Indian Army: News & Discussion

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.
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby vic » 22 Sep 2010 08:12

karan_mc wrote:Indigenous anti-mine, snow footwear for soldiers

Troops deployed in high-altitude and naxal-affected areas are set to get designer footwear to protect them from ‘anti-personnel’ mines and frost bite.


http://idrw.org/?p=1012


It took just 11 years after Kargill for babudum to "start" moving

atreya
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 16:33

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby atreya » 22 Sep 2010 18:00

putnanja wrote:Two Army officers die in Himalayan avalanche

Two Army officers died after their camp in the higher reaches of the Himalayas in Uttarakhand was hit by an avalanche on Sunday, according to information reaching the Army headquarters here.

The bodies of Lieutenant Colonel Poornachandra of 9 Para and Major Manish Gusain of 11 Kumaon were brought down to the advance base camp on Monday and airlifted to Joshimath on a clear day. A few personnel sustained cold injuries and they have descended to get medical treatment.
...
...


RIP Sirs :(

:cry:
I don't know why, but such deaths sadden me more than deaths due to enemy action

Rupesh
BRFite
Posts: 895
Joined: 05 Jul 2008 19:14
Location: Somewhere in South Central India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Rupesh » 22 Sep 2010 21:48

Major moves HC to marry American
MUMBAI: Not getting response from authorities, a Major in Indian Army has moved the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the Army to allow him marry a US national or grant him voluntary retirement for which he was ready to forgo benefits.
According to Army rules, a serving officer is required to seek permission from the authorities if he or she wishes to marry a citizen of another country.


Shruti is working for an advertising agency in USA. Sayankar, who is getting ready to marry Shruti on December 10, said the wedding date had been fixed and that he had no other option but to approach the High Court as the Army had not responded.

The Army, however, opposed his plea saying that the Major should approach the Armed Forces Tribunal if he wanted to air any grievance.

Counsel for the Army challenged the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court in redressing the grievance of a serving officer.


Give him the boot.

Ramesh
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Ramesh » 23 Sep 2010 15:37

Give him the boot.


Why not an honorable exit sir?

Riza Zaman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: NYC, NY
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Riza Zaman » 23 Sep 2010 21:45

Rupesh wrote:
Give him the boot.


Why not give him what he wants, instead of "the boot"?

Marut
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 25 Oct 2009 23:05
Location: The Original West Coast!!

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Marut » 23 Sep 2010 22:22

Rupesh wrote:
MUMBAI: Not getting response from authorities, a Major in Indian Army has moved the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the Army to allow him marry a US national or grant him voluntary retirement for which he was ready to forgo benefits.
According to Army rules, a serving officer is required to seek permission from the authorities if he or she wishes to marry a citizen of another country.


Give him the boot.


Why should he be 'booted' out when he is willing to leave and forgo all benefits? It's clear that he wants to marry the lady and is following the Army rules for such things. The army's action, or rather the inaction, seems petty and churlish.Yes or no, the major deserves an answer not the runaround he is being subject to currently

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 23 Sep 2010 22:35

Marut wrote:
Why should he be 'booted' out when he is willing to leave and forgo all benefits? It's clear that he wants to marry the lady and is following the Army rules for such things. The army's action, or rather the inaction, seems petty and churlish.Yes or no, the major deserves an answer not the runaround he is being subject to currently



This is an old and well known trick.

Worked in the very early days.

Doesn't work now.

Is he willing to pay back tens of lakhs of training costs?

Says he doesn't want benefits. He may not have any coming to him.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 Sep 2010 22:37

same query could be asked of any civilian who has availed of govt subsidized higher education before decamping abroad...

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Surya » 23 Sep 2010 22:41

chetak


Is he willing to pay back tens of lakhs of training costs?

Says he doesn't want benefits. He may not have any coming to him.


Then that should be the reply to him. or pro rate the training costs although depending on how many years he has served he could say the army has recouped that.

whats the point of having disgruntled folks in such critical functions

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5209
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby jamwal » 23 Sep 2010 22:45

ramana wrote:Rohitvats, take your time. But make it look credible.Will keep in touch.

Can we have "Dieppe" style raid on Rawlapindi say from Srinagar?



Ramana saar, What about Army raids starting from borders around Jammu and with Air Force support from Srinagar and Pathankot air bases ?
IMHO onlee

Marut
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 25 Oct 2009 23:05
Location: The Original West Coast!!

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Marut » 23 Sep 2010 22:50

chetak wrote:
Marut wrote:
Why should he be 'booted' out when he is willing to leave and forgo all benefits? It's clear that he wants to marry the lady and is following the Army rules for such things. The army's action, or rather the inaction, seems petty and churlish.Yes or no, the major deserves an answer not the runaround he is being subject to currently



This is an old and well known trick.

Worked in the very early days.

Doesn't work now.

Is he willing to pay back tens of lakhs of training costs?

Says he doesn't want benefits. He may not have any coming to him.


Well if the rules say he has to pay for the training costs then he should be made to pay. If he gets no benefits based on his service tenure, then no benefits either. But why should the army not decide on his application all this while making him take legal recourse, AFT or otherwise.

On that note, what is the military's stand on such marriages? yes, no or conditional yes? Are these spelled out in the service rules?
I am not trying paint anyone as the villain here but what should essentially have been a binary logic decision has become a public drama.

Singha, not a correct comparison. The military chaps made a voluntary decision and signed on the dotted line knowing fully well what the service rules entail. Civvies haven't signed any such thing, though it is considered morally right to do so. In cases where such edu has been subsidized and bonds signed, they have been invoked on breach of agreement.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 23 Sep 2010 22:55

Singha wrote:same query could be asked of any civilian who has availed of govt subsidized higher education before decamping abroad...



Exactly what this guy wants to do.

The Army is not a democratic organization.

The rules forbid marriage with a foreign national, period.
The rule is clearcut and explicit. Known to one and all.
No wiggle room what so ever.

You cannot associate with foreigners, have them as guests in your home or club. Every such departure from procedure requires case by case permission from MI. Where and how did this chappie meet the foreigner female? He was already in contravention of many regulations.

Some smart alecks who asked for permission post facto thinking that they had created a fait accompli for the Army were jugged and kicked out dishonorably.

No future after that. Such shenanigans mysteriously stopped.
I wonder why. :)


There are many such applications each year. Most die a natural death, the applications I mean.

Marut
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 25 Oct 2009 23:05
Location: The Original West Coast!!

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Marut » 23 Sep 2010 23:29

chetak, thanks for lowdown on the rules. So the major can't marry and continue in service. If he wants to quit then he pays up and gives up his rank as well.
But still wonder why even after four applications, there is no answer from army? Surely it's an open and shut case. And if the major is reapplying despite the rejections, then he's gotta be booted out anyways.
Something is missing in this puzzle.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 23 Sep 2010 23:38

Marut wrote:chetak, thanks for lowdown on the rules. So the major can't marry and continue in service. If he wants to quit then he pays up and gives up his rank as well.
But still wonder why even after four applications, there is no answer from army? Surely it's an open and shut case. And if the major is reapplying despite the rejections, then he's gotta be booted out anyways.
Something is missing in this puzzle.


The Army has to approve his release from service.

Such approvals are not easily forthcoming.

He has the option of getting out on medical/compassionate grounds or wait to be passed over for promotion (three attempts) before he can put up his papers.

Medical/compassionate grounds are pretty much out now that he has revealed his hand.

He has to lump it and just wait it out for a good many years hoping that the females love will hold steadfast.

Good luck to him.

IMVHO, he sounds like just another jafo trying to take the system for a ride.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 23 Sep 2010 23:47

Wonder if it wasn't an English miss how fast the approval would have come? The reason is many high officers were married to such foreigners without any objection to them reaching the highest ranks. But this lowly major is being denied permission to marry an PIO? Something else at play.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 23 Sep 2010 23:55

ramana wrote:Wonder if it wasn't an English miss how fast the approval would have come? The reason is many high officers were married to such foreigners without any objection to them reaching the highest ranks. But this lowly major is being denied permission to marry an PIO? Something else at play.


Earlier days were different ramana ji.

Policy was rightly changed many years ago after quite a few unpublicized shenanigans.

PIO is not the question but passport is.

It's only lowly majors and captains who land up in such situations.

JimmyJ
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 07 Dec 2007 03:36
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby JimmyJ » 24 Sep 2010 03:21

Ok, why don't she become an Indian citizen and the the major could marry his lady love, would that be too difficult. I believe the lady is a US citizen of Indian origin. Or is that too not allowed

atreya
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 16:33

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby atreya » 24 Sep 2010 09:27

JimmyJ wrote:Ok, why don't she become an Indian citizen and the the major could marry his lady love, would that be too difficult. I believe the lady is a US citizen of Indian origin. Or is that too not allowed


Then the whole point of this exercise MAYBE wasted for the Major (just speculating, that is why the 'maybe'). If the Major marries her, he is hitting two birds with one stone- green card and of course, staying with his lady love. Maybe he wants to settle in USA. We never know.

Sachin
Webmaster BR
Posts: 8039
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Undisclosed

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sachin » 24 Sep 2010 09:35

atreya wrote:If the Major marries her, he is hitting two birds with one stone- green card and of course, staying with his lady love. Maybe he wants to settle in USA. We never know.

You beat me in this by 10 seconds. Wanted to say exactly the same thing. Considering the number of Indians who wish to migrate to US and Canada, the whole hullaballoo over this marriage may be for the very same reason. The whole thing would become useless if the lady love, forsakes her US citizenship for her lover ;).

PS: I had an NCO friend in IAF who wanted to goto the 'Gelf'. Had served in IAF for nearly 10 years (was a Cpl). Finally he had to deliberately make 'staged' fights, formal complaints were lodged (all this while when their Warrant Officer was trying to get these complaints cancelled) and he got a dishonourable discharge. And every one except the poor old WO knew what the whole idea behind the fights was.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 25 Sep 2010 23:23

Actually, an amphibious attack on Karachi followed by physical occupation is a good idea.

Pakistani doctrine is that when it is unable to withstand an Indian conventional strike, it will use nuclear weapons against that strike formation.

Close proximity to Pakistan’s most economically valuable infrastructure & segment of population will negate this option and restrict their responses. They cannot use full firepower because of collateral damage to infrastructure and populace – that they know they cannot easily replace.

They’ll be forced to use their cruise missiles and precision weapons – that are expensive and available in relatively low numbers – to have any effect in the conflict.

Ofcourse, India will need a technically, logistically & numerically superior force. Such occupation could be used to trade territory elsewhere.

On the other matter, I know a Russian lady who took up Indian citizenship under similar circumstances. And IT companies routinely recover recruitment and training costs when employees leave during the probation period. So why shouldn’t the Army?

JimmyJ
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 07 Dec 2007 03:36
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby JimmyJ » 26 Sep 2010 01:45

tsarkar wrote:Actually, an amphibious attack on Karachi followed by physical occupation is a good idea.

Pakistani doctrine is that when it is unable to withstand an Indian conventional strike, it will use nuclear weapons against that strike formation.

Close proximity to Pakistan’s most economically valuable infrastructure & segment of population will negate this option and restrict their responses. They cannot use full firepower because of collateral damage to infrastructure and populace – that they know they cannot easily replace.

They’ll be forced to use their cruise missiles and precision weapons – that are expensive and available in relatively low numbers – to have any effect in the conflict.

Ofcourse, India will need a technically, logistically & numerically superior force. Such occupation could be used to trade territory elsewhere.

On the other matter, I know a Russian lady who took up Indian citizenship under similar circumstances. And IT companies routinely recover recruitment and training costs when employees leave during the probation period. So why shouldn’t the Army?



But if you think the other way round, if Pakistan still nukes, they know for sure that Karachi will be safe at least for few days. :roll:

As long as it stays a conventional war an amphibious force could help opening a new front and Pakistan will have to give attention to it and would be quite good a distraction.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby svinayak » 26 Sep 2010 02:00

tsarkar wrote:Actually, an amphibious attack on Karachi followed by physical occupation is a good idea.

Close proximity to Pakistan’s most economically valuable infrastructure & segment of population will negate this option and restrict their responses. They cannot use full firepower because of collateral damage to infrastructure and populace – that they know they cannot easily replace.

This is exactly I had in mind. 10% of the population and 40% of the economy is strong incentive to defend and also they will be careful not to damage it.
They will stop any incursion in the border to defend Karachi
BraHmos will be used to take out high value targets like Pakistani army chief General Kiyani placed in karachi, 320 km from Bhuj.
Last edited by svinayak on 26 Sep 2010 11:07, edited 1 time in total.

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 700
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby karan_mc » 26 Sep 2010 06:39

AgustaWestland questions its elimination from Indian Army’s $600 million contract


BY:Defenseworld.net

AugustaWestand which has been shown the door in the Indian Army’s $600 million deal to purchase 197 light helicopters has questioned the reasons for its elimination. The company has not been invited for the Phase II final trials which are currently going on with two manufacturers, Eurocopter and Kamov from Russia.
AgustaWestland questions its elimination from Indian Army?s $600 million contract

The company together with its engine partner, Pratt & Whitney Canada has written to the Indian MOD that “the take off, maximum continuous, mechanical and thermal ratings, associated operating limits as well as the engine architecture and the mounting of the engine in the helicopter are the same in the AW119/RSH proposal, the trial helicopter and the final production standard helicopter”.

Earlier, elaborating the reasons for its elimination, AgustaWestand had received a communication from the Indian MoD in April this year to the effect that there was a variance in the equipment offered (engine) in the technical proposal to that fielded in the trails and to the equipment which would be in the final production standard, AgustaWestland sources told Defenseworld.net.

The sources said that the issue focused on the fact that the offered engine had not finished the certification process and not deemed current production standard.

However, all vendors, Eurocopter, Kamov and itself are in the same position – all engines in the competition are non current production standard engines yet to be certified by any authority, the sources claimed.

The sources further asserted that the AgustaWestland AW119SP helicopter offered in the Indian competition meets all the RFP technical and mission requirements.

For the demanding high altitude mission, AW submitted detailed mission profiles and graphs demonstrating the ability to meet the mission.

These graphs were validated by the Customer’s team during extensive high altitude flight testing in Phase 1 of the trials.

AgustaWestland could not participate in Phase 2 of the trials (as it was by the told of its elimination) where the exact requirement should have been demonstrated. However, AgustaWestland successfully performed considerable high altitude flying in Phase 1 and by simple extrapolation of the graphs, it is clear that the helicopter can meet the demanding mission; a key requirement for the customer, the sources claimed.

One of the key requirements of the RFP was the 2 stretcher configuration. AgustaWestland has successfully demonstrated the 2 stretcher requirement, and that the helicopter can also accommodate two stretchers and 2 medical attendants in the same cabin.

Installing the stretchers is a simple 5 minute process that does not require any structural changes or attachments. It claimed that one of the other two helicopters in the race does not meet the two stretcher requirement as only one stretcher can be accommodated, the sources claimed.

The 197 helicopter deal has seen Bell Helicopter pulling out from the race earlier and Eurocopter once disqualified after being named the final bidder. The current competition was re-floated two years ago.


http://idrw.org/?p=1079

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4505
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Sep 2010 09:38

If India occupies Karachi, what prevents TSP from using the nuclear option on Indian cities to force India to withdraw from Karachi? Also, India then cannot retaliate on Karachi when Indian troops are in there.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby svinayak » 26 Sep 2010 11:06

putnanja wrote:If India occupies Karachi, what prevents TSP from using the nuclear option on Indian cities to force India to withdraw from Karachi? Also, India then cannot retaliate on Karachi when Indian troops are in there.

BraHmos will be used to take out high value targets like Pakistani army chief General Kiyani placed in karachi, 320 km from Bhuj.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Nikhil T » 26 Sep 2010 12:36

Army called in to build CWG fallen bridge

Saving the nations pride when the civil society / babudom fails (again).

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby asprinzl » 26 Sep 2010 12:40

American misadventure in Iraq clearly show that occupying a territory especially that of a hostile population is not a wise idea in the 21st century. Unlike the 15th, 16th, 17th, or 19th century where you could cleanseout the hostile population to suit your imperial designs, in our present time unless you are the army of Pakistan, China, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Syria or Egypt....shooting at your enemy with paintball will be war crime in the eyes of Amnasty International or some Scandinavian infested human rights movement. So all these "Hot pursuit" or "Cold Start" are non-starters.

Pakistan is a weak nation despite their bravado. This is the attitude of bullies. When bullies are cornered, they would unleash everything from expletives to throwing rocks to throwing at you everything their hands can touch. Thus sending columns of armor and infantry into Dodge to seize land is not a wise move as far as India is concerned. Anyways, why would you want to add to your headache by having some extra 20 million ba$tards under your responsibilities.

To deal with satan, India needs complete air superiority. This lack of air superiority is the prime reason India has not been able to do anything regarding the Mumbai carnage despite overwhelming evidence of official PA involvement. With 360 degs control of the air, air power should ensure no missiles are fired from anywhere including from rat holes or dog house, no aircraft takes off from any corner of Pakistan. That means every inch of Pakistan must be under constant watch for the duration of the campaign of anhilation of their military, para military and nonstate forces.

Missiles need fuel, parts, crews and locations. So do planes. These assets must be completely anhilated. The storage, the fuel stations, the workshops, the factories, the crews, the command and control, the GHQ, the communications network....everything the military depends on either owned by military or by civillians that could be comandeered by the military. Every single factory, warehouse, storage owned by the fauj either producing toilet paper or bullets must be hit and continue to be hit so that they never be able to rehabilitate after the first strike. High value troops hunkered down un underground shelters must be hit every minute for weeks so that the sleep deprivation cause by the continous explosions that last several weeks completely destroys their sense of being.

If one missile or one aircraft escapes and delivers a WMD ordnance over India...it is something that will not be acceptable. To ensure that this does not happen....the complete anhilation of Pakistan ability to fire even a single bullet must be the outcome. For that the mindset in India must change. The IAF's offensive and surveillance capabilities must be expanded by leaps and bounds. The manner with which the MMRCA procurement saga is something that is not acceptable. This is a fiasco. If this trend continues, the potential for another or more of the Mumbai carnage will always be there because the Pakis know that despite the present IAF superiority over PAF, there is no overwhelming superiority that can ensure India protection from missile or airstrikes. Thus the saga continues.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 26 Sep 2010 12:52

^^^ Inspite of all the air superiority that US forces had in Gulf War 1 , Iraq could fire Al-Hussian ( Scud ) BM over Saudi/Israel and US forces could do nothing to stop them since they were mobile.

Similarly in GW 2 even with a degraded AD despite years of sanction the Iraqi could fire the short range ( ~ 180 km ) AL Samoud BM.

So the notion that you could stop mobile BM from firing due to complete air superiority is a non starter and not viable needless to say IAF is not the USAF that has wide range of assets ,will and money at its disposal.

Though I agree with what you say about Cold Start and Hot Pursuit is a non starter.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gaur » 26 Sep 2010 14:05

Cross post from Indian Army History thread:
A tribute to Indian soldiers on Haifa Day

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby asprinzl » 26 Sep 2010 19:21

Austin....exactly my point which is at present situation....there are no war options at all except utilizing the "non state actors" option.
Avram

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4505
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Sep 2010 22:55

Acharya wrote:
putnanja wrote:If India occupies Karachi, what prevents TSP from using the nuclear option on Indian cities to force India to withdraw from Karachi? Also, India then cannot retaliate on Karachi when Indian troops are in there.

BraHmos will be used to take out high value targets like Pakistani army chief General Kiyani placed in karachi, 320 km from Bhuj.


But the Pakis may still do a nuclear strike first on India if India occupies Karachi. Are we prepared for that?

SriSri
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 15:25

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby SriSri » 26 Sep 2010 23:08

putnanja wrote:But the Pakis may still do a nuclear strike first on India if India occupies Karachi. Are we prepared for that?

I thought before taking Karachi (and doing anything else for that matter) our objective would be to neutralize the Pakistani nuke option.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10097
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sum » 27 Sep 2010 09:12

asprinzl wrote:Austin....exactly my point which is at present situation....there are no war options at all except utilizing the "non state actors" option.
Avram

Given that we have a pretty decent record of raising non-state actors like the SFF, SSB, Mukti bahini, LTTE ( in initial stages) etc, it shouldn't be too tough to pay back Pakis in the same coin provided the political leadership makes up ts mind and has the steely will to go through with it ( currently lacking though!)...

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 27 Sep 2010 14:43

On foreign women marrying Indian Servicemen and settling in India, I completely forgot to mention Savitri Khanolkar, who later designed the Param Vir Chakra. Such were the examples set that we fail to follow today.

This joker's training fees should be recovered and he needs to be boarded out for conduct unbecoming of an officer.

On the Pakistani threat to use nuclear weapons, an aggressive second strike deterrent posture of nuking every square inch of Pakistani land will sufficiently deter their use.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 27 Sep 2010 16:20

atreya wrote:
JimmyJ wrote:Ok, why don't she become an Indian citizen and the the major could marry his lady love, would that be too difficult. I believe the lady is a US citizen of Indian origin. Or is that too not allowed


Then the whole point of this exercise MAYBE wasted for the Major (just speculating, that is why the 'maybe'). If the Major marries her, he is hitting two birds with one stone- green card and of course, staying with his lady love. Maybe he wants to settle in USA. We never know.


The major definitely wants the green card / new passport.

No point in raking up all the muck and doing drama
if change of citizenship was not the goal.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 944
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ParGha » 27 Sep 2010 16:29

sum,

The SFF and SSB are both Indian government agencies. That apart, there are numerous dangers to playing with such fire so close to home. Frankly it is a short-term, band-aid solution - just like many other such quick fixes. If you want a job done right, be prepared to roll up your sleeves and do it yourself.


chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23573
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 28 Sep 2010 00:48

For omar.


http://news.rediff.com/column/2010/sep/ ... -afspa.htm



AFSPA debate: Soldiers clear, but is everyone else?
September 27, 2010 20:55 IST

Today's terrorist does not allow you the luxury of a magistrate's presence, notes Major General Rajendra Prakash (retd), arguing why AFPSA is necessary.

With the Kashmir valley on the boil, the prolific public debate on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act has taken on an unusual stridency.

But a debate which is swayed by emotion, prejudice or cultivated ignorance, instead of resting on a bedrock of factual realities, becomes an exercise in mere sophistry.


Before we re-examine what AFSPA is all about, a word about the Indian soldier (means all members of the Indian Army [ Images ], Navy and Air Force).

The Indian soldier is a citizen with equal obligations and the same rights as any other Indian citizen -- s/he is neither a 'slave' of the State or of the populace and nor is s/he a robot, to be to be manipulated by the exigencies of politics or populism.

Albeit, as long as she/he wears the uniform, s/he voluntarily denudes her/him-self of three fundamental rights granted by Article 19 of our Constitution, right of free association, the right of political activity and the right to communicate to the press -- all other Constitutional rights remain intact.

Further, a soldier voluntarily places her/himself under the statutory rigours of military discipline (Army/Navy/Air Force Acts) and is bound to obey all lawful commands of her/his military superior, unto death.

Next, the Indian armed forces are the servants of the State and its ultimate resort. They are duty-bound to do all that is necessary for the 'safety, honour and welfare' of our nation and to this end, faithfully and efficiently execute all lawful commands, directions and policies of the government in power, with fidelity and to the utmost of their ability.

Reciprocally, it is the duty of the State (and its other executive instruments) to provide the armed forces, the means and wherewithal essential to perform the responsibilities and tasks assigned to them.

Now for the AFSPA. Except in war, or when guarding the international border, the Indian Army has no Constitutional authority or legal powers to use force or fire-arms against anyone, whosoever.

Like any other Indian citizen, the only legal right a soldier has, is the right of 'private defence' (of life or property), which must be proved post-facto, in a court of law, and this takes many years of court hearings.

The only other possibility of such use of force by the armed forces is when called out in 'aid to civil authority', where a magistrate must be present at each spot, and s/he must allow the use of force in writing, on a particular form, and only after completing these procedures can troops be ordered to use minimum force.

Well, today's terrorist/insurgent/militant/Naxalite does not allow you the luxury of a magistrate's presence, ready with a pen and form (and one would not be handy, everywhere and all the time) -- you are shot dead or blown-up in a jiffy, unless you are quicker and forestall him.

Any military commander ordering his troops to operate in a counter-insurgency role (cordons and searches, ambushes, counter-ambushes, pitched battles) against folks of this ilk, would be giving an unlawful command, not liable to be obeyed.

If obeyed, it would land all commanders down the chain and whole corps, divisions, brigades, battalions, companies, platoons and infantry sections before the courts of law, on charges of murder, assault, injury and destruction of property, obviously leaving no time or resources for any other military activities, for years.

So, to ensure that the army is able to perform its basic function of external defence and internal security of the nation, some pragmatic persons in the 1950s invented AFSPA for the Naga hills, and now it is applied on a 'fire-fighting basis' elsewhere also, not by the Indian Army but by the Government of India, when things get out of hand!

So before undermining AFSPA, understand one thing clearly -- in a democracy, only the elected government is mandated to govern -- if it fails and cannot find political solutions, and needs to exert State power to enforce its writ, then the army may be called in by the State -- it does not come in on its own.

So, ordering a soldier, who is also a citizen, to carry out counter-insurgency operations in the absence of any legal mandate, is to order her/him to commit murder and mayhem and this is not a lawful command and is legally and morally open to disobedience.

You apply AFPSA (or any suitable enabling legal measure) and it becomes a military operation, done in a military manner, with restraint and responsibility.

Aberrations will occur amongst humans, will be punished severely and promptly, but these aberrations are not policy. As simple as that!

So all those frantic for the removal of AFSPA, need to be clear on this -- abolish AFSPA, humanise it or whatever, but before that resolve politically or governance-wise, the problems which force the State to impose AFSPA (convince the insurgents, militants, terrorists, Naxalites [ Images ] to stop the mayhem and valley youth to stop chucking stones at the behest of 'organisers').

From the service chiefs downwards, no one can order a soldier to obey an unlawful command -- to inflict violence without legitimate legal sanction.

Thus, debates based on crass ignorance of ground realities are harmful for the community -- it is like banning a book or a movie without having read/seen it.

Soldiers are quite clear on where they stand on AFPSA, but is everyone else?


Major General Rajendra Prakash (retd)

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Suresh S » 28 Sep 2010 06:36

thank the Major general. as always indian army has more sense than the politicians

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Raja Bose » 28 Sep 2010 09:09

tsarkar wrote:On foreign women marrying Indian Servicemen and settling in India, I completely forgot to mention Savitri Khanolkar, who later designed the Param Vir Chakra. Such were the examples set that we fail to follow today.


To add to the above: Major Somnath Sharma the first recipient of the PVC (posthumous) was her son-in-law.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 55 guests