Russia's MiG starts new batch of fighters for Indian Navy

[JBH22]

USA might comes from defeating countries under sanction for decades and then President lands on aircraft carrier "Mission Accomplished"

 

[p2prada]

When american shoots down enemy planes 3 to one, we are beat up little kids, when India outnumber Pakistan 30000 to 5000and uses their air force and army to win agains a country that does not use their airforce or military and you end up loseing more men, tanks and planes and end up where you started after public pressure drives Pakistan back to its borders , you consider that a win. right,,, just so I understand this.

Kargil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You keep posting comparison figures between US with that of Russia or China or India, three countries which are right on top of the GFP website which you keep quoting.

But at the same time you like giving kill ratios when fighting countries which are right at the bottom of the GFP rankings, like Iraq.

Heck you can't acknowledge equal powers based on your own posts, and you expect me to accept your gibberish when it suits you.

How about posting the same GFP ranking figures between the the US and Iraq and see how well your banter stacks up to in real life?

 

[average american]

You cant leave it alone can you in Afganstan about a 150 specials forces went in and along with the northern alliance took out the Afganstan Military and Goverment.

Military Horses & Mules in Afghanistan

The mission of American Special Forces in Afghanistan in October-November 2001 was direct: help the local Northern Alliance forces defeat the Taliban, the proximate source of the 9-11 terrorist attacks, just one month before. But the infrastructure of Afghanistan was anything but modern and the best way to get around was by horse. The adaptable SF team mounted up and rode side-by-side with the Northern Alliance to victory. This swashbuckling story is an exciting and inspiring tale, but has deeper implications for warfare in the 21st Century: be ready for anything, including a mix of the most modern technology with methods and means long considered obsolete, like pack mules.Military Horses in Afghanistan

and you want to compare that to 30,000 regular Indian military supported by planes and tanks takeing on 5000 Kashmir Insurgents.

In the war with Iraq it was more like US allies 300,000,, Iraq 375,000 and Iraq had more tanks and artillary then the USA plus years of combat experience against Iran. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly. - David Hackworth

Anytime you post anything and cant back it up with facts your wasteing my and everybody elses time.

 

[JBH22]

You cant leave it alone can you in Afganstan about a 150 specials forces went in and along with the northern alliance took out the Afganstan Military and Goverment.

and you want to compare that to 30,000 regular Indian military supported by planes and tanks takeing on 5000 Kashmir Insurgents.

In the war with Iraq it was more like US allies 300,000,, Iraq 375,000 and Iraq had more tanks and artillary then the USA plus years of combat experience against Iran.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly. - David Hackworth

First thing Iraq was under sanction for almost 2 decades could rearm and train its armed forces it was already a lost war before it even started note that Iraq had not sent 1 plane in the air to challenge US air superiority.

Second thing tell me where you got that 30000 IA troops with tanks and planes went to fight 5000 kashmiris ??

 

[average american]

First thing Iraq was under sanction for almost 2 decades could rearm and train its armed forces it was already a lost war before it even started note that Iraq had not sent 1 plane in the air to challenge US air superiority.

Second thing tell me where you got that 30000 IA troops with tanks and planes went to fight 5000 kashmiris ??

Look on the box on the right side under Strength. Most of the Iraqi Airforce refused to fight, they knew it was suicide.

 

[Neil]

and you want to compare that to 30,000 regular Indian military supported by planes and tanks takeing on 5000 Kashmir Insurgents.

at 16000ft....???!!!!


and there is no way that only 5000 men were involved.....according to many an entire NLI regiment of paki was killed, their own PM of that time says 4000 to 5000 pakis were killed Over 4,000 Pakistanis died in Kargil conflict: Nawaz Sharief ( India, Pakistan)

so dont base an argument on facts hotly debated on both sides....

and pakis are no Iraq or afghans....they have nukes....that changes the entire game.....

 

[JBH22]

Look on the box on the right side under Strength. Most of the Iraqi Airforce refused to fight, they knew it was suicide.

Point is simple if you are fighting an incredibly inferior enemy then its guaranteed you will win.

Sending M1A2 against T-72 monkey models and then claiming its the best tank its too easy but having said that nobody here will not underestimate the might of US armed forces.

 

[average american]

at 16000ft....???!!!!


and there is no way that only 5000 men were involved.....according to many an entire NLI regiment of paki was killed, their own PM of that time says 4000 to 5000 pakis were killed Over 4,000 Pakistanis died in Kargil conflict: Nawaz Sharief ( India, Pakistan)

so dont base an argument on facts hotly debated on both sides....

and pakis are no Iraq or afghans....they have nukes....that changes the entire game.....

I am sure Pakistans estimates of Indians that got killed is a lot higher also.....

 

[average american]

Point is simple if you are fighting an incredibly inferior enemy then its guaranteed you will win.

Sending M1A2 against T-72 monkey models and then claiming its the best tank its too easy but having said that nobody here will not underestimate the might of US armed forces.

All our enemys are inferior. Not anything the USA can do about that.

 

[Neil]

I am sure Pakistans estimates of Indians that got killed is a lot higher also.....

there might be conspiracy theory.... but we are a democracy so subverting such facts as to how many killed especially during a war is very difficult....
add to that there has never been any conflicting version of number of those killed by any high level official unlike a their former PM saying that PA distorted the facts- which is very much possible considering they didnt even take their soldiers dead bodies for fearing their ''open'' secret would be exposed. please tell me a force that would leave its dead behind..??

 

[p2prada]

You cant leave it alone can you in Afganstan about a 150 specials forces went in and along with the northern alliance took out the Afganstan Military and Goverment.

ROFL. You crack me up. Proves again and again you don't read or understand what you yourself post let alone what others post.

iCasualties | OEF | Afghanistan | Fatalities By Year

Total US casualties in Afghanistan till date is 2177. 3257 if you add the coalition or all the western forces operating there.

Also count the number of countries operating in Afghanistan, you will need to scroll quite a bit.

So, you took Afghanistan by sending in 150 men, but lost over 2177 men in the process. How interesting. Average indeed.

In the war with Iraq it was more like US allies 300,000,, Iraq 375,000 and Iraq had more tanks and artillary then the USA plus years of combat experience against Iran. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

Nonsense. Iraqis never put up a fight. The one who really did were the Republican Guard and they barely numbered over 25000 at the time. The rest either surrendered or deserted.

The Iraqis had little or no tanks and very little artillery. They did not even have a proper air force. It was all shut down. The Iraqis were starved for 2 decades. The only program running was the Oil for Food program where ex-Soviet bloc countries like Russia bought a lot of Iraqi oil in exchange for food and medicine, so that their people don't starve and die. That's the country you attacked. A country that was nearly at the brink of starvation. And you expect them to even have a standing army.

If you are talking about the First Gulf War then Iraq was already a war ravaged country having fought 9 years of war with an equal power. Even with 10 years of unequal war by the US on Iraq and Afghanistan, the US will find it very hard to find another country to fight with, namely Iran, even if this will also end up being an unequal war.

Also, while the deployment of troops to Iraq reduced, even with regular casualties on the American side, the Afghan war became worse and worse as the war dragged on, courtesy Pakistan's double game. Today you have more troops in Afghanistan than you ever did in Iraq (after major operations ended in 2003). Just note: Afghanistan isn't even in the GPF website.

As of today you have over 68000 men who need to return home. 2 years ago you had over 150000 men in Afghanistan with 80000 who returned home earlier. Current force levels in Afghanistan is over 200000 Afghan troops, 68000 American troops (coalition: extra) and over 100000 Pakistani troops fighting what is estimated to be around 60000 Taliban militants.

How about actually reading than wasting time on hopeless websites like strategypage and GPF.

 

[average american]

ROFL. You crack me up. Proves again and again you don't read or understand what you yourself post let alone what others post.

iCasualties | OEF | Afghanistan | Fatalities By Year

Total US casualties in Afghanistan till date is 2177. 3257 if you add the coalition or all the western forces operating there.

Also count the number of countries operating in Afghanistan, you will need to scroll quite a bit.

So, you took Afghanistan by sending in 150 men, but lost over 2177 men in the process. How interesting. Average indeed.



Nonsense. Iraqis never put up a fight. The one who really did were the Republican Guard and they barely numbered over 25000 at the time. The rest either surrendered or deserted.

The Iraqis had little or no tanks and very little artillery. They did not even have a proper air force. It was all shut down. The Iraqis were starved for 2 decades. The only program running was the Oil for Food program where ex-Soviet bloc countries like Russia bought a lot of Iraqi oil in exchange for food and medicine, so that their people don't starve and die. That's the country you attacked. A country that was nearly at the brink of starvation. And you expect them to even have a standing army.

If you are talking about the First Gulf War then Iraq was already a war ravaged country having fought 9 years of war with an equal power. Even with 10 years of unequal war by the US on Iraq and Afghanistan, the US will find it very hard to find another country to fight with, namely Iran, even if this will also end up being an unequal war.

Also, while the deployment of troops to Iraq reduced, even with regular casualties on the American side, the Afghan war became worse and worse as the war dragged on, courtesy Pakistan's double game. Today you have more troops in Afghanistan than you ever did in Iraq (after major operations ended in 2003). Just note: Afghanistan isn't even in the GPF website.

As of today you have over 68000 men who need to return home. 2 years ago you had over 150000 men in Afghanistan with 80000 who returned home earlier. Current force levels in Afghanistan is over 200000 Afghan troops, 68000 American troops (coalition: extra) and over 100000 Pakistani troops fighting what is estimated to be around 60000 Taliban militants.

How about actually reading than wasting time on hopeless websites like strategypage and GPF.

You mean like listening to you, While I deplore the lost of life of any american i dont see that about a 100,000 troops disposeing of the Afganstan military and goverment, killing or driving out Al Quada, and many of the Taliban and goverming Muslim a country of 30 milllion people for 12 years 8000 miles away at the cost of 4000 lives all that bad a job, do you think India could have done better, You seem to have more then your share of problems with Kashmir and its suppose to be part of India,

 

[p2prada]

You mean like listening to you,

Irrespective of your opinion, you will get to learn more.

While I deplore the lost of life of any american i dont see that about a 100,000 troops disposeing of the Afganstan military and goverment, killing or driving out Al Quada, and many of the Taliban and goverming Muslim a country of 30 milllion people for 12 years 8000 miles away at the cost of 4000 lives all that bad a job, do you think India could have done better, You seem to have more then your share of problems with Kashmir and its suppose to be part of India,

India did not build an army for such contingencies. Neither do we plan to. All our enemies are at our doorstep. So any comparison is moot. We built an army to fight very powerful enemies. You built your army to support such powerful armies over long distances, in other words an expeditionary force. The only difference is we are a lot poorer compared to your country. But how long will that last? Don't forget your President and commanders were begging for troops from India to help them in Afghanistan. When the Jungle warfare training school in India opened to other countries for the first time in 40 years, the Americans were the first to enlist for training there.

Kashmir is perfectly fine. We had a little war a decade ago and we won that. Over the many years, irrespective of cross border terrorism, the valley is seeing very peaceful times.

Also I am not talking about the good and bad sides of the Afghan or Iraq war. What I am talking about is your poor understanding of these wars and all the other wars that you have fought to date. And also the unique capability the US fights with. Unlike most countries, the US fights with a pen and paper first and then goes for the hammer, ie, through diplomatic maneuvering through the UN and the trade and banking system, followed by sanctions and then defeating the enemy by force. The times when you started with the hammer first, you lost, eg are Vietnam and Korean war. There are some where you have no chance of doing either. For eg: You tried sanctions against India, supported our enemies (Pakistan and China) directly to weaken us. Even thought of military intervention. When all else didn't work you are now trying to join us. You know the term, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." That's where American power lies. Being able to make friends or enemies at whim. That power has nothing to do with all your fangled toys.

US is a superpower but not one of the reasons you have given in your 1000+ posts have you been able to figure out what makes the US a superpower. That's because of your abysmally poor understanding of what makes the US powerful and the others weaker.

Your 100-0 kill ratio stands for jack when the real fight starts, if ever, against real enemies. Not the pushovers from the Middle East.

 

[arnabmit]

The day US grows balls big enough to take on China, or even depleted Russia, then lets have this discussion again as to who won what.

Heck, US doesn't have the guts to take on Pak or NK! Now a days US doesn't want to fight a country any more, more interested in target killing of a few groups!

All our enemys are inferior. Not anything the USA can do about that.

 

[average american]

The day US grows balls big enough to take on China, or even depleted Russia, then lets have this discussion again as to who won what.

Heck, US doesn't have the guts to take on Pak or NK! Now a days US doesn't want to fight a country any more, more interested in target killing of a few groups!

After Mumbai and them cutting off the heads of soldiers if I was an indian I dont think I would bring up the subject of the USA having guts. :taunt1:

 

[arnabmit]

Revenge is a dish best served cold. Wait for 2014...

They will come and present themselves for target practice. They will come in droves and packs and will get gunned down like the mad dogs that they are...

After Mumbai and them cutting off the heads of soldiers if I was an indian I dont think I would bring up the subject of the USA having guts. :taunt1:

 

[SATISH]

For people below average who dont know the difference between a MiG 27 and a MiG 29k

 

[nishantgupta]

Anyone remembers how Russia starting Mig-29K production has anything to do with USA in Iraq / Afghanistan or Mumbai attack?

 

[mikhail]

I am sure Pakistans estimates of Indians that got killed is a lot higher also.....

the same goes with the U.S. as well when at the end of the vietnam war you declared that more than 57,000 of your men were butchered mercilessly by the Brave and Courageous Vietnamese soldiers but the reality according to Vietnam is that U.S. lost more than half a million men and huge amount of machinery!

 

[asianobserve]

the same goes with the U.S. as well when at the end of the vietnam war you declared that more than 57,000 of your men were butchered mercilessly by the Brave and Courageous Vietnamese soldiers but the reality according to Vietnam is that U.S. lost more than half a million men and huge amount of machinery!

Do you think the US Government intentionally and publicly left out 400,000+ American deaths from the Vietnam War so as not to be embarrassed? That's a lot of grieving American families that will be demanding every day that their deceased loved ones be properly honoured in the Vietnam War memorial wall in Washington DC...