The amrikis are going to sell the porkies very advanced weapons (but things they are not avraid will be copied by China). Their next step will be to offer India even more advanced wapons.
Now India will be in a fix. If India rejects amriki stuff, it will be technically at disadvantage. If India purchases then it will be at unkis mercy.
It is a cruel game. The amrikis want to screw both Indians and porkies.
India is one of the larges purchasers of military hardware. Thanks to DRDO and the rest of defence PSU's, India does not have acess to indignious hardware, but is self relient in visionary equipment. Even simple things like rifles, bullets and artillery has to be imported. The call of the hour is to restructure PSU's to start producing useful stuff. They have to be made accountable for what they do and the pay must reflect the tallent.
This hurts us, but I believe it is the simple truth.
Strategic Implications of India's ABM Test -2
Not that VIjay J needs any help or anyhting, but let me offer my interpretation of what he said.Sadler wrote:Hi Vijay, Do you have some kinda inside track on these matters?? Time and again, i find your statements to be bombastic (no offence), but if one assumes that you are on the know, they do not seem that way afterall.
I think he meant something along these lines:
- Anything America gives Packees will be propmptly leaked to the Chinese.
- The Americans are not dumb. They know this.
- Ergo, they will not give Packees independent care and custody of any advanced weapons they give them. (MR's editorial comment: And BTW, let's be clear about this -- there is not going to be any "sale" here, it's going to be a gift).
- Thus the Paks will not be able actually to use those weapons in any way not approved by America.
There is a sea of difference between what from outside looks like a "state-of-the-art F-16", and the actual parts that go inside it.Sadler wrote:The array of weapons that the US is providing to these porkis is fairly "high" quality. And negates the above statement. The US has supplied the porkis with what were then state-of-the-art F-16s.Vijay J wrote: The point I was trying to make with Captain Hali was that America will not allow very high quality weapons to fall into the hands of an Army that uses Islam as a vehicle for its militarism.
There might be something the BRF archives, but I am not sure about it. There was indeed a plan, a bit similar to Osirak that India was about to carry out. The only problem was there wasn't much of an Osirak to really bomb.I am guessing that the only reason India did not do an Osirak on the porkis was a healthy respect for those F-16s. Or do you know something that others dont?
TOW and AWACS aren't really weapons that will turn the war inside out for you - i.e. not strategic weapons. After all a TOW is merely a high speed bomb.What about the TOW AT missiles? What about the AWACS suite?Vijay J wrote: The Americans will supply Pakistan with patriots that do not really work, and then they will make sure that the Pakistanis do not find out that these patriots do not work.
Ever since they started to hold the keys to US $100 billion in the American economy, and much more in the world economy.Since when did the US give a damn about a bunch of dead hindus??
Sadler,
Beyond a point escalation is too risky for the Americans. The American desperation to avoid war was put on full display during Parakram. If they had wanted to see a fight they wouldn't have taken all that trouble to talk to the pakistanis abou Gen. Vij's walk in the dark. The know how much the Pakistanis fear the dark.
It is anyone's guess if they will be this determined to avoid war in the future, but right now this the way it is.
Back then Pakistan wasn't as islamised or had as much "over friendship with China" as it has today. Those state of the art F-16s were kept on a very tight leash. The Pakistanis never had enough spares on them to train significantly. This forced the uniquely pakistani innovation where they ran to the UAE and Turks and offered all sorts of things for training hours on their F-16s. Today because of all those MMA Osama friendship rallies, everything Americans have to watch what they do with Pakistan very carefully.
Test pieces of weapons and bulk orders are two different things. It is not about Hindus. The Americans don't care about Hindus at all. It is about not arming a potential adversary. Remember if everything else fails, from the American perspective, there is also the Ojhri option.
No such thing as an inside track, just an understanding of history. The booming tone is deliberate, a ruse to get attention. It has no information content.
Captain Hali is okay he is actually quite knowledgeable, you just have to see past the Pakistani Punjabi bumpkin show that he puts on. The Pakistanis are naturals at drama. If there was no border, they would all have high paying careers in Bollywood. Hali is Pakistani and he is proud of that, I see no shame in that. This as opposed to say Gohar Ayub, now that my friend, is one real piece of work. Sitting through Gohar Ayub's essays in narcisscism is one endurance test I would not wish upon anyone. The only thing Gohar hates more than us Indians is his fellow Pakistanis.
We live in a strange world, where the words enemy and friend do not necessarily imply the same connotations as common usage and it is polite to listen.
Beyond a point escalation is too risky for the Americans. The American desperation to avoid war was put on full display during Parakram. If they had wanted to see a fight they wouldn't have taken all that trouble to talk to the pakistanis abou Gen. Vij's walk in the dark. The know how much the Pakistanis fear the dark.
It is anyone's guess if they will be this determined to avoid war in the future, but right now this the way it is.
Back then Pakistan wasn't as islamised or had as much "over friendship with China" as it has today. Those state of the art F-16s were kept on a very tight leash. The Pakistanis never had enough spares on them to train significantly. This forced the uniquely pakistani innovation where they ran to the UAE and Turks and offered all sorts of things for training hours on their F-16s. Today because of all those MMA Osama friendship rallies, everything Americans have to watch what they do with Pakistan very carefully.
Test pieces of weapons and bulk orders are two different things. It is not about Hindus. The Americans don't care about Hindus at all. It is about not arming a potential adversary. Remember if everything else fails, from the American perspective, there is also the Ojhri option.
No such thing as an inside track, just an understanding of history. The booming tone is deliberate, a ruse to get attention. It has no information content.
Captain Hali is okay he is actually quite knowledgeable, you just have to see past the Pakistani Punjabi bumpkin show that he puts on. The Pakistanis are naturals at drama. If there was no border, they would all have high paying careers in Bollywood. Hali is Pakistani and he is proud of that, I see no shame in that. This as opposed to say Gohar Ayub, now that my friend, is one real piece of work. Sitting through Gohar Ayub's essays in narcisscism is one endurance test I would not wish upon anyone. The only thing Gohar hates more than us Indians is his fellow Pakistanis.
We live in a strange world, where the words enemy and friend do not necessarily imply the same connotations as common usage and it is polite to listen.
Sadler,
Let me see if I can do this right the first time.
A JDAM is an option when the regime enjoys credibility with the Jihadis. For this option to actually work as a deterrent, the Jihadis have to agree to pretend to be part of the regimes nuclear option, without actually having a nuclear bomb in their physical possession. The Jihadis have to prove that they are capable of conducting infiltration irrespective of the personal costs and they have to showcase an irrationality that the JDAM relies on. That means they have to be willing to take the horrific random beatings that happen in this peculiar line of work. They have to be willing to certainly die just so that the regime can pretend to have a nuclear option. It is a lot to ask of anyone, even those as psychologically screened and preindoctrinated as the Jihadis.
Only then is the JDAM a credible option.
If the regime in power does not enjoy credibility with the Islamists. Then there is no interest in the Jihadi rank and file to conduct any operations to prove that they are capable of infiltration. A likely but risky scenario here is that if a regime is losing credibility with the Islamists, the Jihadis will agree to conducting token acts of infiltration to project the regime's nuclear prowess only in exchange for a greater control over nuclear weapons themselves. In some sense a system like this with a regime of weakening credibility could only stabilise with a change in ownership of the big bomb.
Where the JDAM remains credible, the ABM is insufficient to project a viable deterrent by itself. Technology sharing should not encourage a false sense of security. Deterrence in my opinion is about self reliance, and careful self-evaluation.
Let me see if I can do this right the first time.
A JDAM is an option when the regime enjoys credibility with the Jihadis. For this option to actually work as a deterrent, the Jihadis have to agree to pretend to be part of the regimes nuclear option, without actually having a nuclear bomb in their physical possession. The Jihadis have to prove that they are capable of conducting infiltration irrespective of the personal costs and they have to showcase an irrationality that the JDAM relies on. That means they have to be willing to take the horrific random beatings that happen in this peculiar line of work. They have to be willing to certainly die just so that the regime can pretend to have a nuclear option. It is a lot to ask of anyone, even those as psychologically screened and preindoctrinated as the Jihadis.
Only then is the JDAM a credible option.
If the regime in power does not enjoy credibility with the Islamists. Then there is no interest in the Jihadi rank and file to conduct any operations to prove that they are capable of infiltration. A likely but risky scenario here is that if a regime is losing credibility with the Islamists, the Jihadis will agree to conducting token acts of infiltration to project the regime's nuclear prowess only in exchange for a greater control over nuclear weapons themselves. In some sense a system like this with a regime of weakening credibility could only stabilise with a change in ownership of the big bomb.
Where the JDAM remains credible, the ABM is insufficient to project a viable deterrent by itself. Technology sharing should not encourage a false sense of security. Deterrence in my opinion is about self reliance, and careful self-evaluation.
Rishirishi wrote:The amrikis are going to sell the porkies very advanced weapons (but things they are not avraid will be copied by China). Their next step will be to offer India even more advanced wapons.
Now India will be in a fix. If India rejects amriki stuff, it will be technically at disadvantage. If India purchases then it will be at unkis mercy.
It is a cruel game. The amrikis want to screw both Indians and porkies.
India is one of the larges purchasers of military hardware. Thanks to DRDO and the rest of defence PSU's, India does not have acess to indignious hardware, but is self relient in visionary equipment. Even simple things like rifles, bullets and artillery has to be imported. The call of the hour is to restructure PSU's to start producing useful stuff. They have to be made accountable for what they do and the pay must reflect the tallent.
This hurts us, but I believe it is the simple truth.
There is no point in trying to point out the facts as after all it is "your belief". As incorrect as it is.
-
Rishirishi
- BRFite
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30
India spends some 5 to 10 billion dollars on hardware purchases.There is no point in trying to point out the facts as after all it is "your belief". As incorrect as it is.
Please give us a list of USABLE world class weapons that DRDO and the likes produce. I am not talking of licence production.
No other contry spends so much on arms without makeing useful stuff them selfs.
And it will continue to do so, unless it ramps up spending on local R&D by many factors.Rishirishi wrote:JCage wrote:There is no point in trying to point out the facts as after all it is "your belief". As incorrect as it is.India spends some 5 to 10 billion dollars on hardware purchases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDOPlease give us a list of USABLE world class weapons that DRDO and the likes produce. I am not talking of licence production.'
Kindly go through the entire article. Which btw, does not even address DRDOs work inmaterial sciences [PDF], or the separate projects of organizations such as BEL and ECIL.
Oh please. No other country has Indias threat requirements and quixotic penny wise pound foolish policies either.No other contry spends so much on arms without makeing useful stuff them selfs.
Last edited by JCage on 14 Dec 2006 19:57, edited 1 time in total.
Ah, but Rishirishi told us last time that world reknowned journals have called the INSAS bad, and so it must be. I must have missed that when I talked to the folks from MLI who were quite happy with the rifle. Or for that matter even comments by RayC and Abhisham on this very forum, and archived to boot. I do hope that this time, folks use more rationality and realize that no Army, especially the Indian Army will standardize on a battle rifle unless it meets stringent user requirements.Vijay J wrote:>> Please give us a list of USABLE world class weapons that DRDO and the likes produce. I am not talking of licence production.
Even Captain Hali knows about INSAS.
As regards Hali, his dimaak is totally khaali. Hali is the kind of Pakistani braggart who actually believes that if he writes some bile, it becomes true. To which I say- dear beta Hali, has Pakistan even made one radar of its own design, for its services? India has made five- even more, considering variants. Etc, etc. Its a bloody joke, when the likes of Hali even talk about India & Pak in the same breath, but then I realize- this guy made command position in the PAF. And in that vein, I do hope: " May the PAF have many many more Halis".
-
Subramaniam
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 27 Mar 2005 19:01
-
Rishirishi
- BRFite
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30
Went though the article. It is basically a long list of the failed DRDO projetc, A few subsystems and of course the INSAShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDO
Kindly go through the entire article. Which btw, does not even address DRDOs work in material sciences [PDF], or the separate projects of organizations such as BEL and ECIL
It has a rather "dubious" reputation. Not comparable to the best in the world.Hardly any arms is exported from India, Appart from some Insas weapons sold to Nepal (whom got them for a discount and are unhapy with them).
So basically a lot of talk and little results.
High time the PSU's were restructured and a new approach taken. The GOI should send a study group to the US defence department to understand how they engage the private sector within the arms industy. Also worth noting is that the private sector is much better at using the R&D within civilian use. To a great degree US inc can thank the defence related R&D to their sucess.
Rishirishi wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDO
Kindly go through the entire article. Which btw, does not even address DRDOs work in material sciences [PDF], or the separate projects of organizations such as BEL and ECILWent though the article. It is basically a long list of the failed DRDO projetc,
Its obvious that you didnt even read what the article catalogues.
Five radar variants in service, including one of which 1176 have been ordered and delivered. An equal number of EW projects all completed, Multiple sonar designs, MBRS and you have the gall to speak of a "long list of failed projects" without even a basic understanding of the topic.
This is a last attempt to knock some sense, when you speak of "usable systems" :
All of India's warships use Indian made sonars- APSOH, now supplanted by HUMSA, HUMVAAD Variable depth sonar, now Nagan towed array sonar. Kilo class subs have the USHUS sonar and Panchendriya FCS. The Dhruv has the Mihir dunking sonar.
India's standard RWR is the Tarang- started with the 125 MiG21 Bisons , its MiG-27 upgrades (40) and Jaguars (40 upg + 37 new build) all rely on critical DRDO-HAL avionics as the heart of the avionics, its MKIs also use the same, including state of the art mission computers and display processors. The MiG-27s use Tusker jamming pods, and the MKIs the HADF ones. The IAF uses DRDO made elint systems on dedicated aircraft. The Navy's Tu-142's, Ka-25's and Do-228's all use DRDO ESM systems. The Navy's destroyers use the Ajanta ESM system. The new Naval ships use the Ellora ESM plus ECM system. The Army ordered and has received both Sujav ESM and Safari IED suprressive jammers for convoy protection in numbers.
The Indian Air Force has 30 Indra-1's, six Indra-2's, and seven state of the art planar array 3D Central Acquisition radars on order being delibvered by a consortium of DRDO, DPSU and private sector partners. The Army has more Indra-1's and 2's. The Army ordered and received 1176 BFSR-SRs from BEL of DRDO design. This is not even counting in the other projects which are underway.
Coming to communication equipment and C3I, the DRDO developed and supplied data extractors for the AREN, the standard Army combat radio for all its armoured vehicles- the freq hopping, encrypted CNR, the VLF facility for IN subs, as well as satcom equipment. All of which has been ordered in bulk. BEL states orders are for the 100's of crores. The IAF's air defence zones depend on DRDO software to link the ST-68U's with additional 2D radars for sensor fusion. The IN's latest ships such as the Beas, also use the BEL-DRDO EMCCA for mission control and ship command and control. The Army has ordered the Shakti Artillery command and control system from BEL, which is of DRDO design.
The Army has ordered 2 regiments of the Pinaka MBRS, to add to the one in service, and with more to be ordered for each coming five year plan. The Navy has already given clearance for bulk production of the AE Torpedo for fitment to its choppers as well as for light ship carriage.
Non glamourous bread and butter items for the Army, including stuff like MREs for Siachen and HAPO bags because of which this year Siachen had no deaths whatsoever.
The Navy's Aircraft carrier is being built using DMRL steel, ditto for several of its newer designs. Advanced alloys for most projects are now made within India, thanks to the DRDO and other associated orgs who do the research and development work.
And most importantly, DRDO has delivered on the ballistic missile front. 54 Prithvi-IIs were ordered by the AF this year itself. Agni-1 and 2 are in service.
DRDO cannot even specify most of the above thanks to the archaic Official Secrets act, which the media uses to its full advantage. But this forum runs on information.
The above is merely the tip of an iceberg. Nor all DPSUs laggards- BEL has an substantial record of local R&D. In contrast, the OFB has lagged far behind.
Specifications for most of these systems are available if you dig for them. They meet worldwide standards, and they were meant to, because they were cleared after competitive bidding by companies such as Thales and IAI.
Its also obvious that a single DRDO cannot meet the staggering needs of the Indian services - even the org. itself states that, what talk of blaming them for a lack of 100% vertical integration! Blame the MOD then for not sanctioning that level of investment in domestic R&D.
For that matter DRDO has ALSO had significant delays in critical projects such as the Trishul project; BUT nor does it mean that they havent succeeded in other areas. In several fields, they have delivered in spades. And this despite the fact, that by worldwide standards, much of the funding allocated to them is peanuts and all their structural problems- bureaucracy, low pay, manpower attrition, etc.
What talk of full vertical integration within India then! You need funding commensurate with your ambitions.
BR does not run on your flawed perceptions. A senior officer and several folks who have fired the rifle have spoken well of it, and its good enough. I have spoken to a cross section of officers and soldiers from various regiments, and their opinions were likewise.A few subsystems and of course the INSAS
More apples to oranges ..sigh...whats the point in even making you understand. One, India's official policy- all these years, bar the past couple- was NOT to export arms, bar small arms, and that too with strict end user confirmation, so where is the question of exports? Second, coming to Nepal- even the Indian Army states that their claims on the INSAS are ludicrous and politically motivated, and conducted an extensive live fire test to prove the point. Third, most of India's critical homegrown systems are NOT available for export, these include Naval EW systems, sonars, and high end radars- all of which were developed specifically for the Indian services, who dont want their technical and operating specifications made public.Hardly any arms is exported from India, Appart from some Insas weapons sold to Nepal (whom got them for a discount and are unhapy with them).
We are not referring to your post here.So basically a lot of talk and little results.
High time the PSU's were restructured and a new approach taken. The GOI should send a study group to the US defence department to understand how they engage the private sector within the arms industy. Also worth noting is that the private sector is much better at using the R&D within civilian use. To a great degree US inc can thank the defence related R&D to their sucess.
Oh another chai-biscoot delegation eh?
The DRDO and its organizations have the private sector deeply integrated in their projects- something which is well known to most who post on the forum, and from the immense amount of data available on the topic.
**I fully understand you will not grasp any of the above. You will return with the same old hackneyed stuff about PSU restructuring, bad products, this and that. Which is exactly why I stated it is your *belief* and it matters little whether you change it or not. However, it is also essential that the record be laid straight despite your erroneous belief, and the above post is entirely in that light, for I dont think that you will even admit that you were mistaken**
Last edited by JCage on 15 Dec 2006 03:58, edited 5 times in total.
There were articles as recent as last week, that stated the GoI was allowing Indian MNCs to work on Indian defence projects -- L&T and Tata were two names mentioned, IIRC.
Anyone who thinks complicated technology of any kind happens cheaply and fastly, in the presence of bugdet cuts, political ill-will, lack of people, international santions etc, needs a reality check. With increasing privatization, and if the GoI ever manages to get its act together in the Education sector, there will be more Indian people and companies who can add value to DRDO projects. Why the frig does one need to send a delegation to the DOD to figure such things out?
Anyone who thinks complicated technology of any kind happens cheaply and fastly, in the presence of bugdet cuts, political ill-will, lack of people, international santions etc, needs a reality check. With increasing privatization, and if the GoI ever manages to get its act together in the Education sector, there will be more Indian people and companies who can add value to DRDO projects. Why the frig does one need to send a delegation to the DOD to figure such things out?
... however, such "understanding" may be injurious to one's health ...The articles actually speak of L&T and TATA's SED getting the same level of treatment any PSU has in terms of access to tech. Ie the GOI is basically nominating two firms to be on equal footing with BEL, ECIL, HAL etc- which is a good first step.Rye wrote:There were articles as recent as last week, that stated the GoI was allowing Indian MNCs to work on Indian defence projects -- L&T and Tata were two names mentioned, IIRC.
Anyone who thinks complicated technology of any kind happens cheaply and fastly, in the presence of bugdet cuts, political ill-will, lack of people, international santions etc, needs a reality check. With increasing privatization, and if the GoI ever manages to get its act together in the Education sector, there will be more Indian people and companies who can add value to DRDO projects. Why the frig does one need to send a delegation to the DOD to figure such things out?
But both firms have been working on DRDO projects for decades. TATA's SED, easily for 2-3 decades now. L&T is even building the hull for the Nuke sub project.
The private sector is neck deep into defence production in India, as component and subsystem manufacturers- eg Agni motors are built by the private sector, after TOT by DRDO. On the other end of the scale, you have fire detection and suppression systems, to even warship grade steel. New projects such as the Brahmos also involve the private sector.
He was here to ceremoniously receive the first airframe section of BrahMos from the Chairman of Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Company, J.N. Godrej. About 20 Indian and seven Russian companies are making critical systems for the missile.
Ideally the private sector should get into large scale system design and integration, but bar L&T and TATAs SED, (and the software design houses, for..well software)- other firms havent ponied up the money for that kind of infra. investment, so the GOI is also waiting and watching.
Hi Mr. Vijay:
Thank you for your first post (and second as well). We "exchanged" views on the JDAM part sometime ago, and since then i have tried to pay somewhat closer attention to your posts in the hope of learning your views a bit more.
I still dont agree with your JDAM scenarios. Underlying your JDAM scenarios is LOGIC, which is not a strong suit of the mohammads - whether porki or persian. The only act, IMO, that will deter a JDAM is to attack the very rationale of the J, which is that islam will survive even if the country initiating the JDAM (whether the porkis or the persians) are destroyed in retaliation. For did not allah promise them 72 virgin virgins/goats? I am afraid we will probably not see eye to eye on that issue.
Thank you for some wonderful posts, though. Jai Hind and Shalom.
Thank you for your first post (and second as well). We "exchanged" views on the JDAM part sometime ago, and since then i have tried to pay somewhat closer attention to your posts in the hope of learning your views a bit more.
I still dont agree with your JDAM scenarios. Underlying your JDAM scenarios is LOGIC, which is not a strong suit of the mohammads - whether porki or persian. The only act, IMO, that will deter a JDAM is to attack the very rationale of the J, which is that islam will survive even if the country initiating the JDAM (whether the porkis or the persians) are destroyed in retaliation. For did not allah promise them 72 virgin virgins/goats? I am afraid we will probably not see eye to eye on that issue.
Thank you for some wonderful posts, though. Jai Hind and Shalom.
JCage: I am one of those whose knowledge of Indian military arsenals and systems comes almost exclusively from BRF, where you and others have done a great job.JCage wrote: And this despite the fact, that by worldwide standards, much of the funding allocated to them is peanuts and all their structural problems- bureaucracy, low pay, manpower attrition, etc.
What talk of full vertical integration within India then! You need funding commensurate with your ambitions.
The question: Moving forward, do you believe, India is at a stage, where DRDO can be split up into as a rule of thumb DR and DO. DR still being under government control but DO, that is the engineering to production cycle being privatized completely.
One way would be to split DO into a dozen separate companies and sell them to private Indian dominated bidders. Much easier for someone to acquire something with a product, infrastructure and sales rather than start from scratch. What better way to get more funding to these DO entities than integration into the Indian public markets? What better way to get the military to allocate funds towards these private companies, where a "natural" vendor-customer accountability cycle is created.
The last defense budget, if my memory serves right was about 2.8% of GDP - to properly fund all the projects we need to do, may need closer to 4% funding - I just do not think, that would be happenning, even with the most patriotic governments in place.
I understand that most defense research is done by private companies in the west, something for which India may be not be ready for but in concept, is it not best to have a hydra headed defense industry instead of one behemoth such as the DRDO - your thoughts?
I agree with Sadler. I too thought (IMVHO admittedly) that Vijay J's posts were a tad unrealistically rational when applied to the jihadi worldview. I'd further expressed the possibility that the porkis and their patrons will happily ignore the strat implications of the ABM test and pretend as if nothing happened in all their dealings with TSP because it suits all the players involved. No chance of Mush getting deposed by another fauji on the basis of the ABM test because he too would be in similar dire straits.Sadler wrote:Hi Mr. Vijay:
Thank you for your first post (and second as well). We "exchanged" views on the JDAM part sometime ago, and since then i have tried to pay somewhat closer attention to your posts in the hope of learning your views a bit more.
I still dont agree with your JDAM scenarios. Underlying your JDAM scenarios is LOGIC, which is not a strong suit of the mohammads - whether porki or persian. The only act, IMO, that will deter a JDAM is to attack the very rationale of the J, which is that islam will survive even if the country initiating the JDAM (whether the porkis or the persians) are destroyed in retaliation. For did not allah promise them 72 virgin virgins/goats? I am afraid we will probably not see eye to eye on that issue.
Thank you for some wonderful posts, though. Jai Hind and Shalom.
Anyway, these opinions are a dime a dozen. Each to his own, I guess.
sorry, couldn't help this ...
however, IMO, R&D are two peas in a pod ... separating production is not the same as separating development ...
good idea ... however, if DODO were split into DO and DO that will more than double productivity with each arm DOing more ...ShauryaT wrote:The question: Moving forward, do you believe, India is at a stage, where DRDO can be split up into as a rule of thumb DR and DO.
however, IMO, R&D are two peas in a pod ... separating production is not the same as separating development ...
Last edited by Alok_N on 15 Dec 2006 08:03, edited 1 time in total.
Indians are civilized people. They dont clamour destrution on such scale ,beside there is no need to declare this kind of threat in public. If forced to make choice , the decision to do such thing will always be at our own convenience. Let islamists provide the necessary impetus to make the mind of kafirs.vsudhir wrote:I agree with Sadler. I too thought (IMVHO admittedly) that Vijay J's posts were a tad unrealistically rational when applied to the jihadi worldview. I'd further expressed the possibility that the porkis and their patrons will happily ignore the strat implications of the ABM test and pretend as if nothing happened in all their dealings with TSP because it suits all the players involved. No chance of Mush getting deposed by another fauji on the basis of the ABM test because he too would be in similar dire straits.Sadler wrote:Hi Mr. Vijay:
Thank you for your first post (and second as well). We "exchanged" views on the JDAM part sometime ago, and since then i have tried to pay somewhat closer attention to your posts in the hope of learning your views a bit more.
I still dont agree with your JDAM scenarios. Underlying your JDAM scenarios is LOGIC, which is not a strong suit of the mohammads - whether porki or persian. The only act, IMO, that will deter a JDAM is to attack the very rationale of the J, which is that islam will survive even if the country initiating the JDAM (whether the porkis or the persians) are destroyed in retaliation. For did not allah promise them 72 virgin virgins/goats? I am afraid we will probably not see eye to eye on that issue.
Thank you for some wonderful posts, though. Jai Hind and Shalom.
Anyway, these opinions are a dime a dozen. Each to his own, I guess.
JDAM is not an option. Too costly for Bakistan materially and spiritually.
Last edited by JCage on 15 Dec 2006 08:24, edited 1 time in total.
Sadler,
The "illogic" espoused by the people who control the Jihadis is a deliberate ruse.
It is similar to the news reports that Nixon used to deliberately leak into the media in the 1970s, stories that portrayed him as an unpredictable crazy person that would "wake up in the middle of the night and play with the big red button".
Demonstrating an apparently illogical nature is part of the deterrence game and you are right in saying that for deterrence reasons one might project what is apparently an equally irrational image. That is certainly one of the accepted ways of doing it.
The average Abdul who is the cannon fodder of the Jihadi machine is indeed brainwashed to the point where he thinks suicide is a rational choice. This is a testimony to the high quality of Islamist indoctrination, it has been engineered to the point that it can take almost anyone man, woman or child and turn them into a deadly weapon. Few other psychological conditioning program can boast of such success, barring the American ones in the sixties, I doubt anyone even has comparable results but the American emphasis on democratic illusions makes it impossible to openly discuss their results.
But the Maulana who orders Abdul to die for Islam is someone who only makes apparently irrational sounding noises in public speeches. The Mullah is perfectly willing to ask others to die for Islam. He is not really interested in making any supreme sacrifices for Islam otherwise he would already be dead.
This also applies to a person who is walking around in a suit and tie and claiming to hold the Mullahs and their Jihadis back.
I want to stress the words "apparently illogical" in the above write up. This refers to the part of irrationality that is an illusion. There is however a real irrationality in human behaviour.
All human nature in fact is only apparently logical, i.e. human beings are psychologically complicated. The rationality of their actions can only be understood after a deeper understanding of their circumstances and for the most part a greater portion of their actions seem like whims and often harmless irrationalities.
The entire rule in the deterrence game is to project whatever imagery you want to project into the minds of the adversary so as to induce a rational choice regime. The idea is not to provoke a very real irrationality or lend wings to irrational aspirations of the adversary.
What this means is that every deterrence related communication has to be very carefully considered before it is made.
You have to evaluate what you are saying or doing and the impact it will have on the minds of the adversary before you say it.
Incorrect assumptions and generalisations have no place in this evaluation and the evaluation has to be sensitive to the details of who you are talking to.
In my opinion statements like "logic is not the strong suite of Mohammedans" is an irrational generalisation that can be used in public discourse if the intention is to display that you are capable of as much irrational thinking as your Mohammedan enemies, but this particular statement has no value when it comes to actually determining the state of mind of a particular mohammedan who may have his finger on the button.
If someone is basing their evaluation of the adversary on such an idea, then the evaluation will be disconnected from reality.
From what I do know of the worlds beyond the reach of a camera. The statements of nobodies are seen as positions in the debate on the deterrence issue and not as actual statements of actual changes in the deterrence posture.
The rules of deterrence demand that only the person with his or her finger on the button matters when it comes to determining whether the posture needs to be changed.
In my opinion the existance of multiple deterrence relationships between multiple powers helps keep this norm in place. No leader of any power wants to be seen as someone who cannot keep his word or worse as someone who has others making decisions for him. Unlike the Non-Proliferation norms, which are fake, this norm is real and its survival is actually enhanced by an increase in the number of nuclear armed states.
The "illogic" espoused by the people who control the Jihadis is a deliberate ruse.
It is similar to the news reports that Nixon used to deliberately leak into the media in the 1970s, stories that portrayed him as an unpredictable crazy person that would "wake up in the middle of the night and play with the big red button".
Demonstrating an apparently illogical nature is part of the deterrence game and you are right in saying that for deterrence reasons one might project what is apparently an equally irrational image. That is certainly one of the accepted ways of doing it.
The average Abdul who is the cannon fodder of the Jihadi machine is indeed brainwashed to the point where he thinks suicide is a rational choice. This is a testimony to the high quality of Islamist indoctrination, it has been engineered to the point that it can take almost anyone man, woman or child and turn them into a deadly weapon. Few other psychological conditioning program can boast of such success, barring the American ones in the sixties, I doubt anyone even has comparable results but the American emphasis on democratic illusions makes it impossible to openly discuss their results.
But the Maulana who orders Abdul to die for Islam is someone who only makes apparently irrational sounding noises in public speeches. The Mullah is perfectly willing to ask others to die for Islam. He is not really interested in making any supreme sacrifices for Islam otherwise he would already be dead.
This also applies to a person who is walking around in a suit and tie and claiming to hold the Mullahs and their Jihadis back.
I want to stress the words "apparently illogical" in the above write up. This refers to the part of irrationality that is an illusion. There is however a real irrationality in human behaviour.
All human nature in fact is only apparently logical, i.e. human beings are psychologically complicated. The rationality of their actions can only be understood after a deeper understanding of their circumstances and for the most part a greater portion of their actions seem like whims and often harmless irrationalities.
The entire rule in the deterrence game is to project whatever imagery you want to project into the minds of the adversary so as to induce a rational choice regime. The idea is not to provoke a very real irrationality or lend wings to irrational aspirations of the adversary.
What this means is that every deterrence related communication has to be very carefully considered before it is made.
You have to evaluate what you are saying or doing and the impact it will have on the minds of the adversary before you say it.
Incorrect assumptions and generalisations have no place in this evaluation and the evaluation has to be sensitive to the details of who you are talking to.
In my opinion statements like "logic is not the strong suite of Mohammedans" is an irrational generalisation that can be used in public discourse if the intention is to display that you are capable of as much irrational thinking as your Mohammedan enemies, but this particular statement has no value when it comes to actually determining the state of mind of a particular mohammedan who may have his finger on the button.
If someone is basing their evaluation of the adversary on such an idea, then the evaluation will be disconnected from reality.
From what I do know of the worlds beyond the reach of a camera. The statements of nobodies are seen as positions in the debate on the deterrence issue and not as actual statements of actual changes in the deterrence posture.
The rules of deterrence demand that only the person with his or her finger on the button matters when it comes to determining whether the posture needs to be changed.
In my opinion the existance of multiple deterrence relationships between multiple powers helps keep this norm in place. No leader of any power wants to be seen as someone who cannot keep his word or worse as someone who has others making decisions for him. Unlike the Non-Proliferation norms, which are fake, this norm is real and its survival is actually enhanced by an increase in the number of nuclear armed states.
VSudhir,
You are correct when you say
This may be okay to Musharraf, but not everyone's interests are likely to be as well protected as his. This is in the nature of things, the pecking order in Pakistan, everyone can't be the president and COAS of Pakistan otherwise Pakistan will be a nation of Presidents and COASs.
As long as there is a perceptable difference between Musharraf and his peers. There will be an incentive for someone to seek his removal.
As long there was a credibility associated with Musharraf's ability to publicly flash the deterrent, there was a reason for people not to remove him from power. Removing him from power would create too much flux and invite escalations inimical to Pakistan.
If you take away Musharraf's ability to publicly flash the deterrent you take away the little epaulette on his shoulder. He is just like the rest of them at that point.
A Jihad friendly General who is seen as having pushed the America loving tribe of Musharraf out of power will automatically have a credibility that Musharraf has lost. Such a general will be able to publicly flash the deterrent against India and keep pakistan true to its original purpose concieved by Anglo Saxon strategists of keeping India in check and additionally he will pose no real threat to the West as he will again pretend that he is someone in between the Jihadis and the nuke.
I think it all comes down to how much of a public hit the Bush Adminstration is willing to take. Are they willing to see Musharraf go down in flames and a new leader emerge in Pakistan? yes there will be a media cost and President Bush's popularity as an able ruler in America will suffer, but the end result may be a finer tuned control over the situation.
Or you can avoid the media hit right now somehow, lose Pakistan based leverage on India, and then run the risk having this same situation blow up in your face a few years later.
It comes down to what Washington wants because no General in Pakistan will move unless he thinks he has Washington's approval to stage the drama needed.
I sense the matter is awaiting Washington's approval. I imagine that if Amb. Ryan Crocker were to give the right gesture, Gen. Ehsan ul Haq would be able to walk into Musharraf's office and tell him that it would be best if Gen. Musharraf resigned as COAS. There would be no need for imports from Mangolia or flights on some outdated C130 aircraft.
You are correct when you say
The problem here is that if they stick to this, they will forever be in a hole where they will have no credible means to flash their nuclear deterrent in public debate.I'd further expressed the possibility that the porkis and their patrons will happily ignore the strat implications of the ABM test and pretend as if nothing happened in all their dealings with TSP because it suits all the players involved.
This may be okay to Musharraf, but not everyone's interests are likely to be as well protected as his. This is in the nature of things, the pecking order in Pakistan, everyone can't be the president and COAS of Pakistan otherwise Pakistan will be a nation of Presidents and COASs.
As long as there is a perceptable difference between Musharraf and his peers. There will be an incentive for someone to seek his removal.
As long there was a credibility associated with Musharraf's ability to publicly flash the deterrent, there was a reason for people not to remove him from power. Removing him from power would create too much flux and invite escalations inimical to Pakistan.
If you take away Musharraf's ability to publicly flash the deterrent you take away the little epaulette on his shoulder. He is just like the rest of them at that point.
Nawaz Sharif gained credibility in Pakistan by testing the nuclear weapons. Musharraf removed him from power by claiming that he had betrayed the Jihadis sitting on Kargil. In doing so Musharraf gained a crediblity with the Jihadis that Nawaz lost.No chance of Mush getting deposed by another fauji on the basis of the ABM test because he too would be in similar dire straits.
A Jihad friendly General who is seen as having pushed the America loving tribe of Musharraf out of power will automatically have a credibility that Musharraf has lost. Such a general will be able to publicly flash the deterrent against India and keep pakistan true to its original purpose concieved by Anglo Saxon strategists of keeping India in check and additionally he will pose no real threat to the West as he will again pretend that he is someone in between the Jihadis and the nuke.
I think it all comes down to how much of a public hit the Bush Adminstration is willing to take. Are they willing to see Musharraf go down in flames and a new leader emerge in Pakistan? yes there will be a media cost and President Bush's popularity as an able ruler in America will suffer, but the end result may be a finer tuned control over the situation.
Or you can avoid the media hit right now somehow, lose Pakistan based leverage on India, and then run the risk having this same situation blow up in your face a few years later.
It comes down to what Washington wants because no General in Pakistan will move unless he thinks he has Washington's approval to stage the drama needed.
I sense the matter is awaiting Washington's approval. I imagine that if Amb. Ryan Crocker were to give the right gesture, Gen. Ehsan ul Haq would be able to walk into Musharraf's office and tell him that it would be best if Gen. Musharraf resigned as COAS. There would be no need for imports from Mangolia or flights on some outdated C130 aircraft.
What is this "sea of difference"? The Paki F-16's are fully comparable to any other NATO members. And those AIM's will blow up Mirage 2000's and other IAF planes into fragments every bit as efficiently. This is the biggest and worst purchase. Before, the IAF could have taken down Paki planes without even coming into range of their missiles. It was theoretically possible to wipe out the PAF without a single fighter loss. Now there will certainly be losses.rocky wrote:There is a sea of difference between what from outside looks like a "state-of-the-art F-16", and the actual parts that go inside it.
AWACS are war winning weapons. Simply put, if the PN didn't have an AWACS and went up against the IN they would be toast in a matter of hours. And TOW's make a big difference if you don't have them. These purchases are revolutionary for the Paki Army. Before, they stood to be crushed in a matter of days by the IAF/IN/IA. Now they can really last a long time, and give as bad as they take before numbers finally tell. It means that sipping tea in Rawalpindi can't happen.rocky wrote: TOW and AWACS aren't really weapons that will turn the war inside out for you - i.e. not strategic weapons. After all a TOW is merely a high speed bomb.
India making progress in bid to become major military power
Big News Network (UPI)
Friday 1st December, 2006
India took a leap forward this week with the successful test of its anti-ballistic Prithvi missile, showing it has much to give, as well as to receive, in its strategic weapons and BMD cooperation with the U.S.
India's successful test of its own anti-ballistic Prithvi missile this week still leaves the country a long way from fielding its own, home-produced short- and intermediate- range BMD systems. But it wasn't chickenfeed either.
In the test, as the Times of India reported, an upgraded version of the Prithvi shot down a conventional Prithvi at high altitude over the Bay of Bengal. The interceptor was launched from India's Integrated Test Range at Chandipur-on-sea and the test rocket from Wheeler Island in Orissa.
The success came as an enormous relief to India's long-embattled and much criticized Defense and Research Development Organization, or DRDO. As we have noted in these columns before, over the past three decades, DRDO has invested billions of dollars into high prestige, ambitious long-range ballistic missile, high-tech light combat aircraft, a new main battle tank and even a touted nuclear submarine with almost nothing to show for it.
We also monitored earlier this year the embarrassing failure of a test of India's ambitious Agni III intercontinental ballistic missile which, if successfully developed and deployed, would give New Delhi the deterrent capability to fire nuclear warheads at any city in China including Beijing.
Rajiv Singh in an authoritative analysis published by the b-domain.com Web site Wednesday gave important details about what was in effect a new Indian-developed ABM interceptor.
'According to DRDO officials, the new missile had inertial guidance in mid-course and active-seeker guidance (i.e. a radar-seeking warhead) in the terminal phase,' Singh wrote. 'While the first stage of the interceptor was similar to the Prithvi missile, its second stage was a totally new segment. The yet to be named 'high supersonic' interceptor missile has been developed by the DRDO as part of an 'exo-atmospheric intercept system' designed to 'hit-to-kill' incoming ballistic missiles.'
Singh noted that DRDO officials told reporters the new ABM could detect a target in less than 30 seconds and launching an interceptor at it within 50 seconds. 'According to the officials, many technologies, like high-maneuverability of the interceptor missile, were validated in the test. The flight time for nuclear capable missiles launched from Pakistan is a bare 5 to 8 minutes,' he wrote.
Monday's successful test was also an excellent omen for A. K. Anthony, India's recently appointed defense minister.
However, as Singh observed, 'Defense analysts at home (in India) adopted a prudent posture with regard to the development. They had sufficient reasons to be prudent given DRDO's patchy track record in developing high-tech defense systems for the country's defense services.'
He noted that the DRDO had previously 'failed to operationalize the much touted 9-kilometer (5.4 mile) range Trishul and the 25-km (15 mile) range Akash air-defense missiles. These missiles have been undergoing 'successful' tests for as long as anyone can remember.'
Nevertheless, as Singh acknowledged, 'The successful missile interception test now allows India to stand alongside a few countries, such as the U.S., Russia and Israel, that possess a missile defense capability.'
The upgraded Prithvi ABM interceptor appears to rank with the U.S. Patriot PAC-3 system, Russia's S-300 and Israel's Arrow in its intended ability to intercept short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. However, the Patriot, the S-300 and the Arrow are all deployed, much tested systems. Even after the extremely positive results of Monday's test, the upgraded Prithvi ABM still clearly as a long way to go to achieve that status.
Indeed, the United States has been trying to sell the Patriot to India as part of the increasingly close strategic weapons cooperation between the two nations. However, so far the Indians have balked at that. Also Singh noted what he called 'informed speculation over the years ... that India may already have deployed a few batteries of the Russian S-300 system as an interim arrangement.'
Given the continuing warm ties between India and Russia, the huge high-tech weapons orders that the current Congress-UPA dominated government and the previous Baharataya Janata Party-led one have both given to Russia and the exceptional enthusiasm for Russian aerospace technology shown for so many years by long-time Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes, that 'informed speculation' seems extremely likely.
Singh noted that the Prithvi-I, 'first tested in 1988, has a range of 150 km (90 miles) and deploys a conventional or low-yield nuclear warhead for use against troops or armored formations. Its two variants, Prithvi-II and Prithvi-III, with lesser payloads, have an increased range of 250 km (150 miles) and 350 km (210 miles) respectively. While the Prithvi-II was first tested in January 1996, Prithvi-III underwent its first test firing in October 2004. The Indian Army has already inducted Prithvi- I and II into service.'
At the end of the day, when all the cautions, caveats and qualifiers have been made, a crucial underlying fact remains: India has now shown its capability to home produce an effective anti-ballistic missile prototype. France, Britain, Germany, China and Japan have not yet developed the capability to make one of these by themselves, though Japan will certainly is on a crash program to do so with extensive U.S. cooperation and China is already lavishly supplied with S-300 systems, and possibly others, bought from Russia.
The strategic balance of the world therefore shifted on Monday. India took a very large step indeed and served notice that it has much to give, as well as to receive, in its strategic weapons and BMD cooperation with the United States.
Hi VIjayj: first, thnk you for posting an insight into this "great game" of porki-US relations (or rather compulsions) that are not that obvious to most (if not all) israelis.Vijay J wrote: I sense the matter is awaiting Washington's approval. I imagine that if Amb. Ryan Crocker were to give the right gesture, Gen. Ehsan ul Haq would be able to walk into Musharraf's office and tell him that it would be best if Gen. Musharraf resigned as COAS. There would be no need for imports from Mangolia or flights on some outdated C130 aircraft.
second, i am a bit skeptical about the above post. Do you really think that the US has that kind of sway over the porki establishment?? I am sure that the US has some leverage (retirement benefits in Virginia suburbs for the fleeing musharraf, a few millions greenbacks etc), but i am not sure that leverage is as vast as you seem to suggest in your post.
Three: Hypothetically, do you think India would participate in a ari-strike against porki nuclear assets? (which would be made a bit more difficult with the prposed sales to porkistan)??
The US has sufficient leverage to induce a change of government in Pakistan should it desire. As long as the Bush government is in power, there is no interest in replacing Musharraf as it would require a major reworking of the handling of Pakistan. No one wants to do that much work right now.
It probably appears much more expedient right now to leave the Musharraf regime teetering on the edge there and then let it fall on someone else's watch. That way the blame for the failure falls on some other (preferably democratic) president.
The payoff is much bigger than you think. The payoff is Pakistan, all of it. That is a lot of leverage.
Given the JDAM options available to Pakistan, it is difficult to imagine a counter proliferation scheme that will actually work. If the idea is to put window dressing and pretend that there is no real problem, then I think that is best left to politicians.
[/i]
It probably appears much more expedient right now to leave the Musharraf regime teetering on the edge there and then let it fall on someone else's watch. That way the blame for the failure falls on some other (preferably democratic) president.
The payoff is much bigger than you think. The payoff is Pakistan, all of it. That is a lot of leverage.
Given the JDAM options available to Pakistan, it is difficult to imagine a counter proliferation scheme that will actually work. If the idea is to put window dressing and pretend that there is no real problem, then I think that is best left to politicians.
[/i]
Indeed. There is interesting piskology on the part of whoever wrote those lines -the piskology of "embarrassment" and "what will people say"/external validationNRao wrote:People, seriously, need to get a life.embarrassing failure of a test of India's ambitious Agni III intercontinental ballistic missile
When a doctor treats a particular condition and it does not respond instantly to treatment he doesn't "get embarrassed" and worry that other doctors around him will laugh at him. He investigates further and changes the line of management.
An investigator - a detective, or even an Edison or Watt or Ford or Faraday does not get "embarrassed" that something being done fails. There is "Mother in Law" piskology here ."My neighbor has two grandsons - and you, bahu, have produced no children yet. What is wrong with you? I am so embarrassed."
Just goes to show what sort of social background this dork comes from. If he is feeling "embarrassed" he is a moron. If he felt concern, or even anger at possible wasted expenditure it would be something else. But "embarrassment" that a missile test failed. Weird. Weird.
With the current set of events in the region, IMHO, this question is irrelevant.Hypothetically, do you think India would participate in a ari-strike against porki nuclear assets? (which would be made a bit more difficult with the prposed sales to porkistan)??
To the Islamic world, now that they HAVE an Islamic nuke, Pakistan seems to have become irrelevant - even the #2 AQ guy does not mention them (good or bad). The assumed pretence of being an Islamic country is over.
To the Chinese they will soon become irrelevant because India will neutralize TSP without having to fight a war. Even if Uncle donates a few more Billions.
With only textile exports to lean on, I wonder what purpose would Pakistan serve as a nation.
With an imminent collapse why would India have to lift a finger when the problem is clearly one that the West created and needs - actually, will have - to solve?
a JDAM is nothing but about 5 Mumbai train blasts or something like that ... well within the absorptive capabilities of Indian polity ... packees have no option ... JDAM is a big phooooos ...Vijay J wrote:Given the JDAM options available to Pakistan, it is difficult to imagine a counter proliferation scheme that will actually work. If the idea is to put window dressing and pretend that there is no real problem, then I think that is best left to politicians.
>>As long as the Bush government is in power, there is no interest in replacing Musharraf as it would require a major reworking of the handling of Pakistan. No one wants to do that much work right now.
That sums up the situation quite neatly IMHO as well... It appears that it is not uncommon for the tactical necessities of government (administrations) such as the one mentioned above to be then semantically re-strung into a larger narrative giving the impression of some grand conspiracy.
Often state (especially democratic state) actions are exactly what they seem to be - a series of moderately inept policies based on short-term expediency, leaving a big picture that looks more like a Pollock than a Kandinsky. Both have their advantages, provided we go into them with an active rather than reactive outlook, with a confidence level commensurate with our true power and capability.
Hopefully, eventually sites like BR will help separate the wheat from the chaff as it were, and help Indians to observe and understand these dynamics with a greater accuracy. This will help us to make sure that our own policies (which, too, are conditioned somewhat by short term realities - but less so than the case of the big Western democracies) move from moderately inept to the supremely inept (just kidding)... to moderately competent.
That sums up the situation quite neatly IMHO as well... It appears that it is not uncommon for the tactical necessities of government (administrations) such as the one mentioned above to be then semantically re-strung into a larger narrative giving the impression of some grand conspiracy.
Often state (especially democratic state) actions are exactly what they seem to be - a series of moderately inept policies based on short-term expediency, leaving a big picture that looks more like a Pollock than a Kandinsky. Both have their advantages, provided we go into them with an active rather than reactive outlook, with a confidence level commensurate with our true power and capability.
Hopefully, eventually sites like BR will help separate the wheat from the chaff as it were, and help Indians to observe and understand these dynamics with a greater accuracy. This will help us to make sure that our own policies (which, too, are conditioned somewhat by short term realities - but less so than the case of the big Western democracies) move from moderately inept to the supremely inept (just kidding)... to moderately competent.