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.

 

Abhay IFV from India

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 12:30 PM
link   

More Autonomous and Diverse Within--Limits

Within-Limit of chine’s Goverment and his propagandas




posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   
The bottomline is that you refuse to believe that the Kanchan is one of the best armour out there which is fact. And wikipedia have chosen some indian sources that they percieve to be honest and respectable.

Can you post one single non-chinese article that says anything positive about chinese armour.

And i am still waiting for a link that says that the kanchan is not good.

And Russia were largely responsible for the Type-98.

and details on the chinese meida
www.jamestown.org...

millions of webistes are screened too

[edit on 10-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
The bottomline is that you refuse to believe that the Kanchan is one of the best armour out there which is fact. And wikipedia have chosen some indian sources that they percieve to be honest and respectable.


there is no facts there. i dont see test results
. you cant judge a book by its cover you need to test it out. also i dont see anything western published about the Arjun thats probaly why they choose to use indian ones.



Can you post one single non-chinese article that says anything positive about chinese armour.


we dont need to. i got proof.

cqchina.vicp.net...

cqchina.vicp.net...


wathc the video it shows a T-98 or T-96 getting hit with a HJ-8 missile. the HJ-8 has a peneration of 800mm-1000mm



And i am still waiting for a link that says that the kanchan is not good.


i already posted my link and you haven't posted any creditable ones


And Russia were largely responsible for the Type-98.


no it wasn't the T-90II was then the T-98 was even more developed and the T-98G is a development of that

as for the arjun 90% a german effort. thats why it turned out just like a leopard 2



and details on the chinese meida
www.jamestown.org...


many countries have things like that that arent exposed.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirza2003

More Autonomous and Diverse Within--Limits

Within-Limit of chine’s Goverment and his propagandas



Its a CIA report



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Perhap's its almost time to put this thread to rest ?

Dallas



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
you cant judge a book by its cover you need to test it out.

Thw wikipedia article just said that the Kanchan was tested against all kinds of ammo the Arjun is likely to face.and obviosuly it was a sucess.



i already posted my link and you haven't posted any creditable ones

Even the data on that homepage imply that the Arjun has got one of the best armout out there.

And if you discredit wikipedia, god save your chinese links


as for the arjun 90% a german effort. thats why it turned out just like a leopard 2


99% of chinese weaponry is plagerised and copied. and Russia were responsible for 95% of the Type-98 and Israel 4.9%



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Thw wikipedia article just said that the Kanchan was tested against all kinds of ammo the Arjun is likely to face.and obviosuly it was a sucess.


it said ammo that it was going to face. pakistani 105mm or its going to be stationed somewhere far away from action




Even the data on that homepage imply that the Arjun has got one of the best armout out there.

And if you discredit wikipedia, god save your chinese links


no its doesn't i implyed that it should be left far from action, maybe that the turrnet off and use it to tow tanks.

i didn't discredit wikipedia i decredited hindu times.



99% of chinese weaponry is plagerised and copied. and Russia were responsible for 95% of the Type-98 and Israel 4.9%


nope maybe 40%.

anyhow nothing in the indian armoury is indian. all imported because of the sad state of the indian nation

what russian help in the T-98 or israeli help



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
The India media is more credible than Xinhua or any other news agency..
What they "choose" to publish is their wish..
They are INDIAN afterall..
See... there are indian sources and there are chinese sources..
And then there are western sources...
Bias will ALWAYS be there..



No indain site is creditable when talking about indians. Xinhua is more creditable
than hindu times or india today.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite


anyhow nothing in the indian armoury is indian. all imported because of the sad state of the indian nation




??!

Where did that come from.. Maybe it was just a knee-jerk to what SS said about
99% of the chinese stuff..


Gosh.. knee-jerks all around..




posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Where did that come from.. Maybe it was just a knee-jerk to what SS said about
99% of the chinese stuff..



i can post a whole bunch of thins that are chinese made and in service. chinese designed chiense used and chinese made



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite


No indain site is creditable when talking about indians. Xinhua is more creditable
than hindu times or india today.


According to whom??
You??!! Are you credible??!
Or did you get from another "credible" source?!

If so.. who is to say that source is credible??!

I've found major shortcomings in sites like FAS and global security.. Esp. when it comes to India and maybe you've felt the same with its material on china..
NOTHING is credible on this planet..Its all biased and relative..



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   
well according to you. you find hindu times more creditable but i find xinhua more creditable.

globalsecruity is probaly the most un-bias site. is it bias because it shows india in a bad light? not everyone can paint india like the picture in your head


[edit on 11-7-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   
wikipedia itself belives that those sources are creditable and used them. do you presume that you are a higher authority than one of the best online encyclopedia's ??

we can talk all that we want....but everyone knows the ground reality about India and China and the state of their media.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
wikipedia itself belives that those sources are creditable and used them. do you presume that you are a higher authority than one of the best online encyclopedia's ??

is there any western sources about the arjun. thats why they used indian last resort.


we can talk all that we want....but everyone knows the ground reality about India and China and the state of their media.


everytime we argue about something you bring up chians media. why is that you have nothing else to say except that.

and you dont know the reality of chinese media because you have never read seem heard been read expereniced chiense life. thats why your opinion is worth nothing.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:09 AM
link   
the T-98 is based on the T-90II

here is a short thing about the T-90II design

The Type 90-II is not a totally new design with around 45% of its components coming from current designs. This can be broken down as follows: 10% from the Type 59, 15% from the Type 69, and 20% from the Type 85/88C; the remaining 55% being new components.


T-90II




T-98



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:11 AM
link   
like your openion changes anything about the Kanchan armour...



and moreover if you see properly, the article is authored by wikipedia and the others are only links it provides if someone wants more info....it is not like wikipedia used these as sources to write its articles as you wrongly claim....those links give news on the arjun's deployment that's all....check them out for yourself...and those links given by wikipedia dont contain a drop about the Kanchan armour.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   
there were four sources but the last one didn't work. i dont think they publish things from general knowledge. anything western published about the arjun.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
No journalist gets to take control and test out a new tank. Everything is based on what the government gives out.

Did any journalist ever test out the F-22 ?? .. all the articles out there are from data that are declassified by the government.

and i just showed you what the official indian govt. website had to say about the kanchan.

claiming that the government press release does not satisfy you is just like saying that all those CIA links you have posted are woth nothing.

and the data from your homepage also imply that the arjun has one of the best armour out there.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 03:06 AM
link   
yes but americans are believeable hindu times is not.

i can show you a offical chiense website on tibet.

you acknowledge the fact that the LAVI has nothing do do with the J-10 because of offical israeli denials and i will acknowledge the arjun



claiming that the government press release does not satisfy you is just like saying that all those CIA links you have posted are woth nothing.


india might have demoracy bbut its diffinently not at the american stage of free speech.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

and the data from your homepage also imply that the arjun has one of the best armour out there.


no it does not




top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join