Chinese army left arunachal after we lost it because its difficult for them to defend it.The forward policy in 1962, we could save Arunachal Pradesh...
Chinese army left arunachal after we lost it because its difficult for them to defend it.The forward policy in 1962, we could save Arunachal Pradesh...
probably.a failure on the then govt partYou got your army there in 1962 under the "forward policy". Your amy just thought Chinese wouldn't dare to resist.
Chineese army fled from AP because they knew that Indians will counter attack with USA help if they do not withdraw...Chinese army left arunachal after we lost it because its difficult for them to defend it.
thats what i meant buddyChineese army fled from AP because they knew that Indians will counter attack with USA help if they do not withdraw...
i thought 8 : 1 was required for both of the countries not india fighting with low terrain and china on top, it was meant for both the countries or any two opponent in common would nearly have 8:1 to win, or is it ? the formula was not made keeping india and china is mind, isn't itjust imagine a fight between you and your friends you are on top of a house with stones and protected,your friends should climb the wall,who will win??
An attacking force while trying to defeat its enemy in a hilly terrain who holds advantage of terrain and also has dug in defences, will need a force which is 8 times the number of defenders to be able to win. This equation is applicable to all armies all over the world. But the qualitative advantage of the attacker can bring this number down by a factor which is directly proportional to the qualitative advantage similarly a defender having qualitative advantage alongwith terrain advantage can ward of a much bigger force and in such a case the numerical ratio may even go to 1:16.i thought 8 : 1 was required for both of the countries not india fighting with low terrain and china on top, it was meant for both the countries or any two opponent in common would nearly have 8:1 to win, or is it ? the formula was not made keeping india and china is mind, isn't it
The same PLA also ran back with their tails between their legs when they saw USA sending arms in 1962...LOL, PLA kicked the ass of somebody in 1962 with almost the same amount. But then considering the combat power, the 8:1 ratio theory might be true. HAHAHA.
IA was forward deployed with no cover and logistics to support those units and PLA used tactics of massed assaults with over 12:1 ratio. Our soldiers just ran out of ammo, got overwhelmed and killed or captured. It was a classic case of Lancasters Linear law wherein the armies were conventional and evenly equipped in terms of weapons with very slight edge for PLA due to AK-47s.LOL, PLA kicked the ass of somebody in 1962 with almost the same amount. But then considering the combat power, the 8:1 ratio theory might be true. HAHAHA.
What about on the Tibetan plateau? does this ratio still apply? The article seems to imply that the ne MSC can be airlifted onto the plateau - but is this suicidal?An attacking force while trying to defeat its enemy in a hilly terrain who holds advantage of terrain and also has dug in defences, will need a force which is 8 times the number of defenders to be able to win. This equation is applicable to all armies all over the world. But the qualitative advantage of the attacker can bring this number down by a factor which is directly proportional to the qualitative advantage similarly a defender having qualitative advantage alongwith terrain advantage can ward of a much bigger force and in such a case the numerical ratio may even go to 1:16.
Yes, this ratio will be applicable there also provided the defenders are situated on a higher ground with well dug in positions. I had stated in the very begining that this ratio falls flat if the opponant uses assymtric warfare or Guerilla tactics or Hit & Run raids.What about on the Tibetan plateau? does this ratio still apply? The article seems to imply that the ne MSC can be airlifted onto the plateau - but is this suicidal?
So unfortunately, to quote the article, we can't expect to 'race' across to Lhasa any time soon:Yes, this ratio will be applicable there also provided the defenders are situated on a higher ground with well dug in positions. I had stated in the very begining that this ratio falls flat if the opponant uses assymtric warfare or Guerilla tactics or Hit & Run raids.
the corps will have battalions of engineers who can bridge Tibet's rivers overnight for the Indian Army to race across, and helicopters that can lift troops and tanks right into the heart of Tibet.
@Mods. is 'Chi nks' a prohibited term? in which case loose borders may not be the death of India but political correctness surely will.Rendered powerless to strike in the eastern or central sectors, the Chinese have lately been needling India in the Ladakh sector in the west, where there are ****** in the Indian armour.
The aim of raising mountain strike corps is to overcome this problem of ratios and use assymtric warfare and guerilla tactics to defeat the enemy also the tech advantage which we enjoy over them today will help reduce these ratios.So unfortunately, to quote the article, we can't expect to 'race' across to Lhasa any time soon:
That is indian army's own fault, you can't blame Chinese or your civilian government!IA was forward deployed with no cover and logistics to support those units
In the whole front, PLA only archieved probably 2:1. By tactically concentrate its forces in certain points while leave other areas vulnerable, PLA may improve its advange to 4:1 but never reach 12:1 simply the logistic can't support. At that time, PLA enjoyed superiority on every measures (equipment, training, war experience, etc) except logistic while Indian army was far weaker than 1971.and PLA used tactics of massed assaults with over 12:1 ratio. Our soldiers just ran out of ammo, got overwhelmed and killed or captured. It was a classic case of Lancasters Linear law wherein the armies were conventional and evenly equipped in terms of weapons with very slight edge for PLA due to AK-47s.
The word has been used for at least 500 years.@Mods. is 'Chi nks' a prohibited term? in which case loose borders may not be the death of India but political correctness surely will.
Definition of -----
1
: a small cleft, slit, or fissure <a ----- in the fence>
2
: a weak spot that may leave one vulnerable <his lawyers found a ----- in the law>
3
: a narrow beam of light shining through a -----
Origin of -----
probably alteration of Middle English chine crack, fissure
First Known Use: 1535
please provide links/references for these numbers.That is indian army's own fault, you can't blame Chinese or your civilian government!
In the whole front, PLA only archieved probably 2:1. By tactically concentrate its forces in certain points while leave other areas vulnerable, PLA may improve its advange to 4:1 but never reach 12:1 simply the logistic can't support. At that time, PLA enjoyed superiority on every measures (equipment, training, war experience, etc) except logistic while Indian army was far weaker than 1971.
Oh Brother!!! Chinese are master of retreat... They would not attack unless they have 8:1 ration in their favor... We need someone like General K.Sundarji who took the bluff out of these Chinese in 1987... When he crossed over to TIBET when the Chinese refused to move from Indian territory then as usual... The famous quote from Rajiv Gandhi then "The border is drawn with thick line""¦ there was no reaction from Chinese then, we need leaders with very strong will power"¦ not the current PM Maun Mohan Singh..You chinese think that you can win over the Indian Army hands down. This will happen only in your dreams.....
You have numbers and we too have it. You are just being mislead by the weakness endorsed by the INDIAN ARMED FORCES, the tactic is similar to the US as to get new hi-tech weapons in the name of chinese aggression and on the other hand you chinese are getting carried away by this.....
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
India-China: The real military equation | Defence & Strategy | 90 | ||
India overtakes China in Latest Times Higher Education World University Rankings | Knowledge Repository | 1 | ||
S | What Should India Do If China Invades Taiwan Tomorrow? | Indo Pacific & East Asia | 55 | |
India-China Border conflict | Indian Army | 18665 |