All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
RaviBg wrote:USSR never imposed a sanction on India like US did.
I think a quote from Lord Palmerston is appropriate for this situation:
Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.
Russia has never imposed sanctions, not because they're such a nice guy, but because it's never been in their interests to do so. The problem is that you cannot tell the future, and in the future, their interests and your interests may conflict.
That is why it is wise to never be wholly reliant on one nation no matter how 'friendly' they appear at the moment.
Spread out/diversify dependence so that even if one turns against you, it is not critical.
On the other hand if you are totally reliant on one, you become their puppet.
RaviBg wrote:USSR never imposed a sanction on India like US did.
On the other hand if you are totally reliant on one, you become their puppet.
Like UK,South Korea,Australia,Japan,KSA,UAE,Bahrain,Qatar,Kuwait,Canada,Pakistan are all American puppets ...
Mr Welch, why do you want to add India to that list .....
durgesh wrote:Mr Welch, why do you want to add India to that list .....
The MRCA competition is not nearly substantial enough to do that. It will be maybe a fifth to a fourth of combat aircraft in the Indian fleet, which is no where near enough to exert that sort of control.
On the other hand I think it is a very real question if you want to become beholden to Russia?
If you go with the MiG-35 85-90% of your combat fleet will be Russian, not to mention the Gorshkov, the sub, and all the other stuff that you are completely reliant on Russia for.
It is simply not prudent to be so reliant on a single country.
GeorgeWelch wrote:
On the other hand I think it is a very real question if you want to become beholden to Russia?
If you go with the MiG-35 85-90% of your combat fleet will be Russian, not to mention the Gorshkov, the sub, and all the other stuff that you are completely reliant on Russia for.
It is simply not prudent to be so reliant on a single country.
As far as the above goes, I am sure many will agree with you. To me personally, that is why European wares are considered strong in this race.
But, you also suggest that a "No to MIG" shall mean "Yes to Boeing/LM". Not True. You could convince everybody in the forum that MIG is doom, but that doesn't do squat for Boeing/LM.
GeorgeWelch wrote:
Anabhaya wrote:Come to think of it, the French and Russian almost never 'sanction' equipment transfers.
France does it a lot, they just haven't done it to India yet.
China, Israel, Argentina, Iran, Myanmar . . .
Lets get into specifics and track record.
- Russia never sanctioned India on defense sales.
- Russia did go back on its cryogenic engine technology (after blackmailed by US)
- France never sanctioned India (It did it to other countries)
- UK sanctioned India (on prodding of US)
- US directly sanctioned the hell of out India repeatedly on a range of fields.
Now, you could argue what France did to other countries and "MAYBE" it will do it to India. Or you could scream that Russia did go back on Cryo-stuff.
But with US, there is "no MAYBE". US has demonstrated considerable will at screwing India directly if it can, or indirectly by goading/forcing others. So, you can bet your a$@# it will sanction/arm-twist/play-dirty/blackmail with whatever leverage it has, its just a matter of time.
Ofcourse, one may escape this by becoming a US sidekick (UK/Aus etc) or owning the politicians/media or to some extent by becoming a NATO country. If you do not, kiss your options goodbye.
GeorgeWelch wrote:
Russia has never imposed sanctions, not because they're such a nice guy, but because it's never been in their interests to do so. The problem is that you cannot tell the future, and in the future, their interests and your interests may conflict.
GeorgeWelch wrote:
I think a quote from Lord Palmerston is appropriate for this situation:
Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.
Precisely. It doesn't matter if Russia is nice or France has a big heart for India. Russia (to lesser extent France) is unlikely to have conflicting interests with India in GeoPolitics. Even if they do, it is a matter of "maybe".
But with US, it has been and will be conflicting interests. Under Bush, they were beginning to align, but now, they are probably going back a decade.
GeorgeWelch wrote:It is simply not prudent to be so reliant on a single country.
Almost everyone will agree to this, no doubt about that. However, it is also not prudent to trust a country which has hurt us in the past and by all indications, is still playing a double game.
I wouldn't mind the Typhoon or Rafale. But having the threat of sanctions always hovering over half of the fleet by going for US items is just not prudent.
But with US, there is "no MAYBE". US has demonstrated considerable will at screwing India directly if it can, or indirectly by goading/forcing others. So, you can bet your a$@# it will sanction/arm-twist/play-dirty/blackmail with whatever leverage it has, its just a matter of time.
Weren't the sanctions placed on India after the nuclear tests were conducted? I doubt the US would place sanctions on India now. They don't have a reason to. Its not like the US gets bored one day and decides to sanction countries.
But with US, there is "no MAYBE". US has demonstrated considerable will at screwing India directly if it can, or indirectly by goading/forcing others. So, you can bet your a$@# it will sanction/arm-twist/play-dirty/blackmail with whatever leverage it has, its just a matter of time.
Weren't the sanctions placed on India after the nuclear tests were conducted? I doubt the US would place sanctions on India now. They don't have a reason to.
Dear b_patel.. Is 1998 the first and last time US sanctioned India?
Is that the only time US arm-twisted India into accommodating US interests at the cost of India's interests?
b_patel wrote:
Its not like the US gets bored one day and decides to sanction countries.
You are absolutely right, its not like its US's pasttime is it? But don't stop there. Maybe you missed other part of my post, the context.
a_kumar wrote:
- Russia did go back on its cryogenic engine technology (after blackmailed by US)
- France never sanctioned India (It did it to other countries)
- UK sanctioned India (on prodding of US)
- US directly sanctioned the hell of out India repeatedly on a range of fields. (Just for you, I will throw in Sharm-el-Shiekh as well )
.....
....
It doesn't matter if Russia is nice or France has a big heart for India. Russia (to lesser extent France) is unlikely to have conflicting interests with India in GeoPolitics. Even if they do, it is a matter of "maybe".
But with US, it has been and will have conflicting interests. Under Bush, they were beginning to align, but now, they are probably going back a decade.
Last edited by a_kumar on 07 Aug 2009 03:17, edited 1 time in total.
GeorgeWelch wrote:
No to MiG
No to Rafale
No to EF
No to Gripen
No to F-16IN
By process of elimination, we arrive at the best solution: SH
GeorgeWelch wrote:
a_kumar wrote:Not True. You could convince everybody in the forum that MIG is doom, but that doesn't do squat for Boeing/LM.
It eliminates one competitor. Then we move on to the next.
Man, after spending so much time in this forum, you still haven't figured our "babus", or for that matter SDREs. By the time you convince us of "No to EF", the list will grow to to maybe 10
This strategy is definitely not good for your health
Don't forget the switch and bait technique of the US. Look at what happened to the Nuclear deal. After promising full nuclear cooperation, they are now trying to block ENR technologies to India. The US word cannot be trusted unfortunately. Whether it is the cryogenic deal, the sanctions post-nuclear test, the travel advisory during op Parakram or the arm-twisting to not pressurize Pak and pulling back troops from LoC, the US applies various types of direct and indirect pressures. And the military deal will be one more pressure point that the US can use later on.
GeorgeWelch wrote:It eliminates one competitor. Then we move on to the next
The typical american way, the end matters more than the means . I am glad that you didn't disappoint us
b_patel wrote:
Weren't the sanctions placed on India after the nuclear tests were conducted? I doubt the US would place sanctions on India now. They don't have a reason to. Its not like the US gets bored one day and decides to sanction countries.
You are absolutely right.
The Argument that somehow the US is conspiring against India ( for no logical reason apparently! ) by sanctioning India unjustly just doesnt hold water. Testing nuclear weapons and expecting no consequences from the West is delusional at best -especially after playing the Russian fiddle for so long! The argument goes on to state that since Russia has never sanctioned India therefore it is more "friendly" - that argument is like saying that the US has never sanctioned Canada while the Russians have flown nuclear bombers towards them thereby making the Russians the "bad guys"! Moreover, if the US is indeed so powerful as to covertly influence Russians and the Europeans and the Israelis to NOT supply India with some technologies what is to say that they cant apply the same pressure again indirectly?
Thus directly or indirectly, the US will levy pressure. The obvious course is to engage the US directly and build stronger ties with America directly. A US MRCA win would only alleviate the suspicions on both sides and build a partnership of trust.
Brando wrote:
Thus directly or indirectly, the US will levy pressure. The obvious course is to engage the US directly and build stronger ties with America directly. A US MRCA win would only alleviate the suspicions on both sides and build a partnership of trust.
Yup, the Americans are building trust as can be seen from the latest ENR fiaso at the G8 meet.
France and Russia did support us after the nuclear tests inspite of US pressure. While one cannot say what will happen in future, it is better to see the realities and hedge accordingly. However, it would be poor judgement to blindly "trust" that the americans won't indulge in nasty surprises again given their track record so far.
However, the current MMS govt appears to be putting more emphasis on "trust" these days with both US and pakistan irrespective of evidence to the contrary. There is good probability that the MMS govt will award the contract to US though. $10 billion worth white elephant
What leverage does any nation have against the US at this time - inspite of it being in recession and having the rest of the world as its creditor? Irrespective of what we think, there is little indication (going back past 60 years) that India is still in a psition to be able stand up for itself. During the cold war it had aligned totally with the Soviets and still had to back down when the seventh fleet decided to take a cruise in the Bay of Bengal. Who would help India (covertly or overtly) in case some predictions about the Chinks getting itchy and in 3 years come true? Take a pick...
Philip wrote:I have been reliably informed-shown a document rated "Above Top Secret" for the MMRCA,regarding the testing regime about to begin.The IAF's top test pilots will be sent in secret to evauate the contenders,details given below.
4.The F-18 "Super-Horny".
Once again another veteran from America's dreamland! You'll be "Sleepless in Seattle" with this stripper ,who is as extensivley touted as her compatriot the F**k-In.Though quite matronly and long in the tooth,this bird has had dentistry,a boob-job and Botox done on her to keep her looking attractive.She claims that she is the most experienced at carrying any kind of load and as for "deep penetration" missions,"Deep Throat" is unmatched! She has serviced many a client from numerous western allies,but is fast approaching her sell-by date and will be replaced in Boeing's bordello by the JSF (figure that one out for yourselves!).
sorry to be nitpicking, but the Super Hornet (you forgot to use the term "Super Whore-net", surely would've tickled you and quite a few others who believe that Russian birds are studs, stallions and very neatly overlook how the actual age of the MiG-29 dressed up as the MiG-35 actually would equate it to a middle-aged guy who has gained weight since the days of his youth and won't find favour even from his own maai-baap, who would rather leave him and the name that he carries, without any future) is not built in Seattle or Everett. Its built in St.Louis, which is the headquarters for Integrated Defence Systems (IDS) that builds the F/A-18..
and the new EA-18 Growler (that you forgot to describe) has apparently passed the USN's tests
Classified Tests Show Growler Ready for Ops
The EA-18G Growler is now on the road to a full-rate production decision and it could benefit from an expected Quadrennial Defense Review determination that U.S. expeditionary forces need another 26-30 airborne electronic attack (AEA) aircraft.
Successful completion of operational testing for the U.S. Navy’s digital electronic attack aircraft might trigger the production of more Growler/Grizzly electronic attack aircraft. Senior Pentagon officials have discussed the expeditionary operational shortfall openly in congressional hearings.
Officials are loath to discuss what specifically the need for airborne electronic attack (AEA) is in a battlefield arena that has virtually no enemy radar presence. But the aircraft’s digital communications emitter geo-location and identification capability is at the top of the list. It allows tracking of enemy command and control, network mapping and signals intercept. It also can be an important factor in combating improvised explosive devices.
Production pressure on the Boeing F/A-18E/F and EA-18G production line would likely be driven by the expeditionary requirement, agrees Rick Martin, Boeing’s EA-18G program manager. So far 12 aircraft have been delivered to the Navy, and two more will follow in September and October as part of the current 34 aircraft contract, with each costing about $55 million, Martin said in an interview Aug. 3. The Navy’s operational validation of the Growler opens the door to a full-rate production decision in the fall for another 54 aircraft. The Navy’s current program is set at 88 total aircraft. After years of criticism for being — potentially — too concurrent, not evolutionary enough and increasingly expensive, the EA-18G shrugged off its critics by being declared operationally effective and suitable in late July with a recommendation for introduction into the fleet.
The determination was made by the Navy’s commander of operational test and evaluation forces. It means, roughly, that the Growler is deemed capable of performing its operational mission of electronic attack. Suitability refers to the adequacy of maintenance, reliability and support.
The Growler has been designed to bridge the gap between the new, digital ICAP III electronic attack system which has just been introduced into the Grizzly and the EA-6B that the EA-18G will replace in Navy squadrons. It will later be modified with the Next Generation Jammer program, which is to make a quantum leap into the world of advanced electronic attack, cyber warfare and network exploitation.
As proof of the system’s flexibility, Navy officials like Capt. Mark Darrah, F/A-18 & EA-18G program manager, PMA-265, point to software problems found and fixed during the test program by developing a software update that will go into the aircraft in the next software release later this year.
The software problems were not associated with the Growler’s ability to transmit or receive, but rather involved integration of the electronic attack pod on the wing and electronic attack suite on the aircraft, Martin says.
RaviBg wrote:
Yup, the Americans are building trust as can be seen from the latest ENR fiaso at the G8 meet.
There are EIGHT countries, the beloved Russia and France included who agreed to the ENR restriction! Yet somehow this is an "American" conspiracy ! Thats amusing!
Brando wrote:
There are EIGHT countries, the beloved Russia and France included who agreed to the ENR restriction! Yet somehow this is an "American" conspiracy ! Thats amusing!
A little too premature. For one both France and Russia are open to India processing or they are willing to process it in their own countries. And, the talks with the US have just started. If the US will not provide a similar agreement - at the least - India may/will not buy their reactors.
Not providing ENR - when it was agreed by the NSG to make India an exception will not bode well in the future - the whole purpose of the 123 was to make an exception. Perhaps it is part of the deal making that this is still going on.
...
Responding to a clarification in the Rajya Sabha, Singh said he had raised the issue of the nuclear cooperation against the backdrop of G-8 resolution with French President Nicolas Sarkozy during his visit to Paris earlier this week.
"I did raise this issue with Sarkozy. Sarkozy was absolutely emphatic that France is eager to enter into full civil nuclear cooperation with India, that means it includes ENR technology," he said in response to a clarification sought by CPI-M leader Sitaram Yechuri.
...
The US was the driving force behind the G8 resolution.
RaviBg wrote:
Yup, the Americans are building trust as can be seen from the latest ENR fiaso at the G8 meet.
There are EIGHT countries, the beloved Russia and France included who agreed to the ENR restriction! Yet somehow this is an "American" conspiracy ! Thats amusing!
Remind which countries' president has Nuclear Non Proliferation on top of his list...is it America? Cannot remember clearly...pls help.
Brando wrote:
There are EIGHT countries, the beloved Russia and France included who agreed to the ENR restriction! Yet somehow this is an "American" conspiracy ! Thats amusing!
Remind which countries' president has Nuclear Non Proliferation on top of his list...is it America? Cannot remember clearly...pls help.
Well its not America.
And all G8 members have nuclear non-proliferation as a goal- thats the POINT of the NSG (which they are all part of! )
And all G8 members have nuclear non-proliferation as a goal- thats the POINT of the NSG (which they are all part of! )
So does Pakistan and China!!
Maybe one of the reasons neither of them are in the G8 ?
NRao wrote:
And, G8 have contributed to proliferation.
Then you have nothing to worry with regards to their recent declaration in Italy do you ? If you believe they have proliferated then they will just do more of the same with India!
NRao wrote:
The US is after GNEP - control anything nuke. They are not after non-proliferation.
Remind which countries' president has Nuclear Non Proliferation on top of his list...is it America? Cannot remember clearly...pls help.
Well its not America. And all G8 members have nuclear non-proliferation as a goal- thats the POINT of the NSG (which they are all part of! )
You are just like MMS (may be Sonia will appoint you PM one day) - never answer the question. Just spew out some BS and play equal equal. In my world we argue based on facts, not argue the facts.
Brando wrote:
The Argument that somehow the US is conspiring against India ( for no logical reason apparently! ) by sanctioning India unjustly just doesnt hold water.
This is sounding like a broken record.. but. I will try again.
"proper/just to US" doesn't mean it is "REALLY proper/just", and definitely doesn't have to be "proper/just to India".
As of now, "BO's proper/just" is mostly going to be "improper/unjust to India". We don't have to go far.. you and your friends on this page are the very reason we get riled up. Your posts are dotted with "India should blindly trust", and wink.. wink at all the "fences" BO and his non-prolifiraction posse are putting up.
In all the paragraphs you have written, I haven't read one line where you said US (Americans in general and BO in particular) understands India's interests. (I will emphasize that Bush's Indo-US nuclear deal was the only exception, which is being watered down by BO). Good reason to stop responding to your posts, but guess am enjoying it
Brando wrote:Testing nuclear weapons and expecting no consequences from the West is delusional at best -especially after playing the Russian fiddle for so long! The argument goes on to state that since Russia has never sanctioned India therefore it is more "friendly" - that argument is like saying that the US has never sanctioned Canada while the Russians have flown nuclear bombers towards them thereby making the Russians the "bad guys"!
huh? asdfklj erwpoi sdflkj pwpoiur werpoiujr dsf
Brando wrote:Moreover, if the US is indeed so powerful as to covertly influence Russians and the Europeans and the Israelis to NOT supply India with some technologies what is to say that they cant apply the same pressure again indirectly?
Thus directly or indirectly, the US will levy pressure.
"Directly" meaning US has little price to pay to get its way.
"Indirectly" meaning.. US will have to pay a price too, call favors, use quid-pro-quos or find sufficient leverage for other parties as well.
In which world are they both the same?
Brando wrote: The obvious course is to engage the US directly and build stronger ties with America directly. A US MRCA win would only alleviate the suspicions on both sides and build a partnership of trust.
Whose suspicions?
And oh yeah, obviously, I am sure you will let your neighbour's ravaging bull dog snaping on your heels into your backyard, because that will increase "trust" between your neighbour and you and in the far chance that it "may" protect you!! Very smart.
I would rather wait till the neighbor tames it properly or puts on a leash.
The MMRCA cannot go to US. IAF are not morons. It will be a eurojet (France, russia or the 4 disjoint group).
May be. But viewing the MRCA as a isolated deal to buy a few Aircrafts is wrong. It is part of the strategic relationship developing with US. Trust is crucial and absolute to this relationship.
You can trust US with Trenton, P8s, C-130s, nuclear reactors and then say you don't trust them with MRCA. Trust is definitely not an issue for the current government.
a_kumar wrote:
Dear b_patel.. Is 1998 the first and last time US sanctioned India?
Is that the only time US arm-twisted India into accommodating US interests at the cost of India's interests?
And how can we forget that those b*s*a*ds (sorry for using abusive language) dared to send 7th fleet against us in Bangladesh liberation war. In Hindi we say, JO APNE BAAP KA NAHI HO SAKTA WO AUR KISSI KA KYA HOGA. They are these kind of people. Look at the state of Pakistan, in support of which, the fleet was sent. How many time deliveries of F 16 was blocked in spite of payments made.
They will only support those who either serves their interest or moves away from Russia.
Even with soviet break up, Russia is the only country which can counter all the so called hi tech American forces.
Russia and France are the time tested partners. A few cost escalation issues cannot blur these relations. They are already co operating on projects and technology which America will not even show us. MMRCA is strategic acquisition. The term Strategic itself connotes something whose integrity is not compromised. It will be ok even if it is not as high tech as Americans have (I still don't believe Indian version of F 16 / SH will be as advanced as USAF /USN) so far as its integrity is intact.
Mind you, the tech of other contenders is also not inferior, which is very visible that all has met the qualitative parameters laid by IAF.
Also, when we blacklisted many companies recently for charge of corruption, why we did not blacklist LM after it was found that it has compromised some of most confidential documents of Indian defense and security?
My take is to go for Rafale / Mig 35 / EF. Not advisable to go for Americans and SAAB which will be as good as LCA and which if selected can kill LCA
-Nitin
Last edited by nrshah on 07 Aug 2009 13:27, edited 1 time in total.
The MMRCA cannot go to US. IAF are not morons. It will be a eurojet (France, russia or the 4 disjoint group).
May be. But viewing the MRCA as a isolated deal to buy a few Aircrafts is wrong. It is part of the strategic relationship developing with US. Trust is crucial and absolute to this relationship.
You can trust US with Trenton, P8s, C-130s, nuclear reactors and then say you don't trust them with MRCA. Trust is definitely not an issue for the current government.
Can you define what strategic relationship we are developing with US? What are our benefits of this so called relation except that we will get some stripped of outdated aircraft / Ships? With respect to Nuclear reactors, Americans have already started showing their true color (Oh I am becoming racist) by ENR issues...
With respect to C 130, they are not critical... The only reason for us to go for them is to show that we maintain equal relations with Americans and Russians. Yet another show of poor diplomacy inherited from MR JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
P8 only seems exception to me. However, who knows, there might be also some reason which gurus here know and can enlighten us.
Believe me, this all relationship is to counter PRC which is growing to challenge the unipolar attitude of Americans. This time, Americans have decided to make India as KURU KHETRA so that it does not itself become battle field. All nukes if at all will be used on India / by India at no loss to UNITED STATE OF AMERICA. And the outcome will be awesome.. both the Asian giants who can challenge the position of USA are no more.
No country denies technology to India like US does -a personal example as of yesterday
wanted to buy some books on liquid hydrogen properties and its use history in US as propulsion fuel from amazon
all the 4 books were denied with a reason the books cannot be shipped to the country of destination indicated by you and not just once repeatedly
So Guys this is US
One of the books is Russian but translated into english by US publisher
And you are suggesting we spend ten billion dollars to this crappy paranoid country
After Arihant where 143 russian engineers came to paint the submarine and pose for photographs there is no doubt whatever Mig 35 is joining IAF -mIG 35 MKI whow it sounds great too
neatly overlook how the actual age of the MiG-29 dressed up as the MiG-35 actually would equate it to a middle-aged guy who has gained weight since the days of his youth and won't find favour even from his own maai-baap, who would rather leave him and the name that he carries, without any future)
Kartik,
Don't be too sure. The russkis know that this is considered a weakness so fwiw (from bill sweetman no less):
MiG Lives!
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 8/6/2009 8:36 AM CDT
Maxim Pyadushkin writes:
35 could be a lucky number for the Russian Air Force. Commander Gen. Col. Alexander Zelin announced on August 5 that the Air Force has decided to acquire both the Sukhoi Su-35S and the Mikoyan MiG-35S - as the new aircraft are now designated in Russia. Zelin described them as “deeply modernized, but in fact principally new, transitional to the fifth generation”. The purchase of 48 Su-35 fighters was announced in May and according to Sukhoi chief Mikhail Pogosyan the contract with the Air Force is to be signed any time soon.
This is the first official confirmation of interest in the MiG-35, an updated version of the MiG-29 with extended range, increased combat payload and AESA radar. It boosts Russia's chances in India’s 126-aircraft Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition. Two MiG-35 prototypes are to start customer evaluation trials for India in September. The first phase will take place in Russia, after which one aircraft will continue trials in India.
MiG tells Ares that the number of MiG-35s to be purchased by the Russian Air Force is still being discussed, but the aircraft is included in the defense procurement program through 2020.
Sweet, I look forward to seeing something new in the fulcrum family. Even if it is more or less a MiG-29K, it'll still be fabulous cause the K has some pretty new things in it (and the 35 is 850kgs lighter)
a_kumar wrote:
This is sounding like a broken record.. but. I will try again.
"proper/just to US" doesn't mean it is "REALLY proper/just", and definitely doesn't have to be "proper/just to India".
As of now, "BO's proper/just" is mostly going to be "improper/unjust to India". We don't have to go far.. you and your friends on this page are the very reason we get riled up. Your posts are dotted with "India should blindly trust", and wink.. wink at all the "fences" BO and his non-prolifiraction posse are putting up.
In all the paragraphs you have written, I haven't read one line where you said US (Americans in general and BO in particular) understands India's interests. (I will emphasize that Bush's Indo-US nuclear deal was the only exception, which is being watered down by BO). Good reason to stop responding to your posts, but guess am enjoying it
So many words there but I cant quite make much sense of it all.( Whats with all the slash and parentheses ? And what is BO's? The only BO I know stands for Body Odor! )
This back and forth is proving to be utterly unproductive in breaking through all the anti-American programing and hostility bred into Indians for so many decades. Also, apparently this is becoming increasingly irrelevant with respect to the Indian MRCA and at Boeing and Lockheed's chances.
This would be my last post on this endless 'detraction', however, let me just finally add that at the end of the day, India is not doing America a favor by choosing to build stronger ties with America or trusting America and giving American companies a fair chance without prejudice. Rather, this is an opportunity for India to take advantage to forge closer ties that would benefit millions of its starving people for generations. If the pessimism and closed mindedness prevent India for playing a larger role in an International Coalition of Democratic nations, today led by the US, then it's a pity 1 billion people of a vibrant democracy will have to continue being treated as the "outsiders" with other allied democracies of this world and the US. The US has rules that govern its behavior, these rules do more good than harm and that is why they are in place. If India sees itself as being victimized by these rules like denying technology, research etc, then that would be the result of squandered opportunities by both sides and thats a shame.
Brando wrote:
This back and forth is proving to be utterly unproductive in breaking through all the anti-American programing and hostility bred into Indians for so many decades.
Interesting choice of words, it would tell me the programming bred into the community for so many years that you are part of.
India is not doing America a favor by choosing to build stronger ties with America or trusting America and giving American companies a fair chance without prejudice.
Yes it is, in todays world its Indian money which is going to keep so many millions from starving in which ever country India chooses to pump the money generated by the earnings of its citizens.
Rather, this is an opportunity for India to take advantage to forge closer ties that would benefit millions of its starving people for generations.
Yes, I am sure the MRCA would nicely go along with the roti-acchar that the starving cant get.
Brando wrote:However, let me just finally add that at the end of the day, India is not doing America a favor by choosing to build stronger ties with America or trusting America and giving American companies a fair chance without prejudice. Rather, this is an opportunity for India to take advantage to forge closer ties that would benefit millions of its starving people for generations. If the pessimism and closed mindedness prevent India for playing a larger role in an International Coalition of Democratic nations, today led by the US, then it's a pity 1 billion people of a vibrant democracy will have to continue being treated as the "outsiders" with other allied democracies of this world and the US.
You are utterly and thoroughly misguided. Talking about fair chance, remind me when did any other country require India sign EULA. Also remind me why did American aircraft carriers moved towards Pakistan after Mumbai terrorist strikes. Remind me why did America pressure MMS to start talks with Pakis. Remind me why did America prevent India from even shipping refined oil to Iran while America sends ship loads of weapons to Pakistan. Remind me why does America is willing to sell only F-16 and F-18 which it will discard soon. Remind me the logic behind America wanting to contain India's nuclear capability (hint: interests of nations change, therefore no country is to be trusted). Remind me when did anyone do India a favor and treat it as an "insider" when it wasn't in their own interest. America sees a great sucking sound from the east, some of it is China and rest is India. If it weren't for the fact that India GDP will reach no. 3 in two decades you will see America wanting to talk to India only about disarmament (limiting India's military influence), environment (asking India to pay for environment), market access (more money for US companies), intellectual protection (more money for US pharma industry), labor rights (keeping american industry competitive by raising cost elsewhere) and nuclear non proliferation (maintaining american hegemony).
As is often said "Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests." Americans believe it more than anyone else, India needs some hard nosed diplomacy, and and some cold calculations about its interests, not another bhai-bhai joke.
Last edited by abhiti on 07 Aug 2009 14:56, edited 1 time in total.
nrshah wrote:Can you define what strategic relationship we are developing with US? What are our benefits of this so called relation except that we will get some stripped of outdated aircraft / Ships?
Exactly. Very reason we are paying for outdate aircrafts/ships itself says that these moves are not driven by modernization/ technology acquisition. They are token deals exercised for political purposes only.
nrshah wrote:Believe me, this all relationship is to counter PRC which is growing to challenge the unipolar attitude of Americans. This time, Americans have decided to make India as KURU KHETRA so that it does not itself become battle field.
Agreed. But wrto China, Indian and American interests coincide (at the moment). US needs us as much as we need them. We have an opportunity to use them, and we should. The day we are independent enough to defend against a Chinese aggression, alone, we can choose to ignore unkil.
Kailash wrote:The day we are independent enough to defend against a Chinese aggression, alone, we can choose to ignore unkil.
This topic is becoming heavy on geo politics but then geo politics is part of MRCA deal. I like your notion that India needs to watch its own interest only and everything else will fall in place.
But never ever ever ever ever think that America will help India defend against China. Otherwise we will be making the same mistake that Georgia made with Russia. INS Arihant will help defend India against China not America.
The IAF should view its requirements in a holistic manner,as we have to plan for dealing with China and Pak acting in unison in the future and place this deal in proper perspective.The earlier need was to make up declining numbers,still a prime objective,plus-as the deal got delayed and the Mirage-2000 production ceased,an added dimension was thrown up,that of acquiring an AESA radar and some other exotic EW eqpt.,all in a medium sized package.The failure of the LCA to arrive on time and the fact that when it arrives in MK-1 avatar,will be underpowered,requiring a new engine in a MK-2 version that will only appear in the next decade.,neccesiated that we buy an interim medium sied MRCA.Upgrading the existing types in service,a very wise cost-effective decision is also being done,to keep as many in service as possible.In addition,the venerable Jaguar,will be re-engined and with its new engine and other 4th-gen.tech.will see more being produced and all existing aircraft upgraded to same std.The key to the IAF's regional dominance is still the SU-30MKI,which is also being acquired in greater number and with further upgrades is being touted as of 4++ gen,almost 5th-gen,better than anything flying with the possible exception of the Raptor.
Since the 5th-gen Indo-Russian bird,the Sukhoi PAK-FA is shortly to fly and will be in production by around 2013/14,with the Indian version in production by at least 2015,this project should be given the top priority.It will keep us ahead of China in the tech. stakes.Simultaneously,the LCA programme has to bear fruit if only for us to have successfully developed a light multi-role fighter contemporary in design and capability and can be acquired cheaply and in alrge numbers.Its delays however has alarmed the IAF,which rightly fears that a tech, gap will emerge by the time the Mk-2 version with the new engine is in production.What use would there be to keep making an LCA of inferior capability of at least a gen.than a 5th-gen fighter also available at the same time? The IAF will flinch from the acquisition in similar manner as that of the Indian Army,which is also resisting buying more Arjuns because,as the COAS said,while contemporary, it did not offer a futuristic option.
To make up numbers,apart from the various upgrades of all types in service,extra SU-30MKIs are also being acquired with local production to be increased as much as possible and even more Russian built aircraft bought.
Where therefore do we place the MMRCA in our overall force strategy and which aircraft should we choose in the light of the above?
Obtaining an AESA radar is not a problem,all want to give it and the most important TOT with it,except the US.This issue has still not been successfully resolved.The US is attempting to armtwist the weak,gutles,political leadership AGAINST the "written warnings" of the service chiefs not to sign the hated EUM with the US.In addition,the US has banned Sweden from selling us the Gripen with an Israeli made AESA radar,one that Israel has even offered to us for the LCA!Therefore,on this count alone,the US offers must be thrown into the dustbin for they ,if acquired,will be a "Trojan Horse" inside our entire defence establishment and seriously undermine our ability to defend ourselves in any crisis when we have to humiliatingly allow our "Privates" to be inspected whenever and wherever an American pervert demands.Secondly,and equally importantly from the technoloigcal point of viw,the two US aircraft are truly obsolete.They may have had a good make-up job done to them,but are between one to three decades older than the other contenders.They have NO future and acquiring the manufacturing rights/TOT of them is simply ludicrous when no one else is buying them,as all the US's allies already have them and want either the JSF or the F-22 Raptor!
Even the chief of the OZ air froce has said "NO" to Boeing for more F-18SH's,as posted elsewhere quoting from AWST.
Therefore,let's look at the other contenders more carefully.The Gripen is a great little aircraft,the Swedes most obliging on giving us complete TOT,but they lack AESA tech and have to rely elsewhere for it.With the US exercising its veto over the Swedes and remember how the US did so decades earlier when the Viggen was wanted by the IAF,doubts will perists over acquiring this aircraft especially if it possesses US tech.We know how the US sabotaged us from upgrading our Sea King ASW helos we acquired form the UK too! It also if acquired will spell the death knell for the LCA as the two aircraft are very similar.In fact,some tout this aircraft as the dark horse,as if the IAF want to kill the LCA programme,which it is being forced to acquire because of GOI/DRDO pressure,choosing the Gripen,which would also come in as the perfect cost-effective answer.
The MIG-35,is the easiest to induct,as we already fly the MIG-29,and the 53 has the reputation of being the best at air combat with its unique 3-D TVC.Hevaily modified,with new engines (MIG-29 engines are already being made in India),AESA radar (could even come with an Israeli radar),its makers claiming that it now 4+ gen.,is a good assest especially when the future 5th-gen aircraft are to be inducted and similar 5th-gen tech will be fitted to the 35 and the SU-30MKI,making pilot training and evolving tactics the easiest and the cheapest too.This is the most logical option.However,if we want to acquire western tech,instead of flying too heavily upon the Russians,either of the two Rafael and Typhoon (Most expensive) would be a good choice,as they are very contemporary,have a long future ahead and that the IAF has past service experience of French and British aircraft and their tech.The French could offer the Rafale,M-200 upgraded and replacing them all eventually with the Rafale (throw in helo projects too to sweeten the offer).EADS,with the EJ-200 offered for the LCA along with pressure from 4 EU nations and their multifarious defence deals spread across the country's requirements,could swing the deal.It would be the most expensive option though and if a "Eurocanard" is being sought,then the deal could be split by buying only 126 Eurocanards and extra MIG-35s,with the MIG-35s eventually replacing all earlier MIG0-2(s too.If this option is followed,buying the Rafale and MIGH-35 to replace MIG-29s and Mirage-2000s appears a sound option as we would have two new aircraft to last for at least two decades + along wiht the Su-30s,5th-gen fighter and the LCA.
Last edited by Philip on 07 Aug 2009 16:38, edited 1 time in total.
)
)