification of FSC and sighting systems, (5) night vision capabilities, (6) Kanchan armour.

References:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/264-development-indian-arjun.html
http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2008/apr/r2008042813.pdf



It is true, if the adversary introduces new technology, or, if technology in general across the globe evolves to something new, the GSQR must reflect those. That is not my point of contention. My point of contention is, just like DRDO has missed the timeline at times, it has also met the timelines many times. I have seen detractors of the Arjun count the number of years beginning with 1972, but those that do, are simply lying. From a technical perspective, if we look at the various iterations the Arjun went through, we have to say, we have attempted to make three tanks, and I am not even counting Arjun Mark II.

I don't have a problem with the Army going for the first batch of T-90s. I have a problem with going for the second batch. That was unnecessary, IMHO.



Sir, everything you are saying is valid.

I will present two options now:
Either we settle for a light tank where the crew will get fried on being hit by an RPG (refer to the Kiev regime's BMPs, or even the T-72s in Ukraine), or, go for a heavy 70 ton vehicle that will guarantee high crew survivability, but won't be able to cross many bridges. There is no way to have the benefits of a light vehicle with high crew survivability rolled into one tank. This is impossible.

Sir, many requirements are indeed flights of fantasies. Here is one example from an article by Dave Majumdar:

Pardon my cynicism, because I have to make this caustic remark: Same survivability as Abrams, but about 20 tons? What were these people smoking? Or did these people fail every single physics and math class in school, and somehow ended up being in some committee that writes requirements?


Armata concept leads the way. The only way to have a reasonably light tank with high crew survivability is to have:

• a crew size that is no more than 3;
• a crew-less turret;
• autoloader;
• empty weight no less than 45 metric tons.

First of all, there has been revised GSQRs for two reasons, as I can comprehend.

(a) to keep up with the latest technology. It obviously was in consultation with the DRDO, MOD and other agencies and not unilaterally. And it was accepted as valid, or so I presume.

(b) accepting outdated technology would put the military back vis a vis adversaries since once an equipment is accepted, it cannot be canned within a few years because the assembly lines etc costs a fortune to include the ancillary sector which cannot be discard owing to the Govt's social responsibilities. It is the same reason as to why non profitable Ordnance PSU, like the Parachute and Military Clothing factory etc cannot be junked.

How many years have our MIG 21s been operational inspite of all the problems? Why was it not junked and instead upgrades continues with accidents not going away?

Unfortunately all fighters are designed primarily for air superiority but end up in the more hazardous low level close support role.

This was also the case with the MiG 21.

From the 1980s the MiG switched to the close support role. New upgrades to make the type suitable for close support also meant a steady increase in weight. The aircraft became more sluggish and unwieldy particularly during the landing and take off and in circuit where the aerodynamic control forces decline as a square of the flight velocity but the inertias remain the same. The weight increase affected the wing, power and span loadings (please refer toTable A- for the MIG the figures on the top of each box are for the FL those below are for the Bis).

So, for a country like ours which has very little leeway to squander our meager wealth, it is always mix and match.


Now, it it is THREE tanks, so be it. There is a simple way it is done Mk I, II and so on. Still, no matter how many Mks, it must come up to expectation compatible to the operation requirement and technological pace.

Do you drive an Ambassador? I would say given the road conditions, it is still the best, even if the performance is not matching today's cars. And what would really come into question is the cost will be near similar, but in fuel expenditure, it will burn a hole in the pocket compared to the modern vehicles.

I agree there is no way, a light tank can be compatible with an MBT.

But an MBT must be compatible to India's operational requirement and not a white elephant that is of no use to man or beast. As I said in a post, the desert in the Thar is not similar. There is soft sand and there is firm sand. Even this firm sand has a certain load bearing capacity and is not the same as hard earth in the plains. This is where the ingenuity and expertise of the scientist come into play and test, beyond their promising the moon.

I presume the wider tank specification in one of the GSQR would be a DRDO input since increasing the size of the contact area on the ground (the footprint) in relation to the weight decreases the ground pressure. So, it would not be solely the Army's. I am sure that other modifications were similarly after consultations and not unilateral. Of course, you and I would not know and so can justifiably be inflamed.

As far as Dae Majumdar's article it is not India's.

It is The Russian Army's Secret Weapon: Enter the Armata Program. Yes, it sounds out of Sci fi. But have you heard of DAPRA? They also dabble in Sci Fi. I am sure they the Russian and American Sci Fi chaps deliver. Heard of Velcro? Check the history of development.

I have full faith in Indian scientists and engineers in the DRDO. But they are hamstrung by the bureaucracy cranked in by their superior, who have self interest and live off the fat of the land.

If Kurt Tank could design and manufacture HF 24 in record time with Indian scientist, engineers and technologist, then why can the DRDO with Indians do?

If HAL under Air Force Heads could deliver, then why can't the HAL with civilian bureaucrats/ scientists at the Head deliver?

Skewed work culture?

Think that over.

 

[Ray]

Defense Minister has spoken the truth. Forget about the frequently changing specs, in several instances the end-user doesn't even know what it needs and ends up wishing for things right out of the Comic Books.

I think you read Comics too much.

How many people use the Quill to write?

How many even write with a pen?

How many use e mail instead of letters?

Think that over.

I was one of the first in the IA Infantry to use the computer.

It was a Sinclair

It used audio tapes!

And yet those who know me, marvel at my handwriting since it is calligraphic.

 

[sgarg]

Once again self opinionated, knowledge and experience denied, mish mash of no worth.

A large majority of officers who went abroad for specialised training went to USSR since the equipment was of USSR origin. There were hardly anyone who went to the West for training, except one or two who were either selected for Staff College or Higher Defence Management. Yes, my good man, thousands to the USSR and one or two to the West.

Let facts speak and not be cloud by pseudo nationalist pretensions.

That puts paid to your silly rant of no value as far as knowledge of the Military goes. But you must pose as a knowledgeable person even on if there is life in Mars. But maybe you have visited Mars, which none other has.

Since it is the soldiers and officers life is on the line, and not some civilians with pseudo pretentious nationalist jingoism, only the equipment suited to the operational imperatives are selected, be they Indian or Foreign. Many an Indian equipment has been selected over foreign equipment, or else the INSAS would not have been the staple for so many years and still continue to be, nor would the Gurdial Gun, the 105 mm Indian Field Gun was designed by the Armament Research and Development Establishment, various Night vision devices, signal equipment so on and so forth.

That again indicates your shallowness of knowledge and slanderous comments of no worth.

Since the military man's life is on the line, he would hardly buy foreign equipment that would be a dud or a lemon.

But armchair 'experts' like you with pseudo and pretentious nationalist jingoism, whose life is not at stake, will rave and rant, just to play to the gallery.

Wow!

India has a volunteer military force. People join the military voluntarily. Nobody joins military to die.

The military is part of this country and is answerable to the nation just like any other part of the government.

The army should buy the best that is AVAILABLE IN INDIA. And the government should make sure that industry is encouraged to improve.

The army of Dalals in New Delhi is not there to do any favour to this country BUT to line pockets of a few. I hope this is known to you.

 

[Ray]

Wow!

India has a volunteer military force. People join the military voluntarily. Nobody joins military to die.

Which idiot told you that we join the military JUST TO DIE?

You are so consumed in yourself that you do not understand the difference 'Dying for heck's sake' and 'Martyrdom for a Cause'.

If one had a self defeating desire to merely die, why join the Army? That Railway track is the easiest.

But then you would not understand and I am wasting my time.

The military is part of this country and is answerable to the nation just like any other part of the government.

Indeed it is and will always be.

It is not like Pakistan, where the Nation has to answer to the Army.

But under no circumstances, we are merely gun fodder or sacrificial goats.

Army is answerable to the Nation and the Nation is also answerable to the Army that it is equipping it well to keep the Nation safe and not making them sacrificial goats. You can revel being a goat or a sacrificial goat, but not we who served the Nation and the Army.

The army should buy the best that is AVAILABLE IN INDIA. And the government should make sure that industry is encouraged to improve.

No problem.

Let us buy the 'katta' (Desi Katta Tamanchas Pistol ). Readily available anywhere. Right?

How imbecilic juvenile can you be, just to prove you pseudo, pretentious, fraud nationalistic jingoism?

The army of Dalals in New Delhi is not there to do any favour to this country BUT to line pockets of a few. I hope this is known to you.

Maybe.

You must be a Dalal since you are speaking so authoritatively.

You have been proved to be a self opinionated brainless and knowledgeless wonder and you are in a retrograde anguish.

You have my sympathies.

 

[Ray]

Weight exerted per unit area for Arjun is way lower than T-90. If Arjun cannot withstand it niether can t-90.This is one of the reason why DRDO insisted for comparitive trials.Everyone knows what happened after it.

Really?

Please give links to say so.

The DRDO rebuts this logic, as do the tank units that actually operate the Arjun. "The Arjun's heavier weight is distributed over a larger area because of its larger tracks. Its nominal ground-pressure is lower than the Russian tanks. So, the Arjun can actually move more easily in Punjab

Very clever.

Punjab!

What about the Thar, where the tanks will make the difference in territory captured?

Punjab is the plains. Much harder ground. Pattons have operated. So?

 

[sgarg]

Which idiot told you that we join the military JUST TO DIE?

You are so consumed in yourself that you do not understand the difference 'Dying for heck's sake' and 'Martyrdom for a Cause'.

If one had a self defeating desire to merely die, why join the Army? That Railway track is the easiest.

But then you would not understand and I am wasting my time.



Indeed it is and will always be.

It is not like Pakistan, where the Nation has to answer to the Army.

But under no circumstances, we are merely gun fodder or sacrificial goats.

Army is answerable to the Nation and the Nation is also answerable to the Army that it is equipping it well to keep the Nation safe and not making them sacrificial goats. You can revel being a goat or a sacrificial goat, but not we who served the Nation and the Army.



No problem.

Let us buy the 'katta' (Desi Katta Tamanchas Pistol ). Readily available anywhere. Right?

How imbecilic juvenile can you be, just to prove you pseudo, pretentious, fraud nationalistic jingoism?



Maybe.

You must be a Dalal since you are speaking so authoritatively.

You have been proved to be a self opinionated brainless and knowledgeless wonder and you are in a retrograde anguish.

You have my sympathies.

Wow again!
Your English is good at least. Good to see at least one quality in a man.

 

[Ray]

Wow again!
Your English is good at least. Good to see at least one quality in a man.

Pathetic.

What a bleat of a person who has no legs to stand upon.

English is not material. Facts, Knowledge, experience and comprehension, are.

I am proud to be an INDIAN and will be so till my dying day. But I will not under any circumstance be a catspaw to ulterior motives that send me to the funeral pyre without a cause to die for and be a sacrificial goat to uphold false, pretentious Indian pride, for which others are not ready to stand vigil and be counted and instead cheer from the rear for standing vigil with substandard goods because it is Indian.

Call me what you want, but PRIDE without the wherewithal to be PROUD to be a martyr actually equates with STUPIDITY.

Proud I am. Stupid I am not.

If that does not qualify me to be a Proud Indian as you or your ilk, so be it. I have no complaints on that count. But I give way to you and your ilk, you go and stand vigil on the frontier with your Tamancha and Katta. I wish you well and hope to see you alive and not draped in the Indian flag as I salute your and your ilk's stupidity but fierce misplaced national pride.

Even now I salute your national pride, but I find it misplaced since pride cannot be substituted with illogical and non pragmatic emotions.

I would hate to die a dog's death.

 

[Mad Indian]

I dont think any of the pseudo nationalists here have ever visited DRDO. If they have, I dont think they would blindly support such a pathetic excuse of an organisation over our armed forces

 

[sgarg]

I dont think any of the pseudo nationalists here have ever visited DRDO. If they have, I dont think they would blindly support such a pathetic excuse of an organisation over our armed forces

Why do you say so? Can you give examples.

No organization is perfect or ever can be perfect. People have to learn to WORK together for the betterment of the country.

DRDO is needed as much as army or air force. It is essential.

 

[sgarg]

The present study was taken up as corruption and defence deals have become synonymous in India, which can especially be fatal for a country whose bulk of the defence weaponry is obtained from private corporations abroad.

Corruption in India's Defence Deals: A Case Study on Business and Government Ethics | Chakraborty | TIJ's Research Journal of Social Science & Management - RJSSM

I suggest the above is a good read.

 

[sgarg]

The biggest irony of India is that people who oppose buying from private sector in India freely support buying from private sector of foreign countries. What kind of socialism is this??

Our socialist are so hollow that socialism equates to shunning work and militant politics. What is the achievement of Indian socialism?? A country that teetered on the verge of collapse by late eighties. Humiliated by small neighbors. What else??

A proud country is one that develops its industry and educates and feeds its people. I still consider USSR as a great country due to its achievements though its faults led to its early demise.

India is a large country and only fools think that India cannot build its arms.