Deathstar
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2019
- Messages
- 2,333
- Likes
- 7,358
But the problem is for country like India with such a high youth population , Armed forces acts as an excellent employer. Trimming the strenghs of forces is not just economic question but a political one too.I’ve heard this before and I didn’t buy it then and I don’t buy it now.
you think western forces spend billions to make their soldiers less effective? Average Australian soldier has $27,000 worth of equipment issued to them. This makes the soldier more lethal, more survivable and more competent. they are force multipliers.
In India soldier gets issued a rifle and helmet just like 100 years ago. PLA have even realised the futility in this approach and are cutting their manpower by 30-40% so they can spend more on each individual soldier and CAPEX and they have a defence budget 3-4X India’s!
In this day and age people still making a case against mechanisation and automation?
you constantly are hearing in JK/NE about ops being called off because it’s getting dark, have heard of terrorists escaping cordons becuase of a lack of communication and command and control awareness. You’re telling me Indian forces aren’t compromised by their lack of equipment at all? I’d say you’re naive if you actually believe that.
Total armed forces including paramilitary , armed police etc etc in India is 4 million plus , even more than China. Its not economical for a country with per capita less than 2000 dollars to equip its 1.3 million armed forces with equipments costing 27000 dollar on par with developed countries.
Yet still we have highly equipped force like NSG , SFs etc.
Jitni aukat hai utna hi de sakte hai hum. We are not in a position to compare our forces with that of the developing ones.
Australias per capital income is 45k and Indias is 7k i.e almost 6.5 times (ppp) so Indias forces shiush be equipped with min 27000/6.5 i.e 4k which is we do already.
Lets be realistic and not fret over US or Australian forces