ladder
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2013
- Messages
- 7,258
- Likes
- 12,233
No, I still don't.sir ji but how come we have spare for m46 but they dont have for 203mm howitzer. you see the contradiction.
ballistic missiles cost far far more than a rocket . an MLRS would be far more cost efficient than a ballistic or cruise missile.
nashedi nasr dont hold any value in my opinion with 69 km range .
Indian Army too wasn't detered. you are wrong havent you seen an article written by lt.general whose headline say match chinese mlrs with pinaka mlrs. they can target ladakh with mlrs.
There are upgrading them? Have you heard Pakistani are upgrading 203mm howitzer?
A suicide bomber is even more cost effective. In a war objectives matter. If something is important enough to be hit at 100 plus kilometres, why not invest money to ensure it is decimated?
That being said, I am not saying 100 km+ rocket has no utility.
If you aren't mis-quoting the General, then
Ok, include 'I and the lt. Gen', no one beyond you two.
Hopefully you aren't reffering to one Lt. Gen' who aspires to wear political cap in guise of his army peak cap.
Last edited: