It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Tibet/Nepal Quandry....

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 08:39 PM
link   
I'll start addressing the claims made by the same guys in this thread, from today.

Thanks




posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by rajkhalsa2004
-IA/PLA
-deployability of forces
-technological comparison of forces
-Arjun is a failure
-LCA is a failure
-PLAN outclasses IN
-T-98 is better than Arjun
-India doesnt have nuclear deterrance vs. China
-China can 'absorb' nuclear attack with no probs
-ATV is a failure
-Type 55 is better than classes of IN ships
-etc
-etc
-etc


Did I forget anything?


-Raj

[edit on 15-12-2004 by rajkhalsa2004]







IA/PLA



This is a downright stupid argument. The IA and PLA have similar infantry equipment and APCs/IFVs (Type 81,INSAS,both copies of Ak-47s.There,don't say only China copys stuff) (BMP1/2 and OT62/64 against Type 90s and Type 92s).The Chinese have a huge advantage over the IA.




Technological Comparison



Both countries have similar weapons supplied mostly by Russia,while China has larger numbers.Comparing your best to our best,equipment is roughly equal in technology.





PLAN


China's Navy's main threat is from its fast attack craft,they can be deployed in a moment's notice,are cheap and effective.Besides that,we have lots of modernized DDGs.Our submarine fleets are close to being equal,but that might change if Russia builds nuclear subs for India.




Arjun/LCA


Both are good projects,but take a look at their Chinese equivalents (Type 98 & J-10).The Arjun and LCA are produced too late to be any good when they come out in full service.The Chinese equivalents are also cheaper.




India's Nuclear Deterrent


India doesn't have a nuclear deterrent.Get it into your head,because India will be hoping that China doesn't nuke their asses.If India nukes China,can anyone guess what will happen? No prizes for guessing,kids





India's Allies


Russia is already in a crisis stage.If President Putin makes a wrong move they will crumble.China plays a part in Russia's economy.China is Russia's biggest military client.Russia will not risk it by helping China.Instead,It will play the middle man,selling equipment to both China and India.And the USA,don't even mention them as India's allies.The USA will not risk a Nuclear war with China even for North Korea,what makes you think they will risk one for India?




etc,etc,etc,etc


I'm too tired to look through all that.Go find that info yourself.

PS:Just back from a 3 day camping trip,I'm all tired.

[edit on 18/12/04 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 07:57 AM
link   
1. PLA not deployed in tibet...
Ia has mountain warfare expertise advantage..

2. IAF superior to PLAAF in technology and skill levels also supp to be more...

3. Fast attack craft are only for coast patrol not blue water warfare...DDGs cannot knock carrier down....they are comparable to INS warships..

4.Arjun is alreay inducted into the army and serving now Don't know why you think its not in service...
....LCA induction 2006..

5. India has MAD with China.."deterrant" means to have MAD so that each side is 'detered from using nukes..India will not use nukes on China first..
200 nukes enough to assure MAD with China...all of China in Indias IRBM 2500km+ range..

Russia may not intervene in a war..neither will USA...agreeed USA and China have lots of trade together etc..but USA and China have more problems than USA and India..The US benefits strategically and financially more from a war weakened and defeated china rather than a war weakened/defeated India...common sense..china's contribution to US market replaceable...China's weakening w/o US wasting forces (priceless)



posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 08:11 AM
link   
So I guess your 124 Arjuns are gonna do something? They're not even sure when its gonna be delivered. I just spent the whole last three hours reading Arjun and its failures. India doesn't even want its own tank, thats why they didn't spend the money they bought T-90s with for Arjuns, its only political pressure that made the military purchase Arjuns. Your own fire and control system won't work in 40 degree temperature that means it won't work in Indian summers. Theres a lot more other problems too. 30 years of R&D for something that totally failed with many parts that have to come from other tanks.

Mig-21bis has no competition against VLS launched HQ-9 missiles and its upgrades. Not to mention the new HQ-15, 16, 17 under R&D.

LCA induction is no where near 2006, with all its troubles that I just read off the internet, they expect a three year delay with a decrease in performance from engine, radar and avionics problems.

Holy moly, get a hold of yourself. China is only 2500 km long? You must have problems, get a atlas dumbo.

US won't do anything to devastate China because America relies too much on Chinese imports (vice versa too but much less). With China devastated, America too will be devastated, the companies, the investments, the stocks, the National Funds, the trade and most importantly the friendship.

Yes, China can be replaced but that takes twenty years of work and establishment. India is no where near being able to compete with China on international markets (maybe except for IT sweatshops).

[edit on 18-12-2004 by COWlan]



posted on Dec, 25 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Hello..back after a while i am...went on xmas holiday to see tigers at a wildlife reserve..absoulutely spectacular....The Arjun is an underachievement IMHO from the poin of view of delay..i don't know about anybody else..But it cannot be compared to the T-98 as inferior as there is no level ground for comparision..The majority of the Chinese tank force is t-55 oriented as of now..I would like to see it in action..any euro-ameroican sites on the T-98?

answering the IRBM range point...no china is not 2500km long but a n IRBM with a 2500+km range missile launched form India covers all of China except maybe the region north of Shenyang..



posted on Dec, 26 2004 @ 03:11 AM
link   
The armor,speed and all the other high-tech stuff goes to show the Type-98 as better than the Arjun. However we will need to see it in battle.I wouldn't want to be in a Arjun on a desert battlefield,its engine jammed in a test somewhere in a desert in India.



posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
The armor,speed and all the other high-tech stuff goes to show the Type-98 as better than the Arjun. However we will need to see it in battle.I wouldn't want to be in a Arjun on a desert battlefield,its engine jammed in a test somewhere in a desert in India.


WAs it because of the desert?...Confirm..I wouldn't want to be in any tank actually..pretty stupid those things are..

Big fat and dumb!


Aircraft is my passion



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Yep,aircraft... you can't go wrong with those sleek and shecksy planes



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Firstly, I have to make clear, I find this whole thread to be a ridiculous argument. Forgetting all ad hominems and unsubstantiated sloganeering against India, there simply will not be a major clash of armies between the two nations. The Tibetan plateau, the Burmese jungle and the Ladakh steppes make it impossible for massed armored or mechanized deployments. The nature of the Line of Actual Control and the extremely militarized and fortified border in the Himalay and the Western sector would make any type of attack require an absolutely overwhelming force in order to break through the front lines.

In the Kargil war with Pakistan, the only modern massed ultra high-altitude conforontation, the terrain required India to have a 5:1-8:1 advantage versus the Paksitanis who were minimally fortified on mountain heights of some 14,000 feet sheer cliffs. (I recommend reading Center for Contemporary Conflict's workshop: Asymmetric Conflict in South Asia for more information on this.) The Indo-Chinese border is even higher, more rugged, more fortified, and the armies more entrenched. The political and strategic risks for escalation is also incredibly more high.

Any India-China war in the future will be limited to border skirmishes on far flung outposts both sides have established in the no-mans land between their defensive lines. Both sides have equally extensive infrastructure to the front lines that will faciliate troop movements and reinforcements, with geography and transport capabilities giving a slight advantage to India. The conflict will take place at the tactical level.

The border skirmishes since the 62 war (a whole other topic), in the 70s and 80s, followed exactly this. In all these recent skirmishes, India had come out the clear winner, as it was able to use mobility plus superior airlift and artillery capabilities to its advantage.


Originally posted by W4rl0rD
This is a downright stupid argument. The IA and PLA have similar infantry equipment and APCs/IFVs (Type 81,INSAS,both copies of Ak-47s.There,don't say only China copys stuff) (BMP1/2 and OT62/64 against Type 90s and Type 92s).The Chinese have a huge advantage over the IA.


You logic fails. Where exactly does the Chinese "have a huge advantage over the IA"? In terms of size? Well, lets talk strategically deployable forces.



Both countries have similar weapons supplied mostly by Russia,while China has larger numbers.Comparing your best to our best,equipment is roughly equal in technology.


I would broadly agree. However, the majority of modern PLA equipment are arrayed in the elite battle formations. These formations have specific set deployments that cannot be redeployed. The ones deployed/deployable against India are matched by Indian deployments. The Indian units have clear technological superiority over their PLA counterparts, have far easier a logistical chain, a more extensive C3I network, as well as integrated force-multipliers through the IAF that the Chinese cannot currently match.

Moreover, Indian Army units are trained in amongst the best institutions in the world, and all combat units -- all of them -- have the incalculable but awesome advantage of actual combat experience in both counter-terror, COIN and conventional deployments.


China's Navy's main threat is from its fast attack craft,they can be deployed in a moment's notice,are cheap and effective.

Are you joking? PLAN attack craft will traverse the entire length around the Indochina, through the busiest international shipping lanes of the Malaccas, and into the Indian ocean completely undetected and unmolested? Especially since the Indian Navy actively patrols from the Gulf to the South China sea at not only the request of the ASEAN nations, but also with the cooperation of the USN? These little ships are then to freely operate in the Bay of Bengal against India, away from bases 3000kms away?

This arguemnt can just as forcefully be made against all Chinese surface vessels. It is simply a strategic (and logistical) impossibility for PLAN ships to even operate past the Indonesian archipelago and even more so with forward IN deployments in the region. (It is similarly impossible for effective IN deployments in the south China sea, though IN has demonstrated its capability for sustained carrier operations there, off the Vietnamese coast.

The only theat against the IN from the Chinese comes from the submarine fleets, which as you stated are in terms of capability roughly equal. (India has more modern subs, but less of them.) But neither country will deploy its subs so far out of reach, when they are necessary for their roles of denial of their operatable regions.

Furthermore, any India-Chinese conflict will last an extremely short (2-3 week max) duration. As such, the majority of each country's navy will not see active conflict. Furthermore, the IN's responsibility is the denial of the Indian Ocean region from all regional and extra-regional powers, which is why it is so capable. It is an accepted fact that the IN can do this, and even the USN brass has admitted that even it would be hard pressed to operate in the IOR with a hostile IN. (USN CINCPACFLT recently said so during a press conference about the Tsunami.) The PLAN on the other hand is almost exclusively structured for operations against Taiwan.

Neither navies would compromize this core role (IOR deniability, Taiwan-straights-support respectively) by useless and ineffective forward deployments. In 10-15 years, judging how both navies are shaping up, it will be a different story.


Both are good projects,but take a look at their Chinese equivalents (Type 98 & J-10).The Arjun and LCA are produced too late to be any good when they come out in full service.The Chinese equivalents are also cheaper.


Strongly disagree on varying counts. The Arjun is already being inducted in regimental strength as we speak. Within the next two years it will reach full production capability. The Arjun is significantly superior to the Type-98s, and even superior (and more expensive!) than the T-90s that India is also inducting. The expense of the Arjun, though it remains the best tank in any conflict India may have with its neighbors, is the major limiting factor. However, it is not designed to replace the whole armored corps, but plays a specific specialized role in the complete reorganization of the IA under the "cold start" doctrine (forward-deployed cohesive battlegroups capable of high-mobility and non-set-piece deployments). The Arjun with its formidable armor and fcs will serve as the spearhead of any IA division attack, along with the T-90s, T-72s upg giving support. In terms of cost comparison with the Chinese tanks, it is a cost-utility matchup, with a more expensive Arjun and T-90 having greater capabilities.

The LCA, as I have explained in great detail in the LCA thread, will come around when the tranche 2 J-10s come out. Per-unit cost is comparable, and any disadvantage versus the PLAAF that the initial delays have caused will be made up by induction of the 125 MRCA + deep license production (most likely Mirage-2000-9s or MiG-29SMTs.) This will also fulfill the combat squadron increase in the IAF. Also, as of now, no one can make any cost-comparisons of LCA v. J-10 because there are no credible figures for per-unit cost.



India doesn't have a nuclear deterrent.Get it into your head,because India will be hoping that China doesn't nuke their asses.If India nukes China,can anyone guess what will happen? No prizes for guessing,kids

Now I know you must be joking. India doesn't have a nuclear deterrent?? I guess induction of 1-200 Agnis of various builds, to say nothing of the Prithvis, etc. already operationalized, and the weaponization of both IA and IAF units (with all IAF planes being nuclear capable) do not count as a strategic nuclear deterrant?

No doubt China has more nukes, but unlike China, India's nuclear doctrine is for credible minimum deterrance, i.e. enough nukes + platforms to deliver them to turn China into a wasteland. It doesn't matter of China can nuke India three times over. The singular destruction of the entire nation-state of the PRC is within India's capabilities. That is why no war will go nuclear, and will be limited. THAT is nuclear deterrance.



India's Allies


Neither China nor India need allies to conduct themselves in a war against the other. Even if Pakistan joins in, the very nature of the Indian numerical, technological, etc. superiority over Pakistan will negate any Pakistani response. The currently deployed forces against Pakistan are at an raw 3:1 numerical advantage, and this is not even considering IA mobility doctrine and localized strategic superiority. Pakistan simply cannot mount an offensive campaign against Inida.

And again, the whole idea of nuclear redlines in an India-China or India-Pakistan conflict will prevent the other from joining in.


Ill address more posts as soon as I get the time, later.

-Raj


[edit on 12-1-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Ok,so it is heavily fortified. But for what? Not for China,For PAKISTAN in case they attacked. India has a nuclear deterrent,i'll clear it up,but it does not have MAD. Arjun is superior to Type-98,i doubt that. Sure,it will take lots of stuff to start to take over India's fortified locations,what same goes the other way. To me,it will be a war,mostly a cyber-war and a bit of aerial activity.



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Okay lets get this straight, you're saying that in a nuclear war china could take a many as 200 nuclear warheads and still surivive??

Seriously is that what you're saying? because if theres no MAD then China should be able to survive an all out nuke attack from India...otherwise its MAD allright!!



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   
MAD is complete destruction of each other. The last time I checked China had at least three times more nukes than India and with more launch vehicles.

You can't even destroy half the cities in China with 200 nukes and we have more people in Rural areas. But I bet 600 nukes can destroy most of India's cities.

China can destroy India's economic infrastructure while India could only devastate China's, devastate not annilate.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Really... now c'mon you might regret me quoting you on this later..
you literally claim that ...

"200 nuclear warheads are NOT sufficient to destroy China??"

Well putting it the way you usually do now COWlan..

"thats TOTAL BS !!!"

You've got to be kidding me!!
200 warheads can destroy any country in the world!!

Wait Read up on this stuff:

India's nuke weapons' yield as of 1998 ..(now its 2005)

www.fisiusa.org...

www.fas.org...

Destructive power of nuclera weapons..

www.nuclearfiles.org...


Btw Carl Sagan calculated that approx 400 nukeswould be enough to raise enough dust and debris into the atmostphere to block out the sun, thus causing a 'nuclear winter'...so 200 weapons is potent enough..

The range of India's ballistic missiles is 3000km+ which encompasses all of China
Yields ranging from sub kiloton range(tactical nukes) to 1 megaton warheads are currently assumed to be in the possesion of India..



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Try it! Then we will know.

If "we" still exist.


Originally posted by Daedalus3
Really... now c'mon you might regret me quoting you on this later..
you literally claim that ...

"200 nuclear warheads are NOT sufficient to destroy China??"

Well putting it the way you usually do now COWlan..

"thats TOTAL BS !!!"

You've got to be kidding me!!
200 warheads can destroy any country in the world!!

Wait Read up on this stuff:

India's nuke weapons' yield as of 1998 ..(now its 2005)

www.fisiusa.org...

www.fas.org...

Destructive power of nuclera weapons..

www.nuclearfiles.org...


Btw Carl Sagan calculated that approx 400 nukeswould be enough to raise enough dust and debris into the atmostphere to block out the sun, thus causing a 'nuclear winter'...so 200 weapons is potent enough..

The range of India's ballistic missiles is 3000km+ which encompasses all of China
Yields ranging from sub kiloton range(tactical nukes) to 1 megaton warheads are currently assumed to be in the possesion of India..




posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 05:22 AM
link   
If 'anybody' tries it, then 'no one' will be left to see who 'exists or not'..
Thats my whole point,Iamairforce...I am not saying that chinese nuke arsenal cannot destroy India, Im merely stating that the Indian nuke aresenal can ALSO destroy china..thats the whole point of MAD..mutually assured destruction....


[edit on 22-1-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Who is Mr. 'no one'? I have no idea.
I don't think anybody around here know about him. So let it go to hell.

Originally posted by Daedalus3
If 'anybody' tries it, then 'no one' will be left to see who 'exists or not'..
Thats my whole point,Iamairforce...I am not saying that chinese nuke arsenal cannot destroy India, Im merely stating that the Indian nuke aresenal can destroy china..thats the whole point of MAD..mutually assured destruction....



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 05:52 AM
link   
right let him go to hell, as long as we understand each other...



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Wish it doesn't mean ask him back as long as we understand each other.


Originally posted by Daedalus3
right let him go to hell, as long as we understand each other...



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   
You've lost me now, what are you saying..



posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   
It's hard to say, or no way to say...
One side is nuclear wps, national proud, colorized water navy abilities, MAD, LLLLCCCCAAAA, JJJJJJ-10000, politicians.....
One side is human beings, short life, families, flowers, engineers, friends, .......






top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join