Indian Army News & Discussions - 11 June 2014

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 956
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby K Mehta » 04 Jul 2014 12:53

This report is by rahul bedi, who is known to be lifafa.
What RayC used to say was INSAS was good enough. There were production problems, and each new rifle had to be tweaked in the armory of the units using the gun, but once done they were reliable as any. The fault then lies with MoD and OFB. The other is issue is rate of production and again the fault is with OFB.

Lack of improvements from DRDO front is a lie, with introduction of picatinny rails, foregrips, foldable butt etc. has been carried out. Excalibur, MSMC and MCIWS have been developed and these should be inducted. If not this will be a repeat of marut and HDW saga and we will loose expertise that has been developed.

The baretta mx4 has only been ordered by us and no other country, there are shades of augusta scam in that procurement.

ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby ASPuar » 04 Jul 2014 13:11

All journos are by and large individually or organisationally lifafa.

But the fact is, that the rifles reaching the troops are of poor quality. OFB does not have the QC standards required to deal with such orders. In fact, rampant trade unionism and chalta hai culture, coupled with factories being led by an organised group A service that largely devotes its time trying to get deputations to other ministries and departments with fancier and more important designations, leads to a rather poor work culture.

Quality is the last thing on OFB's mind. And the soldier suffers. I would say even if INSAS production was outsourced to Pvt sector huge improvements would be seen.

The assault rifle is a simple piece of equipment, seventy year old technology. Its not rocket science, frankly.

If others make better weapons than us in this category, better to bite the bullet and adopt the tried and tested rather than reinvent the wheel. Its a cheap necessity. Spend that time and money developing something that we cannot acquire from anywhere else, and get out of this silly swadeshi mindset.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby dinesh_kimar » 04 Jul 2014 13:39

deleted
Last edited by dinesh_kimar on 04 Jul 2014 13:51, edited 1 time in total.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby dinesh_kimar » 04 Jul 2014 13:50

^ Even i have silly swedish mindset, and if we get to keep the 7-8 Billion dollars ourselves, rather than send it to countries like Italy and the Czech Republic, then why not?

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 956
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby K Mehta » 04 Jul 2014 13:59

ASPji whose job is to ensure that OFB does its job properly? I think the answer here is to give pvt sector the blueprints and get it manufactured from them, atleast a parallel order especially when OFB doesnt event produce sufficient quantities all the while providing subpar quality. We should not let our design experience go waste due to poor production, especially when there are other avenues available. Time has come for us to be rid of DPSU culture.

ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby ASPuar » 04 Jul 2014 17:10

K Mehtaji, it is the job of the Ministry of Defence, specifically the Department of Defence Production to ensure that the work is done correctly. However, as I have said, rampant trade unionism has made a hash of everything. The fact is, that OFB is not even a Defence PSU. It is a direct government department, like deptt of posts. They are least concerned about anything, as noone can ever touch their jobs.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2154
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby merlin » 04 Jul 2014 17:42

K Mehta wrote:ASPji whose job is to ensure that OFB does its job properly? I think the answer here is to give pvt sector the blueprints and get it manufactured from them, atleast a parallel order especially when OFB doesnt event produce sufficient quantities all the while providing subpar quality. We should not let our design experience go waste due to poor production, especially when there are other avenues available. Time has come for us to be rid of DPSU culture.


Then getting the INSAS manufactured by a private Indian firm from DRDO blueprints would be a low hanging fruit to be plucked before going for imports. With imports only the import lobby of arms dealers, middlemen and other and the troops benefit. With Indian private industry manufacturing it the country and troops will benefit which is much better.

Unless the troops are unhappy with the design of the INSAS itself. Then I suppose imports are justified as it might be too late for a redesign. BTW, I have never heard of design problems with the INSAS.

ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby ASPuar » 04 Jul 2014 18:09

A firm which has expertise in metalwork- stamping, machining, with necessary tooling, would probably be able to pull it off.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby JayS » 04 Jul 2014 19:03

merlin wrote:Then getting the INSAS manufactured by a private Indian firm from DRDO blueprints would be a low hanging fruit to be plucked before going for imports. With imports only the import lobby of arms dealers, middlemen and other and the troops benefit. With Indian private industry manufacturing it the country and troops will benefit which is much better.

Unless the troops are unhappy with the design of the INSAS itself. Then I suppose imports are justified as it might be too late for a redesign. BTW, I have never heard of design problems with the INSAS.


I have heard of at least one. From one eminent professor who is highly regarded in the field of quality assurance/Reliability engineering (or whatever it is called: basically to do probabilistic study of how much any system is reliable etc). He has done a lot of work on reliability of Indian defense systems like Agni launcher system, INSAS design. He told once about an issue in INSAS design. The gun would not fire as intended in burst mode, sometimes only 1 or 2 rounds would be fired, sometimes nothing would come out and stuff like that.. It was very random event and the designers were unable to figure out why it was happening. Then this professor was brought in for analysis. He figured out, there were issues in the tolerances specified on the trigger mechanism components such that 2 mating parts wouldn't fit properly if both of them are of min dimension. The required interference was not insured. Such stupid error, but implications were heavy.

Anyway, I don't believe we can't make world class guns in India. We are simply not using collective intelligence of our country. People at the top don't give a damn for self-sufficiency and imports bring them kickbacks. Even if INSAS was a bad design, it could have been improved. Even the westerner didn't make assault rifles right in there first attempt.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Viv S » 04 Jul 2014 19:43

nileshjr wrote:Anyway, I don't believe we can't make world class guns in India. We are simply not using collective intelligence of our country.


The best sniper rifles in the world according to some are built by Accuracy International, a British firm. The astounding thing is that it has just 50 employees.

The idea that we simply must import firearms is ridiculous. Both DRDO and the private industry have the potential to develop world class firearms, at short notice if need be. We need to get OFB out the picture in either case - split it and let the major defence players acquire the parts as a stepping stone to a larger role.


Also what the hell happened to the MCIWS -

Image


What stops it from serving as a basis (if not solution) to the IA's requirements?

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Picklu » 04 Jul 2014 23:57

The optimistic BRakshaks see the first generation products like ALH Dhruv, Pinaka, Akash, LCA and rejoice.

I see INSAS saga of importing the next gen multi calibre AR and cringe.

Wish NaMoji gives some direction by allowing private parties in India to design and manufacture small arms with a price cap and assured quality with penalty clause for induction.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby RoyG » 05 Jul 2014 00:07

Picklu wrote:The optimistic BRakshaks see the first generation products like ALH Dhruv, Pinaka, Akash, LCA and rejoice.

I see INSAS saga of importing the next gen multi calibre AR and cringe.

Wish NaMoji gives some direction by allowing private parties in India to design and manufacture small arms with a price cap and assured quality with penalty clause for induction.


Shadap Picklu. You are making too much sense. Karanji is circling with PSU hellpyre.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 01:12

Deleted as part of thread clean-up. Too much love between posters here. - rohitvats.
Last edited by rohitvats on 05 Jul 2014 19:08, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Deleted as part of thread clean up-rohitvats

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 01:20

Reddy wrote:Years ago i used to collect Russian cameras. One example is Kiev 88 medium format camera, a rip off of Hasselblad 500. As a rule i always order two cameras because they seldom work out of box. One need to rip them apart polish gears, repack anti-reflective felt and paint, wash crappy lubrication and change with something that does no dry in warm weather etc. However, once it is rebuilt it lasts a life time. Do similar with East Germany lens and you end up with top notch medium format set-up for 1/3 the price.
Coming back to INSAS, only opportunity i had talking to a user of INSAS said exactly same thing about these weapons. Out off box they are crap but once it is tweaked they are as good as any. In other words, inconsistent machining and horrible QC. Perhaps we picked up this wonderful production values from our socialist brothers.


SanjayC wrote:^^^ Rather then phasing out INSAS rifles on which so much effort has been spent, it is better to hand over their blueprints to private companies like Bharat Forge, who can improve them further, rectify all faults and manufacture them with world-class standards, with license to export. Being private firms, they won't take much time to collect gun designers from around the world to act as advisers.


Bingo.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opi ... 508655.cms

By A M Naik (L&T head)

It is time now to shed the public vs private sector mindset and consider the entire defence industrial base in India as the 'national defence sector'. It is important that domestic programmes are opened up for competition wherever possible. SMEs capable of developing niche technologies should be encouraged, while the stalled pro-posal to identify platform builders and system integrators — Raksha Udyog Ratnas, must be immediately implemented.

...
and
...
Increased emphasis on R&D and innovation is vital for achieving self-reliance in defence equipment. In order to realise the untapped potential in indigenous technologies, DRDO must be authorised to form partnerships with organisations of their choice for cutting-edge technology deve-lopment, while simultaneously allowing use of their facilities on commercial terms by companies in the defence field.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 01:24

K Mehta wrote:This report is by rahul bedi, who is known to be lifafa.
What RayC used to say was INSAS was good enough. There were production problems, and each new rifle had to be tweaked in the armory of the units using the gun, but once done they were reliable as any. The fault then lies with MoD and OFB. The other is issue is rate of production and again the fault is with OFB.

Lack of improvements from DRDO front is a lie, with introduction of picatinny rails, foregrips, foldable butt etc. has been carried out. Excalibur, MSMC and MCIWS have been developed and these should be inducted. If not this will be a repeat of marut and HDW saga and we will loose expertise that has been developed.

The baretta mx4 has only been ordered by us and no other country, there are shades of augusta scam in that procurement.


Correct, Bedi is a long time "all local is worthless" baiter. The SS109 development for instance was driven by IA requirements. One has to take what he says with a ton of salt.

merlin wrote:Then getting the INSAS manufactured by a private Indian firm from DRDO blueprints would be a low hanging fruit to be plucked before going for imports. With imports only the import lobby of arms dealers, middlemen and other and the troops benefit. With Indian private industry manufacturing it the country and troops will benefit which is much better.

Unless the troops are unhappy with the design of the INSAS itself. Then I suppose imports are justified as it might be too late for a redesign. BTW, I have never heard of design problems with the INSAS.


What is truly ironic is that OFB will manufacture any foreign design chosen.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Cosmo_R » 05 Jul 2014 01:25

ASPuar wrote:A firm which has expertise in metalwork- stamping, machining, with necessary tooling, would probably be able to pull it off.


Yup, along with the right financial motivation. It's all very low hanging fruit.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7630
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby rohitvats » 05 Jul 2014 02:56

Well, the OFB factory which is producing Dhanush threatened to go on strike when union heard about TATA SED developing a gun for army - were assuaged only when told that TATA SED gun is in different category. Guess what hissy-fit will they throw when they hear about DRDO partnering private firms for manufacture.

Then we have example of HAL wanting a way-in on AVRO replacement.

Fact is, will MOD let go of fat dividends from OFB in 'interest' on better manufacturing capability!

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Cosmo_R » 05 Jul 2014 03:18

rohitvats wrote:Well, the OFB factory which is producing Dhanush threatened to go on strike when union heard about TATA SED developing a gun for army - were assuaged only when told that TATA SED gun is in different category. Guess what hissy-fit will they throw when they hear about DRDO partnering private firms for manufacture.

Then we have example of HAL wanting a way-in on AVRO replacement.

Fact is, will MOD let go of fat dividends from OFB in 'interest' on better manufacturing capability!


The OFB bluff with the commie unions needs to be called. They put themselves before the country.

Need to know the meaning of an honest day's work

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby RoyG » 05 Jul 2014 04:45

Deleted as part of thread clean-up. - rohitvats.
Last edited by rohitvats on 05 Jul 2014 19:09, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Deleted as part of thread clean up-rohitvats

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby RoyG » 05 Jul 2014 04:51

rohitvats wrote:Well, the OFB factory which is producing Dhanush threatened to go on strike when union heard about TATA SED developing a gun for army - were assuaged only when told that TATA SED gun is in different category. Guess what hissy-fit will they throw when they hear about DRDO partnering private firms for manufacture.

Then we have example of HAL wanting a way-in on AVRO replacement.

Fact is, will MOD let go of fat dividends from OFB in 'interest' on better manufacturing capability!


Rohitvatsji, OFB manufactures high quality arms and ammunition. World beaters just like HAL. The way they glide over foreign schematics , operate the torque wrench, passion displayed during strikes, etc leaves me dumbfounded as to why the government is so unhappy with them. Please desist from this nonsense.

SanjayC
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby SanjayC » 05 Jul 2014 09:09

^^^ Jeporadising the defence of India by persisting with OFB monopoly on defence manufacturing is a self-inflicted wound, and no task is more difficult in this world than persuading Indians to stop wounding themselves. Most of these wounds have been self-inflicted on India by that shahanshah-e-goofballs, Nehru.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby dinesh_kimar » 05 Jul 2014 11:18

Below is the piece from Time Magazine written on the 1962 War: Apologies if already posted and I hope IA thread is the correct one for this:

Nehru’s Juvenile Delusions and his 1962 China Blunder

Nehru’s monumental chinese blunder, an article written in 1962, at the time of the war itself, in the ‘Time” magazine

INDIA: Never Again the Same

Red China behaved in so inscrutably Oriental a manner last week that even Asians were baffled. After a series of smashing victories in the border war with India. Chinese troops swept down from the towering Himalayas and were poised at the edge of the fertile plains of Assam, whose jute and tea plantations account for one-fourth of India’s export trade. Then, with Assam lying defenseless before her conquering army. Red China suddenly called a halt to the fighting.

Radio Peking announced that, “on its own initiative.” Red China was ordering a cease-fire on all fronts. Further, by Dec. 1, Chinese troops would retire to positions 12½ miles behind the lines they occupied on Nov. 7. 1959. If this promise is actually carried out. it would mean, for some Chinese units, a pullback of more than 60 miles. These decisions. Peking continued, ”represent a most sincere effort” to achieve ”a speedy termination of the Sino-Indian conflict, a reopening of peaceful negotiations, and a peaceful settlement of the boundary question.” War or peace, the message concluded, ”depends on whether or not the Indian government responds positively.”

In New Delhi the government of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was taken completely by surprise. An Indian spokesman first denounced the Chinese offer as a “diabolical maneuver.” which was later amended to the comment that India would “wait and see” exactly what the Chinese were proposing. A communique confirmed that, after the cease-fire deadline, there “had been no report of firing by the Chinese aggressors.” Indian troops also stopped shooting, but Nehru warned India: “We must not imagine that the struggle will soon be over.”

On closer examination, the Chinese cease-fire proved to be a lot less mysterious. It did offer India’s battered armies a badly needed respite. But it left the Chinese armies in position to resume their offensive if Nehru refuses the Peking terms. And it puts on India the onus of continuing the war. Said the Hindustan Times: “The latest Chinese proposals are not a peace offer but an ultimatum.”

Whatever the results of this peace bid tendered on a bayonet, India will never be the same again, nor will Nehru.

Barren Rock

In New Delhi illusions are dying fast. Gone is the belief that Chinese expansionism need not be taken seriously, that, in Nehru’s words, China could not really want to wage a major war for “barren rock.” Going too, is the conviction that the Soviet Union has either the authority or the will to restrain the Chinese Communists. Nehru’s policy of nonalignment, which was intended to free India from any concern with the cold war between the West and Communism, was ending in disaster. Nearly shattered was the morally arrogant pose from which he had endlessly lectured the West on the need for peaceful coexistence with Communism. Above all. the Indian people, fiercely proud of their nationhood, have been deeply humiliated and shaken by the hated Chinese.

India, which is equally capable of philosophic calm and hysterical violence, showed, in the words of President Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. a “great soul-awakening such as it has never had in all its history.” The awakening took some curious forms. The Buddhist nuns and monks of Ladakh devoted themselves to writing an “immortal epic” of India’s fight against Chinese aggression. A temple in the south Indian state of Andhra Pradesh converted its 85-lb. gold treasury into 15-year defense bonds, while New Delhi bank clerks shined shoes outside a restaurant after hours and gave their earnings to the government, men jammed the enlistment centers and showered Nehru with pledges to fight signed in blood.

The 73-year-old Nehru gave the impression of being swept along by this tumult, not of leading it. His agony was apparent as he rose in Parliament, three days before the Chinese cease-fire announcement, to report that the Indian army had been decisively defeated at Se Pass and Walong. The news raised a storm among the M.P.s. A Deputy from the threatened Assam state was on his feet, shaking with indignation and demanding, “What is the government going to do? Why can’t you tell us? Are we going to get both men and materials from friendly countries to fight a total war, or is the government contemplating a cease-fire and negotiations with the Chinese?” Other gesturing Deputies joined in, shouting their questions in English and Hindi. “Are we nothing?” cried one Praja Socialist member. “Is the Prime Minister everything?”

While the Speaker asked repeatedly for order, Nehru sat chin in hand, obviously scornful of this display of Indian excitability, his abstracted gaze fixed on nothing. Finally Nehru rose again and tried to quiet the uproar by saying, “We shall take every conceivable and possible measure to meet the crisis. We are trying to get all possible help from friendly countries.”

Attic Burglar

His critics accused him of still clinging to the language of nonalignment. Later, in a radio speech in which he announced the fall of Bomdi La,

Nehru sounded tougher. He no longer defended his old policies, denounced China as “an imperialist of the worst kind,” and at last thanked the U.S. and Britain by name for arms aid, pledging to ask for more.

Nehru was coming close to admitting that he had at last discovered who were India’s friends. The neutral nations, which so often looked to India for leadership in the past, were mostly embarrassingly silent or unsympathetic—a government-controlled newspaper in Ghana dismissed the war as “an ordinary border dispute.” As for Russia, its ambiguously neutral position, argued Nehru, was the best India could hope for under the circumstances. Actually, Nehru had obviously hoped for more, and was shocked when, instead of helping India, Moscow denounced India’s border claims and urged Nehru to accept the Red Chinese terms.

As India’s poorly equipped army reeled under the Chinese blows, the West moved swiftly and without recrimination to India’s defense. Shortly after the Chinese attack, frantic Indian officers simply drove round to the U.S. embassy with their pleas for arms and supplies. Eventually their requests were coordinated. During the tense week of the Cuban crisis, U.S. Ambassador to India Kenneth Galbraith was virtually on his own, and he promised Nehru full U.S. backing.

When Washington finally turned its attention to India, it honored the ambassador’s pledge, loaded 60 U.S. planes with $5,000,000 worth of automatic weapons, heavy mortars and land mines. Twelve huge C-130 Hercules transports, complete with U.S. crews and maintenance teams, took off for New Delhi to fly Indian troops and equipment to the battle zone. Britain weighed in with Bren and Sten guns, and airlifted 150 tons of arms to India. Canada prepared to ship six transport planes. Australia opened Indian credits for $1,800,000 worth of munitions.

Assistant Secretary of State Phillips Talbot graphically defined the U.S. mission. “We are not seeking a new ally,” he said. “We are helping a friend whose attic has been entered by a burglar.” In Washington’s opinion, it mattered little that the burglar gratuitously offered to move back from the stairs leading to the lower floors and promised not to shoot any more of the house’s inhabitants. “What we want,” said Talbot, “is to help get the burglar out.”

To that end, a U.S. mission headed by Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs Averell Harriman and U.S. Army General Paul D. Adams flew to New Delhi to confer with Indian officials on defense requirements. Soon after, Britain’s Commonwealth Secretary Duncan Sandys arrived with a similar British mission. Their most stunning discovery: after five years under Nehru’s hand-picked Defense Minister, Krishna Menon, the Indian army was lamentably short of ammunition even for its antiquated Lee Enfield rifles.

Misbehaving People

So far, the fighting has shown that the Indians need nearly everything, except courage. Chinese burp guns fire 20 times faster than Indian rifles. The Indian 25-pounder is a good artillery piece, but is almost immobile in the mountains and cannot match the Chinese pack artillery, recoilless guns and bazookas. Each Chinese battalion has a special company of porters whose job it is to make sure the fighting men have ample ammunition and food. The Indians must rely on units from their unwieldy Army Service Corps, who were never trained to operate at heights of 14,000 feet and over mule paths. In addition to bulldozers and four-wheel-drive trucks, the Indians need mechanical saws that can match the speed of those the Chinese use to cut roads through forests.

India’s catastrophic unreadiness for war stems directly from the policy of nonalignment which was devised by Nehru and implemented by his close confidant Krishna Menon. Says one Indian editor: “Nonalignment is no ideology. It is an idiosyncrasy.”

Indians like to say that it resembles the isolationism formerly practiced by the U.S.. but it has moral overtones which, Nehru claims, grow out of “Indian culture and our philosophic outlook.” Actually, it owes as much to Nehru’s rather oldfashioned, stereotyped, left-wing attitudes acquired during the ’20s and ’30s (“He still remembers all those New Statesmen leaders.” says one bitter critic) as it does to Gandhian notions of nonviolence. Nehru has never been able to rid himself of the disastrous cliche that holds Communism to be somehow progressive and less of a threat to emergent nations than “imperialism.”

Nehru himself has said: “Nonalignment essentially means live and let live—but of course this doesn’t include people who misbehave.” During its 15 years of independence. India has dealt severely with the misbehavior of several smaller neighbors, but has been almost slavishly tolerant of Communist misbehavior.

The Communist Chinese invasion of Korea was “aggression.” but the West was also “not blameless”; the crushing of the Hungarian rebellion was unfortunate, but all the facts were not clear; when the Soviet Union broke the nuclear test moratorium last year, Nehru deplored “all nuclear tests.”

Like a Buddha

Yet in its way, nonalignment paid enormous dividends. India received massive aid from both Russia and the West. Getting on India’s good side became almost the most important thing in the United Nations. At intervals, the rest of the world’s statesmen came to India to pay obeisance to Nehru as though to a Buddha. And Nehru obviously believed that whatever he did. in case of real need the U.S. would have to help India anyway. Meanwhile, as he saw it. the object of his foreign policy was to prevent the two great Asian powers —Russia and China—from combining against India. In his effort to woo both, acerbic Krishna Menon, says one Western diplomat, “was worth the weight of four or five ordinary men. He was so obnoxious to the West that, almost alone, he could demonstrate the sincerity of India’s neutrality to the Russians.”

At the 1955 Bandung conference. Nehru and China’s Premier Chou En-lai embraced Panch Shila, a five-point formula for peaceful coexistence. The same Indian crowds that now shout. “Wipe out Chink stink!” then roared “Hindi Chini bhai bhai” (Indians and Chinese are brothers). India refused to sign the peace treaty with Japan because Red China was not a party to it. At home, Menon harped on the theme that Pakistan was India’s only enemy. Three years ago, when Pakistan proposed a joint defense pact with India, Nehru ingenuously asked, “Joint defense against whom?” Western warnings about China’s ultimate intentions were brushed aside as obvious attempts to stir up trouble between peace-loving friends.

Even the Chinese conquest of Tibet in 1951 had rung no alarm bells in New Delhi—and therein lie the real beginnings of the present war.

Initialed Map

Under the British raj, London played what Lord Curzon called “the great game.” Its object was to protect India’s northern borders from Russia by fostering semi-independent buffer states like Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim. In those palmy colonial days, Tibet was militarily insignificant, and China, which claims overlordship of Tibet, was usually too weak to exercise it.

When the Chinese Republic of Sun Yat-sen was born in 1912, Britain decided to look to its borders. At a three-nation meeting in Simla in 1914, Britain’s representative. Sir Arthur McMahon, determined the eastern portion of the border by drawing a line on a map along the Himalayan peaks from Bhutan to Burma. The Tibetan and Chinese delegates initialed this map, but the newborn Chinese Republic refused to ratify it, and so has every Chinese government since.

The McMahon Line was never surveyed or delimited on the ground, and British troops seldom penetrated the NEFA hill country, where such tribes as the Apatanis. the Tagins and the Hill Miris amused themselves by slave-raiding and headhunting. As recently as 1953. the Daflas wiped out a detachment of the Assam Rifles just for the fun of it.

At the western end of the border, in Ladakh. the British made even less of an effort at marking the frontier, and the border with Tibet has generally been classified as “undefined.” Red China was most interested in Ladakh’s northeastern corner, where lies the Aksai Chin plateau, empty of nearly everything but rocks, sky and silence. For centuries, a caravan route wound through the Aksai Chin (one reason the Chinese say the plateau is theirs is that Aksai Chin means “China’s Desert of White Stone”), leading from Tibet around the hump of the lofty Kunlun range to the Chinese province of Sinkiang. In 1956 and 1957 the Chinese built a paved road over the caravan trail, and so lightly did Indian border police patrol the area that New Delhi did not learn about the road until two years after it was built.

Time Immemorial

Firing off a belated protest to Peking, India rushed troops into the endangered area, where they at once collided with Chinese outposts. Attempts at negotiation broke down because India demanded that the Chinese first withdraw to Tibet, while the Chinese insisted that Aksai Chin, and much more besides in NEFA and Ladakh. was historically Chinese territory. Neither side has basically changed its position since.

On Oct. 25, strong Chinese patrols began penetrating the NEFA border, occupying Longju and Towang and threatening Walong. For once, Nehru was badly shaken. He said: “From time immemorial the Himalayas have provided us with a magnificent frontier. We cannot allow that barrier to be penetrated because it is also the principal barrier to India.” But the barrier was being daily penetrated. Ten months ago, Nehru appointed Lieut. General Brij Kaul, 50, to command the NEFA area. Then, without consulting any of his military men, Nehru publicly ordered Kaul to drive out the Chinese invaders of NEFA.

The opposing armies were of unequal size, skill and equipment. The Chinese force of some 110,000 men was commanded by General Chang Kuo-hua, 54, a short, burly veteran of the Communist Party and Communist wars, who well understands Mao Tse-tung’s dictum, “All political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” His army is made up of three-year conscripts from central China, but its officers and noncoms are largely proven cadres who served with distinction in the Korean war. The infantry is armed with a Chinese-made burp gun with not very great accuracy but good fire power, hand grenades, submachine guns and rifles. The light and heavy mortars, which have a surprising range, are also Chinese made, but the heavy artillery, tanks and planes are mostly of Soviet manufacture.

The Indian forces number some 500,000, but fewer than 100,000 men were committed to the Red border area—the bulk of the army, and many of its best units, being kept on guard duty in Kashmir watching the Pakistanis. A strictly volunteer army, with the men serving five-year terms, it drew its troops largely from the warrior races of the north—Jats, Sikhs, Gurkhas, Dogras, Garhwalis. Over the past century, the Indian army has fought from France to China, and has usually fought excellently, whether pitted against Pathan guerrillas, Nazi panzer grenadiers or Japanese suicide squads. In the 1947-48 war in Kashmir, the Indians were fighting a British-trained Pakistani army very like themselves. Since independence, the Indian army has not encountered a really first-rate foe. The guerrilla war with the rebellious Naga tribesmen of Eastern Assam and the walkover in Goa were little more than training exercises.

Infinite Testiness

For the past five years, the Indian army has also been plagued by Defense Minister Krishna Menon, who was both economy-minded and socialistically determined to supply the troops from state-run arsenals, most of which exist only as blueprints. Sharing Nehru’s distrust of what he calls the “arms racket,” Menon was reluctant to buy weapons abroad, and refused to let private Indian firms bid on defense contracts. Menon’s boasts of Indian creativity in arms development have been revealed as shoddy deceptions. A prototype of an Indian jet fighter plane proved unable to break the sound barrier. Even the MIG-21 planes that the Soviet Union has promised to deliver in December are of questionable value, since jet fighters are useless without an intricate ground-support system, which India is in no position to set up.

A man of infinite testiness, Menon was soon squabbling with independent-minded generals. Lieut. General Shankar Thorat and Commander in Chief General K. S. Thimayya appealed to Nehru against Menon’s promotion policies. When Nehru, who has long scorned the British-trained officers as men who “did not understand India,” refused to listen to complaints about Menon, both generals retired from the army in disgust. Menon named as new commander in chief P. N. Thapar, a “paperwork general.”

Skyward Zigzag

Before Kaul had a chance to try and “clear out” the Chinese in NEFA, the Chinese struck first on Oct. 20. Some 20,000 burp-gun-toting infantry stormed over Thag La ridge and swept away a 5,000-man Indian brigade strung out along the Kechilang River. The surprise was complete, and dazed survivors of the Chinese attack struggled over the pathless mountains, where hundreds died of exposure. In Ladakh the Chinese scored an even bigger victory, occupying the entire 14,000 square miles that Peking claims is Chinese territory.

While the Indians worked to build up a new defense line at Walong and in the lofty Se Pass, reinforcements were hurried to Assam. The effort to bring up men and supplies from the plains was backbreaking. TIME Correspondent Edward Behr made the trip over a Jeep path that was like a roller coaster 70 miles long and nearly three miles high. He reports: “The Jeep path begins at Tezpur, amid groves of banana and banyan trees, then climbs steeply upward through forests of oak and pine to a 10,000-ft. summit. Here the path plunges dizzily downward to the supply base of Bomdi La on a 5,000-ft. plateau, and then zigzags skyward again to the mist-hung Se Pass at 13,556 ft. Above the hairpin turns of the road rise sheer rock walls; below lie bottomless chasms. Rain and snow come without warning, turning the path to slippery mud. Even under the best conditions, a Jeep takes 18 hours to cover the 70 miles.

“At this height, icy winds sweep down from the snow crests of the Himalayas, and if a man makes the slightest exertion, his lungs feel as if they are bursting. Newcomers suffer from the nausea and lightheadedness of mountain sickness. Every item of supply, except water, must be brought up the roller coaster from the plains. There are few bits of earth flat enough for an airstrip, and helicopters have trouble navigating in the thin air.”

Shell Plaster

After three weeks, Kaul felt emboldened to make a probing attack on the Chinese lines. Following an artillery barrage, 1,000 Indian jawans (G.I.s) drove the Chinese from the lower slopes of a hill near Walong. It was a costly victory, for the Chinese launched a massive counterattack through and around Walong, driving the Indians 80 miles down the Luhit valley. At Se Pass, the Chinese victory was even more spectacular. Having spotted the Indian gun emplacements, the Chinese plastered them with mortar and artillery shells, and then sent forward a Korea-style “human sea” assault. Two Chinese flanking columns of several thousand men each moved undetected and with bewildering speed through deep gorges and over 14,000-ft. mountains around the pass to capture the Indian supply base at Bomdi La, trapping an Indian division and throwing India’s defense plans into chaos.

Panic spread from the mountains into the plains. Officials in Tezpur burned their files, and bank managers even set fire to stacks of banknotes. Five hundred prisoners were set free from Tezpur jail. Refugees jammed aboard ferry boats to get across the Brahmaputra River. Even policemen joined the flight.

Indian army headquarters was hastily moved from Tezpur to Gauhati, 100 miles to the southwest. Officers and men who had escaped from the fighting referred dazedly to the Chinese as swarming everywhere “like red ants.” An Indian colonel admitted, “We just haven’t been taught this kind of warfare.”

Needed Intellect

Though India—like the U.S. after Pearl Harbor—could not yet afford scapegoats and recrimination, Defense Minister Krishna Menon was almost universally blamed for the inadequacy of Indian arms, the lack of equipment and even winter clothing. His fall from grace not only finished his own career but brought a turning point in Nehru’s. The Prime Minister had tried to pacify critics by taking over the Defense Ministry and downgrading Menon to Minister of Defense Production, but Nehru’s own supporters demanded Menon’s complete dismissal.

On Nov. 7, Nehru attended an all-day meeting of the Executive Committee of the parliamentary Congress Party and made a final plea for Menon, whose intellect, he said, was needed in the crisis.

As a participant recalls it, ten clenched fists banged down on the table, a chorus of voices shouted, “No!”

Nehru was dumfounded. It was he who was used to banging tables and making peremptory refusals. Taking a different tack, he accurately said that he was as much at fault as Menon and vaguely threatened to resign. Always before, such a threat had been sufficient to make the opposition crumble with piteous cries of ‘Panditji, don’t leave us alone!” This time, one of the leaders said: “If you continue to follow Menon’s policies, we are prepared to contemplate that possibility.” Nehru was beaten and Menon thrown out of the Cabinet. Joining him in his exit was Menon’s appointee, Commander in Chief General P. N. Thapar, who resigned because of “poor health.” (This P.N. Thapar is the father of arch-secularist Karan Thapar.)

The Defense Department at once, but belatedly, got a new look and a firmer tone. Impatient of turgid oratory and military fumbling, all India turned with relief to the new Defense Minister, Y. B. Chavan. A big man in every sense of the word—including his burly 200 lbs.—Chavan served for six years as Chief Minister of Bombay, the richest and most industrialized Indian state. The army’s new commander in chief, Lieut. General J. N. Chaudhuri, the “Victor of Goa,” who also saw action in World War II campaigns in the Middle East and Burma, is a close friend of Chavan’s.

Though a socialist and a onetime disciple of Nehru, Chavan is cast in a different mold. Once a terrorist against the British and a proud member of the Kshatriya warrior caste, Chavan says: “There can be no negotiations with an aggressor.” Unlike Nehru, who still maintains that China’s attack is not necessarily connected with Communism, Chavan declared: “The first casualties of the unashamed aggression of the Chinese on India are Marxism and Leninism.”

Old Twinkle

There has been some grumbling that Nehru is no wartime leader. At 73, he often seems physically and mentally spent. His hair is snow-white and thinning, his skin greyish and his gaze abstracted. Since the invasion, he has not spared himself, and his sister, Mme. Pandit, thinks Nehru is “fighting fit-he’s got that old twinkle in his eye.” But he tires noticeably as the day goes on. One old friend says, “It makes a big difference whether you see him in the morning or the evening.”

No one seriously suggests that Nehru will be replaced as India’s leader while he lives. To his country, he is not a statesman but an idol. Each morning, large crowds assemble on the lawn outside his New Delhi home. Some present petitions or beg favors, but thousands, in recent weeks, have handed over money or gold dust for the national defense. Most come just to achieve darshan, communion, with the country’s leader. The throng is comforted and reassured, not by the words, but by the presence of Nehru.

His widowed daughter, Indira Gandhi, 45, who is functioning as his assistant and has sometimes been mentioned as his favorite choice to succeed him, is still essentially right when she says: “Unity can only be formed in India behind the Congress Party, and in the Congress Party only behind my father.”

Nevertheless, Nehru’s power will be circumscribed from now on. His long years of unquestioned, absolute personal rule are at an end. For the first time, leaders of the ruling Congress Party are demanding that attention be paid to the majority sentiment in the party as well as to Nehru’s own ideas. The 437 million people of India may cease being Nehru’s children and may at last become his constituents.

This does not mean that Nehru no longer leads, but only that from now on he will have to lead by using the more orthodox methods of a Western politician. Conservative members of the Congress Party, notably Finance Minister Morarji Desai, have been strengthened, and expect that Nehru’s dogmatic reliance on socialism and the “public sector” of industry will be reduced; if India is to arm in a hurry, they argue, it will need the drive and energy of the “private sector.”

Moreover, the Indian army may not only at last get the equipment it needs but may also gradually emerge as something of a political force. While this view is still vastly unpopular, many army officers think it is time for India to come to terms with Pakistan over the nagging Kashmir issue, so that the two great countries of the subcontinent can present a united front to China.

Bartered Gains

There is still considerable dispute over how little or how much the Chinese were after in their attack on India. One theory held by some leading Indian military men is that the Reds want eventually to drive as far as Calcutta, thereby outflanking all of Southeast Asia. In such a drive, the Chinese would be able to take advantage of anti-Indian feeling along the way, notably among the rebellious Nagas in East Assam, and in the border state of Sikkim. Reaching Calcutta, perhaps the world’s most miserable city, where 125,000 homeless persons sleep on the streets each night, they would find readymade the strongest Communist organization in India. According to this theory, the Reds could set up a satellite regime in the Bay of Bengal and, without going any farther with their armies, wait for the rest of India to splinter and fall. This strategy has not necessarily been abandoned for good, but it certainly has been set aside. For one thing, the Chinese attack shattered Communism as a political force even in Calcutta.

The prevailing theory now is that the Chinese had less ambitious aims to begin with: to take the high ground and the key military passes away from the Indians, and to finally establish, once and for all, Chinese control of the Aksai Chin plateau in Ladakh, so as to safeguard the vital military roads to Sinkiang province. The Chinese may have been unprepared to exploit the almost total collapse of India’s armed forces and may even have been surprised by their swift success. On this reading, the terms of the Chinese cease-fire offer become intelligible. The Nov. 7 line would in effect barter away the sizable Chinese gains in NEFA for Indian acceptance of China’s property rights in Aksai Chin.

Viewed from Peking, the difficulties of supply through the Himalayas in dead of winter might make the Communists hesitate to try to occupy Assam, especially since India’s determined show of national unity, and the West’s evident willingness to support India to the hilt. There is a significant indication of one Chinese anxiety in the cease-fire offer. After warning that renewed war will “bring endless disaster to India,” Peking says: “Particularly serious is the prospect that if U.S. imperialism is allowed to become involved, the present conflict will grow into a war in which Asians are made to fight Asians, entirely contrary to the fundamental interests of the Indian people.” Implicit in those words are Red Chinese memories of the prolonged Korean war. which ended in a gory stalemate.

India’s angry millions, armed, trained and aided by the U.S., must be a prospect that not even Mao Tse-tung relishes facing. Instead, by in effect quitting while they are ahead, the Chinese can play the peacemakers in the short-sighted eyes of the neutral nations, while having dramatically demonstrated their military superiority over India and without having to abandon the long-range threat. Says Madame Pandit: “This attack was far more than just an attack on one border. India is completely and wholly dedicated to democracy and not to some kind of ‘Asian democracy.’ China’s motive was to humiliate India and to prove democracy is unworkable in Asia.”

Without Meaning

Even if Nehru were prepared to give away Ladakh in return for a Chinese pullback elsewhere, he is committed to clearing all Indian territory of the invaders. And Nehru must know that the situation has reached a point where he can never again trust a Red Chinese promise and that the relationship between India and China has changed irrevocably. His policy of nonalignment has not been jettisoned. It has just ceased to have any meaning.

But Americans in New Delhi last week were irritated by evidence that the Indian government still prefers equivocation to the plain truth. Official requests went out to the Indian press not to print photos showing the arrival of U.S. arms, and the twelve U.S. Air Force transport planes sent by Washington to ferry Indian troops were made to sound like leased aircraft flown by mercenaries. The crowds know better. A current slogan is a revision of the earlier cry for brotherhood with China: “Americans bhai bhai; Chini hai hail” (Americans are our brothers; death to the Chinese!).

An Indian Cabinet minister, who disagrees with Nehru politically but respects him, says passionately: “He will come to many changes now. You cannot imagine how difficult it was for him to get rid of Menon. Do not think it was easy for him to ask for American arms. Right now, it is important not to push him into a corner in public.” Another Cabinet minister, who does not like Nehru, also counsels patience: “His will to resist will wear down. It is already worn down a long way. Hitherto, there was no opposition at all in India. Now, Nehru is relying on his opposition. He may hate it. He has been thrown into the company of people like me, people he does not like. We make strange bedfellows, but together we are going to win the war.”

To Americans it may sound like a peculiar way to win a war. But though India moves at a different pace and speaks with a different voice few could doubt last week the Indian determination to see that the Himalayan defeats were avenged, however long it may take

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby ArmenT » 05 Jul 2014 12:58

rohitvats wrote:Well, the OFB factory which is producing Dhanush threatened to go on strike when union heard about TATA SED developing a gun for army - were assuaged only when told that TATA SED gun is in different category. Guess what hissy-fit will they throw when they hear about DRDO partnering private firms for manufacture.

Sir, they already threw a hissy fit a few years ago, when a hint of that happening came about. It was discussed here:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1362426#p1362426 <-- Original news report
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1362673#p1362673 <-- Discussion starts below this post for the next few posts.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2415
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby vic » 05 Jul 2014 13:26

Why do the Unions never threaten to go on strike against imports? Why did the Unions not go on strike when foreign assault rifles, carbines and howitzers are being tested?

SanjayC
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby SanjayC » 05 Jul 2014 13:54

dinesh_kumar wrote:Below is the piece from Time Magazine written on the 1962 War: Apologies if already posted and I hope IA thread is the correct one for this:

Nehru’s Juvenile Delusions and his 1962 China Blunder

Nehru’s monumental chinese blunder, an article written in 1962, at the time of the war itself, in the ‘Time” magazine

INDIA: Never Again the Same


That's from my blog, dude. At least give a link:
http://indianrealist.com/2009/07/22/neh ... a-blunder/

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby dinesh_kimar » 05 Jul 2014 14:47

^ Saar, i re-checked once again using Unkil, and it was indeed from your blog. Apologies abt the link, and many thanks for the good work.

-dk

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby RoyG » 05 Jul 2014 18:18

[You can get across your point without getting into name-calling and labeling bit. While we understand that discussion can get heated, lets not derail the same by indulging in petty remarks against posters. Please bear that in mind. - rohitvats.]

To others - please keep the debate civil and confined to topic of discussion. No point indulging in name calling or passing snide remarks against other posters. Thank you for your co-operation.
Last edited by rohitvats on 05 Jul 2014 19:01, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: rant deleted - rohitvats

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 18:56

Follow-up rant deleted - rohitvats.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 19:00

Follow-up rant deleted - rohitvats.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gentlemen, no more trying to second guess the ancestry and attendant work and food habits of fellow-posters; make an effort to participate in BRF meet to find that out. Not here. Please stick to topic at hand. Thanks.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 19:03

vic wrote:Why do the Unions never threaten to go on strike against imports? Why did the Unions not go on strike when foreign assault rifles, carbines and howitzers are being tested?


Most imports don't really threaten them, because any volume import gets license manufactured at a DPSU. This is also the reason why DRDO wants private partners who are comitted to success of their programs because in some cases, the DPSU doesn't care, one way or the other its business is guaranteed, and as matter of fact, the local option is high risk and no guarantee.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 19:27

Rohitvats, thanks for the cleanup.

Since your second general comment in the last edited post (which happens to be mine), mentions " lets not second guess the ancestry and attendant work and food habits of fellow-posters". Since it inadvertently comes across as if I made the comment though its a general comment, I'd just like to point out these comments were by the prior poster (Bengali this, that) since I do go to some extent not to get into this regional rubbish.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 19:31

ArmenT wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Well, the OFB factory which is producing Dhanush threatened to go on strike when union heard about TATA SED developing a gun for army - were assuaged only when told that TATA SED gun is in different category. Guess what hissy-fit will they throw when they hear about DRDO partnering private firms for manufacture.

Sir, they already threw a hissy fit a few years ago, when a hint of that happening came about. It was discussed here:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1362426#p1362426 <-- Original news report
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1362673#p1362673 <-- Discussion starts below this post for the next few posts.


Thats merely the tip of the (reported) icerberg. The Maruti case a couple of years back also showed the extent to which militant "activists" can destabilize even private plants. Now that we have a change in Govt, one hopes this will be addressed more seriously.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7630
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby rohitvats » 05 Jul 2014 19:33

Karan M wrote:Rohitvats, thanks for the cleanup.

Since your second general comment in the last edited post (which happens to be mine), mentions " lets not second guess the ancestry and attendant work and food habits of fellow-posters". Since it inadvertently comes across as if I made the comment though its a general comment, I'd just like to point out these comments were by the prior poster (Bengali this, that) since I do go to some extent not to get into this regional rubbish.


Karan - I'm aware you did not make the comment. It was simply left there (once I deleted your post) for reference of mango-BRFites. Hope that clears the air. Regards,

kancha
BRFite
Posts: 897
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby kancha » 05 Jul 2014 21:03

SanjayC wrote:
That's from my blog, dude. At least give a link:
http://indianrealist.com/2009/07/22/neh ... a-blunder/


SanjayC, that was a beautiful blog post.
Here's a pic of the Memorial at Walong by the Lohit Brigade. An excellent account of the battle, with poignant words - Walong Will Never Fall Again

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17944
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2014 21:22

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:Rohitvats, thanks for the cleanup.

Since your second general comment in the last edited post (which happens to be mine), mentions " lets not second guess the ancestry and attendant work and food habits of fellow-posters". Since it inadvertently comes across as if I made the comment though its a general comment, I'd just like to point out these comments were by the prior poster (Bengali this, that) since I do go to some extent not to get into this regional rubbish.


Karan - I'm aware you did not make the comment. It was simply left there (once I deleted your post) for reference of mango-BRFites. Hope that clears the air. Regards,


Thanks!

BTW any news of FINSAS from the grapevine? A host of RFIs have gone out for NV devices etc. Thankfully it seems IA is not waiting for FINSAS to introduce these necessary items.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7630
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby rohitvats » 05 Jul 2014 21:30

Karan M wrote: Thanks!


You're welcome!

BTW any news of FINSAS from the grapevine? A host of RFIs have gone out for NV devices etc. Thankfully it seems IA is not waiting for FINSAS to introduce these necessary items.


No idea...yours truly is an ORBAT junkie and so are few nutcases he discusses and shares his notes with! :mrgreen:

I look up to you and other more knowledgeable/technically inclined posters for information on such subjects.


deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby deejay » 06 Jul 2014 11:46

^^^^ Very interesting and detailed article. Thank you for the link.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby JayS » 07 Jul 2014 17:35

Just got to know about this news:

http://archive.mid-day.com/news/2010/ja ... emoted.htm

I was wondering, what's the deal here?? Can anybody tell me?? I dunno if its discussed here previously, I tried to search on BRF but couldn't locate anything.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7630
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 11 June 2014

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jul 2014 17:59

nileshjr wrote:Just got to know about this news:

http://archive.mid-day.com/news/2010/ja ... emoted.htm

I was wondering, what's the deal here?? Can anybody tell me?? I dunno if its discussed here previously, I tried to search on BRF but couldn't locate anything.


Unless there is clarity on the subject from IA's side, there is no point even discussing this. We don't know what happened and why it happened. The development is simply being used as sensational news item by a Tabloid news-paper.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chiru, sarathy and 48 guests