India-China 2020 Border conflict

[fire starter]

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Reply:

1. Offered. Once F-16s come in.
2. Publicly. Not "not officially".
3. For #6. Why F-35B? What advantage does that offer over F-35A? (Mind you, we have to have Aircraft Carriers proposed and underway, in our mind; Had an opportunity to get a proper, guided tour of a F-35A of RAF on my visit there in 2018, from an operational squadron with due 'cloaking' of tech)


The only reason we are not going for US equipment is the limitations in usage with respect to Pakistan which come into play. For China, there is no restriction by US on use of its equipment.

In case F-35 is offered at a future date.. what is the deployment plan.. like S-400s will not be deployed in sectors where F-35s are deployed ? Or USAF personnel on airbase to ensure Ruskies dont get hold of some classified details? Like can we have F-35s only deployed against China, and S-400 defend cities , as well as against Pakistan?

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Seems fake news.. That would mean Mongolia is getting near suicidal..

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Ya'll Nibbiars This looks easywalk compared to Siachen but still they fall over a dozen times.

Where I stand belongs to China.. hmm.. toh inse IA shaadi kar lega.. toh dahej mein zameen le lenge...

 

[Hellfire]

Saw some very interesting posts here.

Those who are cheering for war, please, first join TA and then cheer. Till then - thank you very much.

IA knows precisely what has to be done. Political will has been suitably tweaked. We can tie up Chinese at their own game.

Why fight when you can 'readjust' endlessly? All the time doing what they do - talk peace and do something that forces them to break it.

There is no hurry now. The game has to be longer, played smarter. Is being played out.

Wei qi ...... is not a board game when talked of in terms of realpolitik and military dimensions. It is a concept or philosophy of strategic maneuvering. Kautilya, Sun Tzu, Jomini, Clausewitz all have alluded to it - directly or indirectly. Only an ignorant ignores the tenets of waging a war - maneuvering for strategic advantage before the battle - only to relearn them during the war, with price paid in lives, money and at times, national honour and prestige.

 

[prasadr14]

"Where I stand belongs to China" - Yep that summaries it.

Are they taunting us or tempting us?
One confused nibba here...

 

[Hellfire]

In case F-35 is offered at a future date.. what is the deployment plan.. like S-400s will not be deployed in sectors where F-35s are deployed ? Or USAF personnel on airbase to ensure Ruskies dont get hold of some classified details? Like can we have F-35s only deployed against China, and S-400 defend cities , as well as against Pakistan?

We are not going for them.

 

[Cheran]

LEH: Two Indian officials said Chinese troops were laying a network of optical fibre cables near the Himalayan border with India, suggesting they were digging in for the long haul despite high-level talks aimed at resolving a stand-off there.
Such cables, which would provide forward troops with secure lines of communication to bases in the rear, have recently been spotted to the south of Pangong Tso lake in Ladakh, a senior government official said.

India China news: India says China laying cables to bolster communications at border flashpoint | India News - Times of India

India News: Two Indian officials said Chinese troops were laying a network of optical fibre cables near the Himalayan border with India, suggesting they were dig

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

nothing to be surprised here.

 

[cereal killer]

Didn't the Jhula Jhuli coconut water happened after Doklam?

Yes it did.. There was nothing wrong with it coz it did worked for the time being. Prior to Doklam as well Modi had tried goodwill with Xi. When modi came to power all he thought about was peace.. But Pathankot gave him harsh reality check & then Doklam. You just can't reason with unreasonable guys.

 

[asingha94]

 

[Shashank Nayak]

We are not going for them.

Su-57 to fill in the gaps .. before AMCA enteries service? Whats your take.. Can we do without fifth generation fighters until the AMCA enters service in numbers?

 

[asingha94]

FATF Asia Pacific’s Joint Working Group meet on Tuesday & Wednesday virtually. Pakistan to be on the agenda.

Any chance of them black listed?

 

[Hellfire]

How can members post the same thing over multiple pages?

"BREAKING NEWS" bug spreading here, is it?

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Any chance of them black listed?

No way with Intra afghan talks on

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Su-57 to fill in the gaps .. before AMCA enteries service? Whats your take.. Can we do without fifth generation fighters until the AMCA enters service in numbers?

Whats funny @Hellfire .. is it AMCA ever entering service or IAF going for Su-57?

 

[Hellfire]

Su-57 to fill in the gaps .. before AMCA enteries service? Whats your take.. Can we do without fifth generation fighters until the AMCA enters service in numbers?

Get realistic.

Too much fantasy is not good.

AMCA will/will not come ..... no one can predict.

No 5th Generation fighter is coming in from an outside country.

Now, work out what we shall be doing.

1. Upgrade of Su-30 MKIs, Mig-29s, Mirage 2000s, Jaguars.
2. LCA induction in larger numbers.
3. And wait for AMCA ... over the next decade.
4. If it does not come, buy some more Rafale - perhaps.
5. Forget MRCA 2.0

The above is your IAF. That is it.

 

[rock127]

Seems fake news.. That would mean Mongolia is getting near suicidal..

Have to wait if it's fake or real since below article is just 40 days old.

If US can do this then it could be a big irritant and undermining the "shupa powa" status of Chini cowards.

Are the US preparing to deploy its missiles in Mongolia?

After the Americans broke the INF Treaty, the Pentagon immediately promised to deploy its missiles in Asia. This has already caused an angry and restless reaction of China. And, it seems, for good reason ...

katehon.com

ARE THE US PREPARING TO DEPLOY ITS MISSILES IN MONGOLIA?
Facebook VK Blogger LiveJournal Twitter Email Print Share
GEOPOLITICS


07.08.2019
USA
Alex Pall
After the Americans broke the INF Treaty, the Pentagon immediately promised to deploy its missiles in Asia. This has already caused an angry and restless reaction of China. And, it seems, for good reason ...
Europe understands perfectly well that if America is stuffing it with medium- and shorter-range missiles, naturally, all these positions will be covered in red circles on Russian maps of combat employment of the armed forces.
Washington is not a solid stone fortress either. They don’t really want to add a headache to themselves with the whining of Europeans and a clear response threat from Moscow. Yes, and initially one of the goals of the US withdrawal from the INF Treaty was to identify a threat to China. Which, according to Washington’s logic, has accumulated too many medium-range missiles, but there are no restrictions on it, because it is not a party to arms reduction treaties.
Based on this, US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper openly announced that the Pentagon is considering deploying medium-range missiles in the Asian region. According to American logic, this will help to drag the PRC into a new treaty - the INF Treaty-2, which already includes three countries.
Beijing disagrees with this logic, and is rather eloquent.

What does it mean that 80% of China's nuclear potential is medium-range missiles? This means only one thing - these missiles will not be able to reach the main territory of the United States. For this reason, the United States needs to worry least about this fact, right? “Fair questions are being asked by the director of the Department of Arms Control and Disarmament of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, Phu Tsun. - The United States has thousands of intercontinental missiles, and at the same time, they are concerned about several missiles that cannot reach their territory. Where is the logic? I don’t see her yet, for this reason this is only an excuse for the American side.

As a result, the world community witnessed an unprecedented event: Beijing, which has so far fanned out silently at such current conflicts, this time openly and even energetically expressed solidarity with Russia. And America threatened that "China will not stand aside and will be forced to take countermeasures if the United States places ground-based medium-range missiles in this part of the world."
Whether the Chinese countermeasures will include the reciprocal deployment of medium-range missiles somewhere near the US coast is unclear.

But, paradoxically at first glance, the Americans are far from endless in their choice of ground-based medium-range missiles. What is needed in order to place such weapons on the threshold of China? Firstly, the allied relations between this country and the United States. Secondly, certain frictions between this country and China. Thirdly, a relatively stable political regime and the resulting predictability of the country's position, especially when the country will have to plunge itself into confrontation with the most powerful Asian power. With which Russia will clearly sympathize. Finally, this country should lie in a radius of 2-5 thousand kilometers from important economic and political centers of the PRC.
And as a result of these objective limitations - there are not many options left. We will not take the actual territory of the United States on the island of Guam - this is too obvious, and 3000 km to Shanghai and 4000 to Beijing make this option very attractive for the United States. However, at the same time, this turns the island into a no less obvious reciprocal goal, and not in the character of the Americans to sacrifice themselves, if they can sacrifice someone else.
Japan, too, is asking for the criteria for the role of position for American missiles. But there is a nuclear-free principle: not to have, not to import, and not to produce nuclear weapons. And non-nuclear missiles against a country like China make no sense. Whatever the US Secretary of Defense promises.
South Korea? It could be the same. But Seoul is so well dependent on the Chinese market that it will hush things up even with Washington's most insistent desire. In addition, North Korea is also nearby. Does Seoul, which has just at least visibly defused the situation with Pyongyang, need to risk a military conflict with the DPRK?

Of the recognized countries, the USA has no close allies in the region. Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar? They have problems with China, but it is hardly realistic to think that these countries will actually go to war with him for American interests. Pakistan today is more of an ally of Beijing than of Washington. India has serious problems with China, but for the whole range of its geopolitical positions, this country will not go to host American weapons directed against a third country.
What is left with us? Yes, Taiwan. An unrecognized country located on an extremely short military-political leash near Washington. And with mainland China it is in a state of inescapable, albeit cold war. Same as between North and South Korea.
But Taiwan is too close. Two hundred kilometers is not a distance. In the event of war, the Chinese army will crush all missile positions here within minutes.

Mongolia
And under these conditions, the most advantageous option at first glance remains the most beneficial for the United States. Mongolia.

Although for whom it is unthinkable? For the United States, on the contrary, it is extremely pragmatic. From here, medium-range missiles splendidly cover the entire territory of both enemies of America - both China and Russia. Including Murmansk and Anadyr. And at the same time, the country’s relief is such that a couple of divisions of mobile devices for RSD can be covered in the most infinitely wonderful way.
Besides. The country is large, the population is small. The population is not too developed, in thinking - medieval nomads. An attempt to switch from feudalism to socialism, frankly, failed. This means that there is already one fundamental advantage: public protests should not be feared, and you can work with a small elite quite effectively. The United States has enough money for this. Moreover, since 1991, the Mongolian elites have been sensitively following a pro-Western course. And even from natural for Mongolia membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Ulan Bator has been evading for many years.

Yes, Mongolia is three-quarters dependent on trade with China. But on the other hand, there are long-standing territorial differences between these countries. A long-standing friendly memory of Russia? The cult of Genghis Khan perfectly eliminates this.

So in the next few years, it is worth observing carefully the ideological and political movements in Mongolia. As if there was no surprise ...
Well, and the last. Very remarkable news came in late July from Washington. There, President Donald Trump held talks with Mongolian President Haltmaagiin Battulga. According to reports from the White House, the main topic of the negotiations was trade: "representatives of the Trump administration announced their desire to help Mongolia diversify foreign trade."

But this altruism is not due to gratitude for the fact that the Mongol president gave the horse to Trump's son Barron. It seems that the whole explanation lies in one phrase: "Trump and Battulga also discussed security and defense issues." How does Mongolia, with its geographical position, build its defense without the United States?
And here is the notorious John Bolton, Trump's national security adviser, recently traveled to Ulaanbaatar.

 

[tarunraju]

LOL, for those missiles to reach Mongolia, they have to be transported over PRC or Russian airspace. How will they do that, and how come this isn't a "Cuban Missile Crisis" of sorts for China?

 

[Bhadra]

A very short answer: Nope, sorry. It is NOT.

It is answerable to the Council of Ministers headed by PM through President of India. Alone. No one else. Not even Parliament. Let me know when the Council of Ministers is directly reporting to Parliament.

So, go peddle your concepts to those who have no idea about the system.



Again - non-sense.

What is the percentage of Defence Allocation directly appropriated from the IT Returns of individual citizens? May I know? And in that case, one can argue, in Defence forces, everyone, without exception, pays IT - so, self financing as a warped logic can be pushed too.

Au contraire, armed forces get allocation from budgetary considerations of the GoI which is a sum total of taxes on goods, services, IT, exports. That is income of Govt. The Govt appropriates it, then allocates it to Defence Head from its overall estimates for expenditure.



Try again.

One should be absolutely clear about the constitutional structure of Indian democracy without which any discussion in a forum like this is futile.

Armed Forces of India are part of the Executive branch of the Govt being part of MoD. Executives are the Ministers headed by the PM and executive branch functions as a council of ministers.

Political control over the executive (which included the Armed Forces) is exercised by the Parliamnt through lagislation, policy control and budgets. Every penny has to be sanctioned by the Parliment. Parliament may amend any law related to Armed Forces or make any new law. Paliament also exercises legislative control over executive deptts through departmental committees.

Yes, Armed Forces are responsible to the people of Inda but people of India means Parliament and not dom dick and harry. They are answerable to the Parliament through their head - the RM. The Parliament may ask him any question, ask clarification, pass censors against him, admonish him and even decide to throw him out. But the Parliament can not call a soldier or a general. Political control has to be exercised through the executive branch composed of the council of Ministers.

In a parliamentary democracy such as ours, "We the people of India" means the laid down majority of representatives in the legislature which is the supreme amongst all three branches of Govt of India. Anything passed by laid down majority in the legislature is the will of the people.

Simple.. do not think that a general is supposed to lick your ass since you pay taxes...

 

[Hellfire]

One question how to join Territorial Army what are the requirements? Test similar to the IA? Is it compulsory to spend 2 to 3 month's annually to bear arms? I heard the total strength is 2,00,000 .

Head to TA page. And look it up.