If India has to go for a two fronts war against China and Pakistan...

[LETHALFORCE]

who has more more experience? who is more battle hardened??

 

[IBRIS]

I would rate Indian overall military at around 25% of PLA. In the theater, I think India would be around 50% of PLA. That number could be less if Pakistan regains some strength and can tie down the western front.

To the extend that China till this day couldnot retake an Island 50 times smaller than Sri Lanka. China's unity requires that substantial be maintained Nanjing military region. At present it seems unlikely that China can successfully invade an Island. Moreover, an invasion could cause communist regime problems. However, from the perspective of beijing, the threat of getting nuked by India is probably the only thing is preventing chinese leaders from behaving badly.

If pakistan join's in China's misadventures. Then there are countries like Russia and USA will make sure they get the pie of there share of the conflict between these 3 countries. Usa will support India with Intelligence. Russia and Israel would open it's doors of free flow of military hardware to India. No one wants to see India go down and pakistan gaining grounds in this part of the world.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

who has more more experience? who is more battle hardened??

Including WWII - no question - China!

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Therefore, the use of the 15th Airborne of the Chinese against India is a pipedream!

Sir,

The 15ABC is not expected to win. They're expected to die.

 

[amitkriit]

Don’t have capability or intention to match China force for force: Navy chief

Admitting that India neither has the “capability nor the intention” to match China’s military strength, Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee and Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta said here today that “common sense dictates” that India needs to cooperate with China rather than confront it.

Don’t have capability or intention to match China force for force: Navy chief

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Time to tell me why 200 is the optimum number.

The concept is deterrance, not war fighting. The whole objective is to avoid being the target of a nuclear strike. If you failed that, then 200 or even 2000 nukes ain't going to save you one squat against 25,000 to 50,000 nukes of the superpowers. The numbers just ain't there.

So, why 200? Actually it's 100 but we'll go with 200. First off, this is a retallitory, not a 1st strike arsenal. You are not going to strike first. This is just plain suicide with zero affect on the enemy population and determination (London, Berlin, and Hanoi bombings as the reference).

Aside from that, the 3 for 1 rules applies for targetting. You want a target destroyed, you aim 3 nukes at it.

This does not apply for retallitory strikes,. You aim at 3 general, not specific, targets, expecting 1 out of 3 to be hit. In other words, you aim at 200 cities, expecting 60-70 to be hit.

In some cases, such as Canada, 10 cities effectively means the end of national countrol and you resort to city states after that.

So, you offer the attacking power a choice. Don't hit us with nukes.

 

[Ray]

Including WWII - no question - China!

Colonel,

China is no comparison in experience vs the Indian Army in WW II or WW I.

The IA has foisted the British Empire in both the cases over a quiet a number of theatres including Europe, Middle East and the East. It is history and irrefutable. Where was China deployed in WWI or WWII.

In the modern context, it will be small wars and border conflicts. China has joined in the Korean War, 1962 with India, against Vietnam and that is all.

Compare that with India including COIN.

China is slowly understanding the issue of COIN!

 

[Ray]

Don’t have capability or intention to match China force for force: Navy chief

Admitting that India neither has the “capability nor the intention” to match China’s military strength, Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee and Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta said here today that “common sense dictates” that India needs to cooperate with China rather than confront it.

Don’t have capability or intention to match China force for force: Navy chief

Sureesh is doing a 'Chinese' on the Chinese i.e. pious platitudes.

There is no doubt that in equipment China is ahead.

This is a 'soft sell' to warn the govt, shape up or ship out.

Take defence requirements seriously and leave politics and pocketing 'commissions' by delaying projects!

He is my coursemate and he is a real sharp chap!

 

[Officer of Engineers]

The IA has foisted the British Empire in both the cases over a quiet a number of theatres including Europe, Middle East and the East. It is history and irrefutable. Where was China deployed in WWI or WWII.

WWI, Sir? Eastern Russia. WWII, you know very well. In fact, India trained those Chinese divisions that went on to open the Burma Road. But in terms of sheer numbers? It's not even a comparison. The Chinese lost more men under arms than India ever had in uniform.

In the modern context, it will be small wars and border conflicts. China has joined in the Korean War, 1962 with India, against Vietnam and that is all.

And China lost more men in one single war than India had in all her wars combined post independence.

However, this p!ssing contest is not my intention. My intention is to show LF has no appreciation to what it means to be battle experienced and battle hardened.

 

[Ray]

Sir,

The 15ABC is not expected to win. They're expected to die.

That is not a military way to fight a war. It is what Islamic jihadis are led to believe and they do it too!

With globalisation and the US culture (I saw a Chinese rock show on TV) creeping in, one wonders if the Chinese of today can be termed as the ones that the Americans faced in Korea and promptly claimed that the Chinese were 'brainwashed robots'.

In my opinion, I can't say what they were during the Korean War, the Chinese are not taking thing lying down any more. The various protest, including armed ones, that have been reported, indicates that they also have a 'mind of their own' and not quite what was the stereotype portrayed in the olden times.

To feel that the Chinese are 'robots' and similar to Islamic jihadist is doing disservice to the Chinese people!

 

[Officer of Engineers]

To feel that the Chinese are 'robots' and similar to Islamic jihadist is doing disservice to the Chinese people!

Sir,

Do you still have the copy of the HANDBOOK OF THE CHINESE PEOPLE'S ARMY that I've sent you?

The 15ABC is classified as disruption/reccee forces. The reason why they're expected to die is that they are not to be relieved in time by ground forces. The 15ABC's job is to stop/slow the enemy's reserves from reacting appropriately and they are expected not to be relieved while doing so.

It is detailed in that handbook I've sent you.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Also, Sir, could you check if you have the OFFICER HANBOOK OF THE CHINESE'S PEOPLE'S ARMY?

 

[Ray]

WWI, Sir? Eastern Russia. WWII, you know very well. In fact, India trained those Chinese divisions that went on to open the Burma Road. But in terms of sheer numbers? It's not even a comparison. The Chinese lost more men under arms than India ever had in uniform.

And China lost more men in one single war than India had in all her wars combined post independence.

However, this p!ssing contest is not my intention. My intention is to show LF has no appreciation to what it means to be battle experienced and battle hardened.

I rarely join in a pissing contest.

That is why I don't care for those thread on which is better since one does not understand that the threat perception and the operational environment is different and cannot be compared! It is the amateurs watching industry glossies who go in raptures!

Losing men is no indication of ‘effort’ involved. It indicates incompetence.

As far as Indian contribution to WWI and WWII, it has been recorded by a third party – the imperialist power. The contribution you could check out since it well known and recorded.

What did the Chinese do in the Eastern Front and what is the achievement? Do also let us know of the Chinese contribution in the Burma Road. As far as my information, 200,000 Chinese labourers were used. Are they military men? Compare the Indian civilians helping the war effort, if civilians are to be in the reckoning and the wealth of India that was used!

China operated against the Japanese for her own interests i.e. Mao’s and the Communists. I would however like to know more of Chinese contribution to WW II with unformed soldier and not labour.

 

[Ray]

Also, Sir, could you check if you have the OFFICER HANBOOK OF THE CHINESE'S PEOPLE'S ARMY?

No, I have not received it!

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Losing men is no indication of ‘effort’ involved. It indicates incompetence.

Not necessarily, Sir. The Russians paid that price of 11 million military dead to the doorsteps of Hitler's bunker. While you may term it incompetence, it is a feat unseen before in the anals of military history.

As far as Indian contribution to WWI and WWII, it has been recorded by a third party – the imperialist power. The contribution you could check out since it well known and recorded.

That the Empire saved Great Britain is no mistery?

What did the Chinese do in the Eastern Front and what is the achievement? Do also let us know of the Chinese contribution in the Burma Road. As far as my information, 200,000 Chinese labourers were used. Are they military men? Compare the Indian civilians helping the war effort, if civilians are to be in the reckoning and the wealth of India that was used!

I'm surprised, Sir. The Chinese divisions that openned the Burma Road was trained by the British Indian Army. You didn't know this?

China operated against the Japanese for her own interests i.e. Mao’s and the Communists. I would however like to know more of Chinese contribution to WW II with unformed soldier and not labour.

It was more Chiang Kei-Shek than Mao. The Nationalist Chinese tied down half the Japanese air force and 75% of the army, mainly through military defeats but defeats that forced the IJA to commit to win.

The massacre at Nanking was done by a IJA corps, while butchering women and chidren, the IJA had one less corps to commit against the Americans.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

No, I have not received it!

I'm just finishing up their new manual, THE SCIENCE OF MILITARY STRATEGY, (and it gave me a headache). I will send both ... but Sir, I would caution you to read THE SCIENCE rather than the HANDBOOK. It's a newer write ... and you will get less confused. A lot of things in the HANDBOOK is now obsolete.

 

[Ray]

Colonel,

History is a great help no doubt.

However, peoples and civilisations change or else we would be still in the Stoneage.

The Russian under Stalin are not the Russians are under Putin. If the Russian still had the Stalin’s time mentality, the USSR would have been there. Same is the case for the Chinese. Are they in sych with Maoist Idea or India with Nehruvian ideas? Even the US has changed. Is the Obama idea of global supremacy the same as Bush’s?

Likewise with China. Please don’t think they are ‘robots’ as in Mao’s time (that is if the western media was honest in reporting!), Can there be a Cultural Revolution today in China? Yet, if I feel that Chinese are still robots and mindless people since history tells me so, then I would make a serious error in judgement!

So, let us quote history in the modern context.

Fine Chiang Kai Shek did what he did and Mao did what he did, but don’t bulldoze to indicate that their contribution overreaches the Indian contribution. Read history and see the effort. Chiang and Mao did it for his country, but Indians did it for the real reason – Hitler and his racist attitude, apart from being a part of the Empire and true to the salt! In India, one has to be true to his salt and it is as important as the concept of ‘losing face’ amongst the Chinese.

Your examples hardly compare with the Indian contributions.

 

[Tamil]

To the extend that China till this day couldnot retake an Island 50 times smaller than Sri Lanka. China's unity requires that substantial be maintained Nanjing military region. At present it seems unlikely that China can successfully invade an Island. Moreover, an invasion could cause communist regime problems. However, from the perspective of beijing, the threat of getting nuked by India is probably the only thing is preventing chinese leaders from behaving badly.

If pakistan join's in China's misadventures. Then there are countries like Russia and USA will make sure they get the pie of there share of the conflict between these 3 countries. Usa will support India with Intelligence. Russia and Israel would open it's doors of free flow of military hardware to India. No one wants to see India go down and pakistan gaining grounds in this part of the world.

this is the perfect result to this thread topic.

India Vs China/Pakistan

Support gain by

USA-Intel/UNSC/Political
Russia-weapons/Political/UNSC
Israel-Weapons/may be Join the war.
Japan-Intel/Political
UK-/Political

Support gain by China/Pakistan

NK-Any type to defeat US
Arab Country's- Money($$$)

End - South Asia Total destruction on economic Front. If Nuke avl then DEAD TOLL IS GOING UPTO 100's of MILLIONS.

Note : It is my personal Thinking. some will change due to the scenario during war.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Your examples hardly compare with the Indian contributions.

And I don't intend to but I am not the one who brought up the comparison. LETHALFORCE did. It was an amateurish, deliquent comment by him that I was challenging.

 

[Ray]

I'm just finishing up their new manual, THE SCIENCE OF MILITARY STRATEGY, (and it gave me a headache). I will send both ... but Sir, I would caution you to read THE SCIENCE rather than the HANDBOOK. It's a newer write ... and you will get less confused. A lot of things in the HANDBOOK is now obsolete.

I assure you that I am not confused.

The sad part is that I don't receive what you send!

Even what you send gets garbled.

It is not as good as what you have sent me on CDs.