Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 20 Apr 2011 00:23

IR guided AIM4D and Semi Active Radar Homing Falcon AAMs launched from F-102As were used against ground targets in Vietnam in 1965. Read that in an ebook Hughes Falcon Missile Family by Sean O'Connor from his blog

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Apr 2011 07:28

There is a reference to AIM4 Falcon against ground targets in Wiki, but after 1965. It was such a lousy missile they were probably trying to see if anything good would come out of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-4_Falcon

The Falcon, already operational on Air Defense Command aircraft, was designed to be used against bombers and its slow seeker cooling times requiring as much as 6 to 7 seconds to obtain a lock on a target rendered it largely ineffective against maneuvering fighters. Moreover it could only be cooled once. Limited coolant supply meant that once cooled, the missile would expend its supply of liquid nitrogen in two minutes, rendering it useless on the rail. The missile also had a small warhead, and lacked proximity fusing. As a result, only five kills were scored, all with the AIM-4D version.[1] (The Falcon was also experimentally fired by the F-102 Delta Dagger against ground targets at night using its infrared seeker.)

Image:A New Jersey ANG F-106A launching an AIM-4, 1984.

The weapon was unpopular with pilots from the onset and was formally withdrawn in 1969, to be replaced in the F-4D by the Sidewinder after retrofitting the proper wiring. Col. Robin Olds, commanding the F-4 Phantom II-equipped 8th Tactical Fighter Wing, was an outspoken critic of the missile and said of it:

By the beginning of June, we all hated the new AIM-4 Falcon missiles. I loathed the damned useless things. I wanted my Sidewinders back. In two missions I had fired seven or eight of the bloody things and not one guided. They were worse than I had anticipated. Sometimes they refused to launch; sometimes they just cruised off into the blue without guiding. In the thick of an engagement with my head twisting and turning, trying to keep track of friend and foe, I'd forget which of the four I had (already) selected and couldn't tell which of the remaining was perking and which head was already expiring on its launch rail. Twice upon returning to base I had the tech rep go over the switchology and firing sequences. We never discovered I was doing anything wrong.[2]

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 20 Apr 2011 11:03

shiv wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-4_Falcon
The Falcon, already operational on Air Defense Command aircraft, was designed to be used against bombers and its slow seeker cooling times requiring as much as 6 to 7 seconds to obtain a lock on a target rendered it largely ineffective against maneuvering fighters.

Shivji these days the longer time drawback due to cooling has been removed. Also targets on ground anyways manouever slower than those in the air. And we have more effective CL-20 which could be used for the warhead if greater impact is desired. If current warhead is good enough then modification may be only needed in software as neerajb's ref has pointed.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Apr 2011 13:50

Arya Sumantra wrote: Shivji these days the longer time drawback due to cooling has been removed. Also targets on ground anyways manouever slower than those in the air. And we have more effective CL-20 which could be used for the warhead if greater impact is desired. If current warhead is good enough then modification may be only needed in software as neerajb's ref has pointed.

I am sure your idea of having dual use A/A+ A/G weapons is a good one and I can only indulge in guesswork as to why the idea has not received more attention.

My guess remains what I said earlier - there are serious tradeoffs for weight, range and maneuverabilty. A heavy warhead more suitable for a fortified ground target will be less maneuverable in the air to air scenario and the heavier the warehad the shorter the range. A short range, heavy, non maneuverable missile may be fine for a ground target but not useful against an agile fighter. On the other hand a light, maneuverable missile may be useful against all targets, but may not carry the explosive power required to overcome fortified ground targets. That is as far as my knowledge goes on the issue.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 20 Apr 2011 14:02

shiv wrote: On the other hand a light, maneuverable missile may be useful against all targets, but may not carry the explosive power required to overcome fortified ground targets. That is as far as my knowledge goes on the issue.

When Astra was planned, i believe, we did not have recently discovered CL-20. So the original explosive planned for warhead must have lower yield for the same weight. Now that we have CL-20, we can get more Kaboom power out of the same weight. Am only talking in context of non-armoured ground targets.

And a multi-role aam is only one part of the suggestion. But another is for tweaking existing aams like the Awacs killer or say the anti-ship missiles of type that Flanker can carry for ground role to make use of existing and ready solutions for expanded use.

JMT.

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 01 May 2011 16:05

hi,

im planning to buy the book "India's External Intelligence: Secrets Of Research And Analysis Wing [RAW]"
by Major General V. K. Singh

also considering "The Kaoboys Of R&AW: Down Memory Lane" by B. Raman.

i was wondering if its a good book to purchase.
any advice from the gurus?

PS : if this is not the correct thread to post this, kindly let me know which one should have i used.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 01 May 2011 16:08

Sirji

Buy both of them, they are worth their worth in gold

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 01 May 2011 16:25

Marten wrote:Here are the links for Lancer:
http://www.lancerpublishers.com/catalog ... cts_id=425
http://www.lancerpublishers.com/catalog ... cts_id=404

i'd also like to know ur inputs about the books in question, as to how good each one is..

tia.

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 01 May 2011 16:27

i'll buy both nonetheless

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 01 May 2011 21:52

Cross posting from Su-30 thread.

Vivek K wrote:a lot of aircraft disappearing near China!

Snide remarks are of little help. Please be clear of what you are trying to imply.

Singha wrote: many moons ago, it was posted on BRF a plan to equip every IAF pilot with a SABRE personal locator beacon.
did it come through, or die a quiet death somewhere in the file pile at MOD ?

Sirji, The CM was flying in a civilian chopper (Pawan Hans), wasn't he? So, I don't see how the equipment of IAF pilots should have any bearing in this case. Or am I missing something here?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 01 May 2011 21:55

Well they say - "samajdhar ko ishara kafi!" Let me know if you cannot figure out that one!

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 02 May 2011 01:26

Vivek K wrote:Well they say - "samajdhar ko ishara kafi!" Let me know if you cannot figure out that one!

You made a snide remark implying that the recent "disappearances" of a/cs, including the current one of Arunachal CM is the work of Chinese. Am I samajhdar now? Or is your intelligence reside in such higher plane that it is incomprehensible to mere mortals like us?

BTW, did you even stop for a second to think before you started doing dhoti shivering. China downing military and CM's aircrafts? Really? Not only are you being highly insensitive to the missing CM and the heli crew (not to mention the people who have died in the previous crashes), you are also fearmongering and in general doing psy ops in favour of Chinese. You are speculating with no basis. You are not even waiting for the final outcome of the currently ongoing search. You are also totally disregarding the crash reports of previous accidents.

I am sure that the Chinese would be mighty pleased with such dhoti shivering. All it shows is that "China is so almighty that it takes down military aircrafts of India with impunity. It even does not spare our CMs. And look how the puny India shivers and tries to cover up all the aggressions as accidents."
Well done, I should say! I am sure that the deceased crash victims (so that you don't twist my words. I am not including the present case here) would be mighty pleased at such sensationalism and dhoti shivering.

Anyway, this is my last post to you regarding this. If you feel inclined to post some more cheeky and generic comments, be my guest. However, do not expect me to reply.
Happy trolling.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 02 May 2011 06:24

Gaur, this is really ridiculous! You're off on a tangent to my post. I have not implied any of the things you are shooting off on! Take a chill pill or add me as foe bubba!

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 02 May 2011 07:47

OBL Killed breaking news (about a week ago be one of the drones in Pak)

jayaaren · Post by **jayaaren** » 02 May 2011 13:58

The surgical strike on Osama Bin Laden is more than ample proof of a the potential for success when both the intelligence community and armed forces work together. One wonders whether the Indian intel community and armed forces cannot replicate this to strike against our nation's enemies.

Aaryan · Post by **Aaryan** » 03 May 2011 10:25

Gurus, my question is very simple.. Why seals and why not delta or any other special force?? I mean we can't say that since seals were available so they sent in seals.. Also do we have such capability??? There are many questions in my mind but wont go in burst mode...

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 03 May 2011 10:47

Aaryan wrote:Gurus, my question is very simple.. Why seals and why not delta or any other special force?? I mean we can't say that since seals were available so they sent in seals.. Also do we have such capability??? There are many questions in my mind but wont go in burst mode...

You should not look at it as a military operation. It was totally an Intel op. Once the intel was got, OBL was as good as dead. US already had Military presence in US. Plus the Paki Air Defence and ground forces turned a blind eye towards US Helicopters and ground forces. There were not even a bunch of Taliban Militia guarding OBL. So, it doesn't really matter which SF went in. They could have even loaded the transport helis with a bunch of pot belied policemen and the effect would have been the same. The real credit goes to the Intel guys here. The military op was just a formality.

So, when you say if we have got the capability, it becomes a totally different situation. We don't have Military Bases there. From both Intel and Military POV, we would not have a free hand in Pakistan like US did. eg:When our helicopters fly over Pakistani skies, Pakis will not turn a blind eye. But I am not trying to guess if Indian Intelligence agencies have the capabilities or not. I am simply not qualified enough to do so. What I am saying is that the OBL operation is irrelevant from Indian POV (by irrelevant, I mean it is comparing apples with oranges as far as our situation goes).

PS: Anyways, both Seals and Delta are comparable forces. Also, as per general perception (which matters little), Navy Seal Team 6 or DEVGRU has acquired more TFTA image than any other force.

Aaryan · Post by **Aaryan** » 03 May 2011 21:44

2005 (May) : arrest of Abu Faraj al-Libbi in Pakistan
2007 : arrest of Abdul Hadi al-Iraqi in Afghanistan
2008 : US identifies 'courier'
2009 : US discovers roughly the area of Pakistan where the courier is working
2010 (Aug) : US finds compound where 'courier' is living
2011 (Feb) : CIA confident this is Bin Laden’s likely hiding place
2011 (Mar) : Obama chairs a series of national security meetings - March (twice) & April (thrice)
2011 (Apr 29th) : Obama orders to mount operation - signs death warrant
2011 (May 1st) : Seals fly in low by 4 copters from Afghanistan, below radar
: C130 Jammer flies overhead - jams all radar & telecom signals (WAPDA Power outage - jamming ??)
: seals rappel down from copter 1
: copter 2 develops 'mechanical problem - soft touch down - seals embarg
: firing - 5 ( OBL, his son, wife, courier & bro) killed
: identification - photo - facial recognition S/W - 99% OBL
: whole operation telecast live to CIA HQ & Situations Room
: evidence collection (hard drives etc) & copter 2 blown up
: copters 1 & 3 lands - evacuation - back to afghanistan in 40 min
: Obama phones up PM and informs him
: Rest of world including President, Army, ISI, Taliban etc get the news
: DNA Tests (compared with that of OBL's sister who died in a clinic in US)
: Saudi asked if they want body - refused
: corpse flown to Aircraft carrier and dumped in sea
: USA asks tough questions

Well that’s what I think happened, now what I want to ask is suppose we have a positive id on dawood, who is somewhere deep in a neutral neighbouring non cooperating country and may be protected by hard core jehadis and local pubil.. Then do we have similar capability to carry out such strike..
Gaur sir it was also a special op as seal had the plan to fightin and fight their way out.. And when i asked why seals why not delta i wanted to know if deltas are trained for diffrent kind of op then seals?? If they chose seals over delta there must be a valid reason. If Indian army would have to conduct such op.. who will be our 1st choice..
PS: Mods if this not the right forum to ask such questions then please shift it to right forum. Thankx

Aaryan · Post by **Aaryan** » 03 May 2011 22:33

well i dont know if if i will get any reply to my question.. but here is some thing thats worth reading..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive ... -bin-laden

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 03 May 2011 22:39

Aaryan wrote:Well that’s what I think happened, now what I want to ask is suppose we have a positive id on dawood, who is somewhere deep in Nepal and may be protected by maoist.. Then do we have similar capability to carry out such strike..

In Nepal?

and gaur sir it was also a special op as seal had the plan to fightin and fight their way out.. And when i asked why seals why not delta i wanted to know if deltas are trained for diffrent kind of op then seals??

Please do away with Sir.

Anyways, I have very little knowledge about western SFs. But I am pretty sure that both Delta and ST6 are perfectly suitable for this these kinds of Ops. If it was US Army Rangers or Green Berets, then I would have been surprised.
Regarding why not Delta? I have no idea. Perhaps someone else may be of help there.

Regarding the "plan" to fight their way out. Well, I don't know about their plan. But they obviously had the area under surveillance. They obviously knew that there was no Al-Qaeda presence there. They did not need to move aircraft from outside the Pakistan Border. So, the only threat they faced was of Pakistani army getting all psychotic and attack them. In that case, I am sure that the plan would have involved more than a few dozen Seals. In any case, if such a thing were to happen, most (if not all) Seals would have been dead and Porkis would be looking at the skies and wondering which Kafir dares to celebrate early Diwali in Islamabad. That is, they would be wondering at the fireworks, just before the fireworks would burst on top of their heads and cease all their confusion.

If Indian army would have to conduct such op.. who will be our 1st choice..

Don't know. Depends upon the operation. If it was a planned large scale operation of foreign soil (something like Operation Khukri), then 50 (I) Parachute Brigade. I know that the Para Brigade was not used in Op Khukri..but the reasons for that are different and I am merely giving an example.

However, if a small team for covert ops was needed, it should ideally be the job of SG. But then again, it could even be Para SF (unlike SG, they are more bonded as a unit). Also, PARA SF had once eliminated all the Training camps in POK through their covert ops (and that is just a small part of their resume

). If you consider operational history, Para SF are the one who stand out.
Anyway, I am no expert in this. It all depends upon various factors including Terrain, threat, intelligence input etc So asking some guru may help you more.

Moreover, I am reluctant to discuss an Indian Covert Op based upon the Osama Bin Laden Op. I have expressed my views on this in my previous post. I consider this as an Intel Operation rather than a Military op. The situation and conditions were totally unique and apply only on US. If US was to perform this operation in an hostile environment, I am sure that the mode of attack would have been totally different.

abhishekm · Post by **abhishekm** » 03 May 2011 23:18

and gaur sir it was also a special op as seal had the plan to fightin and fight their way out.. And when i asked why seals why not delta i wanted to know if deltas are trained for diffrent kind of op then seals??

Interesting question. Weren't US Navy Seals also involved in combing operations in Tora Bora back in 2001? I don't recall Delta Force being used on that occasion as well.

As far as Dawood is concerned, India can't be blamed for not trying to get him. We have been using our acolytes and proxies (gangsters like Chota Rajan, Vicky Malhotra and Farid Tanashah) to get him but none of these operations have succeeded. I guess in the post Morarji Desai/IK Gujral world our special operations capability in Pakistan has been considerably degraded

Sending Indian special forces by helicopters or landing them on a beach near Karachi is completely out of the question. So we need to concentrate on more subtle methods. What would help is Dawood moving to another country like Nepal where India can exercise considerably more leverage over the local government and law enforcement.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 03 May 2011 23:22

abhishekm wrote: Interesting question. Weren't US Navy Seals also involved in combing operations in Tora Bora back in 2001? I don't recall Delta Force being used on that occasion as well.

Delta were involved in Tora Bora.

abhishekm wrote: Sending Indian special forces by helicopters or landing them on a beach near Karachi is completely out of the question.

True. Unlike US, we would have to fly from across the border and not just fly off some helicopters from inside of Pakistan.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 04 May 2011 00:05

Aaryan, just to confirm, it wasn't the regular SEALs who did the operation, it was Seal Team 6 or DEVGRU (correct me if I am wrong). They are Tier 1 spec op forces in the USA, along with Delta Force. Tier 1 means black operations, where the govt denies everything in case things go 'bamf'. As Tier 1, they are even more secretive than other special forces like Green Berets, Rangers or SEAL. And as capable as Delta Force too.

Aaryan · Post by **Aaryan** » 04 May 2011 00:23

Porkis would be looking at the skies and wondering which Kafir dares to celebrate early Diwali in Islamabad. That is, they would be wondering at the fireworks, just before the fireworks would burst on top of their heads and cease all their confusion.

Sir u made me laugh so hard that my dad came running to the room...

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 04 May 2011 00:52

Hi All,

I have been a follower of BR for several years and have formally joined today. To start with my heartiest congratulations on the Pakis being roasted, hammered and rogered in the international media (unlike by the Indian media). I live in London and am thoroughly enjoying the Schadenfreude!

Have a question for aviation experts and LCA followers re Tejas's possible tactical roles in Mk1 IOC configuration. Apologies if these issues have been discussed before. I have surfed the forum extensively and couldnt find the answers.

From open sources (Wiki till a week ago, Broadsword, media reports) Tejas's weight is as follows

Empty - 6500 kgs
Loaded weight - 10,500 kgs including 2500 kgs of internal fuel and 7 pylons fully fitted but only the two outboard ones carrying Short Ranage AAMs.

This would mean that pylons weigh 10,500- 6,500 (empty) - 2,500 (full internal fuel) - internal cannon (150/200 kgs) - 2 SRAAMS (150/200 kgs) = about 1100 kgs for 7 pylons. Thats quite a bit. Does that make sense?

Today Wiki seems to have changed the parameters and says

Loaded weight: 8,500 kg (With 3000 Kg Internal Fuel) (9500 Kg with Ligthening Pod, Internal Canon, Hybrid-Radar, Laser Warning, EW Suite, CMDS) (20,900 lb Without External Loadout).

The two are broadly consistent and so we have roughly 9500 kgs without external load out (not including pylons or missiles) in both scenarios.

My question to gurus. What will the weight of pylons and missiles be in this config with 2 SRAAMs and 2 BVRAAMs? I use this config as my friends in the IAF suggest that 2+2 is a reasonable and effective A2A combat profile.

At that weight could someone hazard educated guesses on what the below performance parameters would be

- Angle of Attack
- Sustained rate of turn
- Instantaneous rate of turn

I talk of these three parameters as those are the ones on which concern has been expressed. I know envelop expansion is on and engine is underpowered etc. What I would really appreciate some input on is the weight with the above config and the performance at that weight.

Thanks

Akshay

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 04 May 2011 01:03

Is it only me or have others also noticed that the Indian media coverage of OBL's execution seems excessively deferential to Pakistan. The whole world is roasting the Pakis and asking legitimate questions about their complicity and the Indians are buying the Paki line that it was a joint op. Have exchanged emails with some worthies in the Indian media about this. They just cant seem to see reality.

My mind boggles.

And where is BR's OBL killing thread, I cant seem to find it today.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 May 2011 01:08

^^
looked in the wrong places I guess. you don't expect it will be in mil forum do you ?
click "View active topics"

Vivek K wrote:Well they say - "samajdhar ko ishara kafi!" Let me know if you cannot figure out that one!

kindly explain what you mean by this statement. since clearly, I am not a samajhdar.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 04 May 2011 01:31

Thanks Rahul, my IT skills are worse than my NDTV worthies convincing skills! Found the topic and posted there.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 04 May 2011 04:39

Rahul M wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Well they say - "samajdhar ko ishara kafi!" Let me know if you cannot figure out that one!

kindly explain what you mean by this statement. since clearly, I am not a samajhdar.

Rahul -- It is an isninuation that the Chinese are involved in this dastardly act. Care to explain to me how the poster takes this to mean that we are indulgin in dhoti shivering! Thanks.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 May 2011 08:30

that is even worse. in essence you are insinuating that
a) china can bring down our aircraft at will and there is nothing that IAF can do about it. and do explain how that is not dhoti shivering.
b) IAF and GOI are lying when they say nothing of the sort happened.

baseless rumour mongering of this kind is extremely harmful. I'll be considerate and not issue a board warning this time.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 04 May 2011 12:35

Hi Nikhil,

I did not see an answer to your question so am responding.

The Indian army has a very rich heritage and the uniform idiosyncracies come from different threads and events of this heritage. These borders you see are actually cloth bases (forget the more techincal name) on which the stars are mounted. Diff arms and within the infantry diff regiments have their traditions for different reasons.

Arty - use a red base, so you see a red border
Infantry
- Rajput Regt (VK Singh's) - Use a black base
- Punjab Regt - Use a green base
- Dogras and Sikhs - Use a yellow base
- Sikh LI - Use an orange base

Have you noticed the rifle regts (Raj Rif, Garh Rig, Gorkhas) have their stars darkened/not gold? Guess what the reason for that is?

There are many interesting stories about these dress traditions and other traditions. For example, arty officers never remove their belts (or atleast are not supposed to). The reason goes back to the Afghan wars where a bunch of arty officers were in a meeting with some afghan leader and removed their belts (which then carried swords and their side arms) and during the meal they were ambushed and killed.

There are hundreds of such stories, for example in the sappers, the Madras Sappers are the most OG (Olive Green - pucca, traditionalist) and the Bombay Sappers the least. This manaifests in very interesting and enjoyable ways and sometimes slightly uncomfortable way

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 04 May 2011 14:05

^^ Correction. Sikh Regiment wears red as well. So does Mahar.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 06 May 2011 17:23

Hello all,

A long time lurker, I am very happy to formally join the Bharat Rakshak community. Looking forward to lots of meaningful discussions and exchanges with fellow forum members

best wishes

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 May 2011 01:14

Here is a post that should be considered "Required Reading" by all BRF members, particularly new members.

It was written by "Rudradev" in the thread entitled "News - Osama Bin Laden - killed In Pakistan" which you can find in the "Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum", and was posted on "06 May 2011 12:04". At present this post can be found in its entirety here, but is recreated below in case this link moves elsewhere eventually.

Rudradev wrote:
ramana wrote: To add to that,
X-post...
We are not looking at the significance of OBL, HUM, LeT, OBL safehouse ownership by HUM, and location of Abbotabad to LOC. I think from 2005 he was the guiding light of Kashmir terrorists. I bet Daoud Gilani/DCH is also linked to him throught LeT. We should relook at Mumbai train blasts, 26/11 and other spectacular acts of terrorism. He could also be the brain behind Ind Mujahideen.

Ramana garu, I am very very skeptical about any significant role having been played by OBL in the Kashmir Jihad.

OBL was never an enemy of India, except in the broadest ideological sense. Just because he became the poster-boy of "dangerous Islamism" for the west, we do ourselves a disservice by adopting that image wholesale and applying it to an Indian context where it is not at all relevant.

Indeed, I believe the presence of OBL in our subcontinental neighbourhood was in fact a net gain for India. Let me explain why.

1) In the early 1990s, the US was full of hyperpower hubris. They had just won the cold war and destroyed the USSR, and Pakistan (via its support for the Afghan war) was appreciated as a key player in that campaign.

These times were the apex of influence for the Brzezinski/Scowcroft school of American foreign policy in the State Department, and Milt Bearden/Michael Scheuer were the victorious lions of the CIA. Many political figures of future importance, such as Madeline Allbright (and Robin Raphel further down the ranks) were rising stars under the tutelage of these worthies.

These people could do or say no wrong, as far as the US establishment was concerned. And what they were saying was that Pakistan must be THE primary US proxy in fashioning the new world order in South/Central Asia.

2) I know it is an assiduously created myth by the US media that Afghanistan and Pakistan were "ignored" after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. Nothing could be further from the truth.

A deliberate power vacuum was engineered in Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal, one that only Pakistan was capable of filling via its proxies. Washington, at that time, favoured the creation of an Af-Pak under Islamabad's TSPA/ISI rule. It fit in with Washington's game plan perfectly.

3) The game plan was ultimately, to create an Af-Pak dagger aimed at Western China and the former Soviet states of Central Asia. A dagger that could potentially play the same role against China as it had against the Soviets when needed...even as China was engaged economically by the US. Additionally, such an Af-Pak power under Islamabad could stabilize the Eastern flank of West Asia, threaten a recalcitrant Iran, and give the US "pro-Islamic" credibility with the Arab street.

Essentially the very "Great Game" ideas behind the creation of Pakistan in 1947, were seen to be "borne out" by the eventual usefulness of Pakistan in defeating the Soviet Union. Extending those same ideas, Pakistan (with Afghanistan as its vassal/strategic depth) was now going to be the launch-pad for expanding Western influence into the Asian heartland and containing America's potential competitors in that theatre.

This whole aspect of US foreign policy in the early 1990s was played out much more quietly than the rebuilding of former Soviet satellites in Europe, and the eastward expansion of NATO. Much more money (and publicity) were allocated to Marshall plans for Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. The creation of the AfPak dagger was a relatively modestly funded effort with a much lower profile. This is not surprising; one of the attractions of Pakistan to the US has always been its willingness to sell itself cheaply.

4) For this US proxy Af-Pak to enjoy unchallenged dominance in Central Asia, serving as an uniterrupted conduit for US forces in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea into the Asian heartland... it was vital that this Af-Pak should include all of J&K as well.

Hence, in the early 1990s, a multi-pronged assault was launched with the backing of Washington, to enable Pakistan to separate J&K from India. The assault had a military component, masterminded by Mirza Aslam Beg and Hamid Gul, in which Afghan war veterans and CIA expertise were used by the ISI to launch a "war of a thousand cuts" against India. It also had a political component, as evidenced by the redoubled efforts (via Robin Raphel) to build the Hurriyat Conference as a "democratic" platform for secession.

5) India at that time was seen to be a helpless state, from Washington's point of view. It was a former Soviet ally and not deserving of trust or sympathy. The strong leadership of IG was a thing of the past. India had slipped into a state of post-dynastic political turmoil following the VP Singh ascension of 1989... this was projected by Washington to mean political instability and lacklustre economic performance for the rest of the decade. To top it all off, in 1991 India had to go to the IMF with hat in hand.

Thus pressure was put on India from every direction to part with Kashmir. Our pleas to declare Pakistan a terrorist-sponsoring state were soundly ignored. We were lectured as never before on Kashmiri "human rights". When the ISI committed terrorist atrocities, such as the Mumbai '93 blasts, US investigators dutifully "misplaced" the evidence of Pakistan ORF ammunition given to them for examination. IMF strings were pulled taut whenever India made any move to assert or consolidate its regional position.

Had it not been for PVNR, our greatest Prime Minister to date, at the helm in those dire years... the plan to separate Kashmir might even have succeeded.

6) In support of the fiction that "Af-Pak was ignored after the Soviet withdrawal/ Pakistan felt betrayed by the US".... the laughable Pressler Amendment (which prohibited US arms sales to Pakistan on account of its nuclear weapons program) is often cited.

In truth, the Pressler Amendment was completely spurious as a non-proliferation tool. Pakistan already had nuclear weapons by 1990, tested and produced by China... and the US knew it. Given nuclear weapons and a large, well-organized offensive machine for subconventional warfare... jihadi veterans of the Afghan war and growing cadres of local Tanzeems... the Pakistanis could very well wage terrorist jihad in Kashmir without fear of conventional retaliation from India. The US knew this as well as TSPA/ISI did... hence, it did not matter at all if TSPA/ISI were denied conventional armaments and F-16s under the Pressler Amendment. In fact, such things could be held up as carrots by Washington to further guarantee TSPA/ISI's future cooperation in the great game.

In the 1990s, from Washington's point of view, it was more than enough to let Pakistan have control of Afghanistan and conduct nuclear blackmail against India. TSPA/ISI's economic strength did not suffer as a result of the sanctions... they had income from the Photochor nuclear proliferation industry via BCCI, and income from heroin sales via the Afghan poppy fields they controlled. They would do Washington's bidding, well-financed as they were through all these unorthodox mechanisms to which Washington turned a willing blind eye.

Thus the myth of the "Pressler Amendment" being a symbol of Washington's "negligence", "neglect" or even "neutral even-handedness" is nothing but a hoax.

Eventually, Washington was betting that India would tire of the sustained nuclear blackmail/terrorism from Pakistan and buckle under political pressure from the western world, giving up Kashmir. Then India could be turned into a docile, decapitated cash cow while martial Pakistan, imperial overlord of Af-Pak-Kashmir, could become the West's frontline soldiers for the dominance of Central Asia.

Managing China, Iran and resurgent Russia, rather than containing India, was the thrust of the 1990s Great Game. India, it seemed, would be a pushover.

7) The early and mid 1990s were truly dark days for India, as many of us remember. J&K was overrun by thousands of foreign mercenaries of the ISI, trained in Afghan camps under the tutelage of Hekmatyar and others. Pandits were ethnically cleansed from the valley by the lakhs. Dost Gul occupied the Hazratbal shrine and IA could not get him out. Harkat-ul-Ansar with its British-Paki cadres (including Omar Shaikh) were trying to "internationalize" Kashmir by kidnapping and murdering Western tourists. Meanwhile LeT and other groups were recruiting Punjabis to wage jihad in J&K, and also building bridges with the Islamist underworld of Dawood Ibrahim to terrorize the rest of India. Month to month, it seemed that we would inevitably lose Kashmir to an irrepressible wave of jihad.

At that time, we were growing our economy bit by tiny bit. We were still fighting the Khalistani separatists in Punjab, also supported by Pakistan and tacitly by the West. Northeastern insurgencies also received a tremendous boost in this decade.

As the decade wore on, China's tremendous economic rise caused it to gain political influence in Washington with the Hamiltonians. The Clinton-Wilsonians (Albright/Brzezinski) jumped on the Hamiltonian bandwagon, and it seemed as if the US was prepared to accept China's nominal overlordship of the Asian continent, to Pakistan's benefit and at India's expense. Washington even suggested that China could be an "honest broker" in mediating between India and Pakistan on Kashmir!

It was only through the greatest and most steadfast heroism that we stood firm through these times. This was the WORST of jihad we faced in Kashmir.
And Osama Bin Laden/ "Al Qaida" had NOTHING WHATEVER to do with it.

8 ) All the above is background.

Now we come to the story of OBL in the Indian subcontinent.

It begins in 1988 when OBL split from the Maktab-el-Khidamat, the organization that was originally formed under ISI/CIA aegis to funnel funds, weapons and materiel to the Afghan jihad. The rest of the OBL story can be seen as an effort by the TSPA/ISI to woo OBL back into their sphere of influence... with US support until 9/11, and for their own purposes after 9/11.
But in 1988, he split from the Maktab, because he saw the US and the West (including Israel) as a greater enemy of Islam than any power that the Maktab was focusing on. That was the birth of OBL's very own Pan-Islamic agenda.

OBL's mission was intensified in 1991, with the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia after Desert Storm (whose successful completion also contributed to Washington's hyperpower hubris.)
The stationing of US troops in the Holy Land of Islam, galvanized Bin Laden to declare Jihad against the West.

9) Bin Laden's chief targets were always the USA, the wider West, and Israel.

His base of operations was initially KSA, from where he was banished to Sudan in 1992. His chosen theatre was East Africa and the Arabian peninsula at this stage. However, he was already beginning to set his sights on the American homeland, as evidenced by the 1993 WTC bombing in which his associates like El-Sayyid Nosair and Ali Mohammed played crucial roles.
Around 1993-94, the charismatic Sheikh caught the attention of many Islamist opportunists from all over WANA, including splinter groups of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood who had been lying in wait for just such an opportunity. Fighting against Western-proxy dictators in their home countries, people like Ayman Al-Zawahiri could hope for neither political success nor personal glory... but under the banner of a pan-Islamist international Jihad against the greatest of Satans, all that might change!

Thus, the nucleus of Al-Qaeda was engendered.

10) It is important to note that at this stage, OBL never said a word about jihad in Kashmir.

In fact, I don't recall him mentioning Kashmir at all until about 2005. By that time he was a "guest" of ISI and the Hizbul Mujahedin, probably at Abbottabad. So, he was probably just relieving his polite obligations to his hosts by including Kashmir in his speeches.

There is a good reason why OBL... concentrating on Israel, the West and US-proxy-KSA...could not care less about Kashmir.

It goes back to the Arab Ghazi psyche.

To people like OBL, disputes like Kashmir are beneath contempt for an organization of Al-Qaeda's scope and ambition. They are squabbles between lesser beings, not worthy of his time or effort.

OBL (and most Arabs) do not see the Pakistanis as birathers. In fact, they see the Pakistan-India conflict as something not very serious; it is a case of upstart recently-converted SDREs fighting against kaffir, but highly Dhimmified and harmless SDREs. If a serious conflict erupts, Pakistan (as Muslims) must be supported; however, it is better to maintain a distance from both Pakistan and India in general. Both have their uses... Pakis as servile mercenaries and dalals for China; Indians as cheap, docile and sometimes skilled labour. The idea that India constitutes a "threat to Islam" would have made an Arab Ghazi like Bin Laden laugh... Kashmir or no Kashmir.

11) 1996 is a pivotal year in our narrative.

The Taliban consolidates TSPA/ISI's grip on its Af-Pak empire... with the full blessings of Washington.

India is in dire straits. After PVNR, her governments are falling within months. Economic reforms are progressing erratically. Kashmir jihad is at its height... and now, with Taliban in Afghanistan, it seems that Pakistan will have even more capacity to leverage its strategic depth and intensify that jihad even further.

At this fatal moment, the Taliban invite OBL (whom Sudan is trying to expel) to come to Afghanistan.

12) The Taliban's invitation of OBL to the Indian subcontinent is secretly welcomed by many... including Riyadh, Washington and Islamabad.

The US and Pakistan would very much like to see OBL turn his assets and energies towards the ongoing Af-Pak jihad against India. Saudi Arabia would be very happy with this as well.

If OBL and Al-Qaeda throw their weight behind the Kashmir jihad, they will be diverted from targets that actually matter to Washington... the US, Western countries, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
The TSPA/ISI are happy too... they think that the addition of OBL's Pan-Islamist banner, plus the vast West Asian funding networks of Al-Qaeda to the Kashmir jihad, will give them the ability to push India over the edge. They assure Washington that, with Taliban cooperation, they can keep OBL diverted away from Western interests and towards India.

13) This beautiful plan fails to take into account the tenacity, single-mindedness and commitment of OBL to his grand vision... pan Islamic jihad against the West. As stated before, he doesn't give a cr@p about Kashmir. It is beneath him and his army to get involved in such a lowly scrap. He is after the US, and Israel!

14) What slowly unfolds now, is the eventual demise of Pakistan's best-laid plans for Jihad in Kashmir.

For a while, ISI's "war of a thousand cuts" continues in force. The nuclear tests of 1998 firmly establish Pakistan's capacity for nuclear blackmail against India. In Kargil, Musharraf uses jihadis trained by Afghan war cadre in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, as the thin edge of TSPA/NLI wedge to occupy Indian land. In December 1999, Punjabi Deobandi terrorists use the sanctuary of Taliban-controlled Kandahar to hijack IC814 and demand the release of Maulana Masood Azhar, a development that leads to the creation of Jaish-e-Mohammed.

Everything seems to be going well for Pakistan. But meanwhile, OBL isn't involving himself in J&K (other than a few massacres of rebellious Shias in the Northern Areas at ISI's request.)

On the contrary, OBL is using Taliban/ISI sanctuary to mount attacks on US interests in East Africa and the Arabian peninsula... Embassies, Khobar Towers, USS Cole.

And finally, on Sept 11 2001, he masterminds the attack on Washington DC and New York City that makes him a household name.

15) The rest is recent history which we know very well.

The Americans launch Operation Enduring Freedom, ousting the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, and replacing them with Karzai.

The TSPA/ISI chooses to GUBO to the Americans. Their betrayal of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda has lasting consequences. One by one, the Deobandi groups nurtured by the ISI go over to OBL's side. Wahhabandism becomes a sociopolitical force unto itself, and eventually the TTP is born.

This is exactly the opposite effect of what the Pakistanis had hoped to achieve by inviting OBL to Afghanistan. They had hoped that they could influence OBL to turn his attention away from the West and KSA, and towards India in J&K.

Instead, OBL has turned Pakistan's own proxies (created to wage jihad in J&K) against the US... and against Pakistan itself!

In effect, forces that were committed to the J&K jihad are now more committed to fighting the Americans in Afghanistan!

Besides this, the generous sources of funding which OBL used to bring into Afghanistan (and of which, some must have been siphoned off by ISI to use against India) quickly dry up under American pressure against the financial conduits. So even that fringe benefit of OBL's presence, quickly disappears for the ISI.

Net gain for India, any way you look at it, compared to the 1990s.

16) 2002 is another pivotal year.

OBL escapes from Tora Bora and into Pakistan proper. From here on he is shielded from the Americans by the ISI in a cat-and-mouse game lasting a decade. The ISI still hopes to use him as a figurehead of jihad in J&K... and if all else fails, sell him out as the ultimate bargaining chip to the Americans.

Meanwhile, the NDA government in India launches Operation Parakram in response to the Parliament Attack. The buildup of Indian troops along the IB alarms the Americans, who do not want their sizeable commitment of forces in Af-Pak to become embroiled in an Indo-Pak war zone.

Washington now starts to lean on Islamabad to rein back terrorism against India. Notably, terrorism against India in J&K goes into a steady decline from 2002 onwards... showing that J&K jihad was completely, entirely in the hands of ISI, and had nothing to do with OBL/Al-Qaeda.

17) From 2005 onwards, the character of the Afghan conflict changes. The ISI begins to use specific proxies among the Taliban to do its bidding in Afghanistan... including the Haqqanis, Hafiz Gul Bahadar, Maulvi Nazir, Hekmatyar etc.

Meanwhile the TTP (joined increasingly by Punjabi tanzeems following the Lal Masjid episode) intensifies its attacks on the TSPA/ISI. In following years, Swat is overrun, GHQ is attacked. The war overflows the FATA and NWFP into the heartland of Pakistan.

From 2005, ISI terrorism picks up again in India, not so much in J&K but elsewhere. LeT is used to build cadres of local terror cells owing allegiance to SIMI and the so-called "Indian Mujahedin." There is no evidence that any of this is related to Al-Qaeda, TTP or the Wahhabandi tanzeems.

OBL may have provided his blessings to these efforts as a gesture of gratitude to his Pakistani hosts... but he did not have either the assets, experience or reach within India to do anything of practical use. The LeT and ISI have far more assets in India than "Al Qaeda" ever did. So why would they need him as a "guiding light" or anything else?

In 2008, the ISI and LeT launch 26/11 against Mumbai in a desperate attempt to force military action by India, hoping that the various tanzeems fighting in Pakistan will unify under TSPA as a result. It doesn't happen.

18) The Obama administration, from 2008 onwards, takes an increasingly hard line towards Pakistan. Drone attacks are stepped up, and focus increasingly on Waziristan, where those factions of Taliban loyal to the ISI are based. TSPA defiantly refuses to engage in any military action in Waziristan.

Meanwhile it is the sunset of OBL's career. He is now ensconsed in an ISI/Hizbul Mujahedin safehouse far from the Afghan border, and close to the J&K border. Finally, he starts to mention J&K in his speeches. But this is no more than chai-biskoot.

It is unfounded to imagine that OBL played any significant role in J&K jihad, alongside the TSPA/ISI who betrayed him by GUBO-ing to the Americans. Why would he, when wars far more important to him were going on in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Yemen? Why would he, when J&K had never been a matter of consequence to him in the first place?

19) Some have suggested that, near the time of his capture, OBL was a virtual hostage of the ISI in their Abbotabad safe-house. However, it's important to note that... while ISI had him by the balls, he also had them by the balls. It's not as if they could force him to take any greater role in J&K than he wanted, or force him to become involved to any greater extent than lip-service for politeness' sake.

What could the ISI do to him... hand him over to the Americans? In doing so, they would lose their primary trump card, their greatest bargaining chip of all. They would also earn the instant wrath of all the jihadi tanzeems that still remained loyal to TSPA, and possibly of allied Taliban factions in Waziristan as well (the formerly ISI-allied Maulvi Nazir in South Waziristan has already declared Jihad against Islamabad following the Americans' raid on Abbotabad!)

By 2011 the TSPA/ISI had been forced into a corner. 89% of drone attacks by the US in 2010 had been against ISI-proxy Taliban factions in N. Waziristan. Meanwhile TTP in Orakzai, Malakand and Bajaur had begun to hit back in force against the TSPA, including raids in Dir and Swat. The Raymond Davis episode, among other things, had forced US-Pakistan relations to the point of nearly public hostility.

The TSPA/ISI knew they could not keep up the show of defiance for very much longer. By summer the IMF had to approve critical loans that Pakistan needed to survive. If the only way out of this was to play the trump card... to sacrifice Osama Bin Laden, who was never any use to them against India anyway... so be it.

19) This brings us to the final chapter concluded last weekend: the American raid on the Abbotabad HM Safehouse where OBL was hiding.

The event is shrouded in mystery.

Could the US have conducted the raid without any knowledge of the TSPA/ISI top-brass? Unlikely.

However awesome the stealth helicopters, the NAVY seals, the high-tech jamming gear etc... there were just too many things that could have gone wrong with a purely unilateral operation, for Washington to risk it. From JSOC choppers getting shot down, to a fire-fight in urban Pakistan including civilian collateral damage, to the mistaken launch of a Pakistani nuke against India. Just too many unpredictable outcomes to consider, if the US had actually "gone it alone."

BUT BUT BUT... if Pakistan AGREED to let the US snatch OBL, why did they not bargain for a more H&D-saving facade? Why did they not insist that OBL be "found in the border regions of Afghanistan" rather than the very embarrassing location of Abbotabad? Why did they not angle for more recognition of their cooperative role so that they could get generous baksheesh in reward from the US Congress? Why did they submit to a raid that makes them look so very bad, in terms of H&D, and in terms of casting suspicion on their role in harbouring OBL all these years? Why did they let SEALS cart away incriminating evidence from the location instead of delivering Bin Laden to the Americans on their own terms?

There is only one possible answer: the Pakis may have agreed to let the US snatch OBL on such humiliating terms because... the only alternative available to the Pakis was WORSE. Unkil has something so damaging to the Pakis, that he was able to threaten them with it, and dictate the terms of how the OBL raid was going to go... or else.

What is that "WORSE" thing? I don't know.

I have a suspicion that it might revolve around two trials currently taking place in the US, though. The trial of Tawwahur Hussein Rana in Chicago; and the trial in NY where the families of American 26/11 victims are suing the Pakistan Army and ISI. Things which could have come out in those trials and become public information, may have been even more damaging to Pakistan than the mere fact of OBL hiding in Abbotabad all these years.

20) For India... for the last 20 years, we have faced jihad alone. We will face it alone for the next 20.

USA/Al-Qaeda squabbles don't matter to us; USA-Pakistan lovefest doesn't matter to us; Pakistan-China double teaming doesn't matter to us.

We have survived the connivance of all these parties under much worse circumstances, when we were much weaker. With the wisdom of our ancestors, the courage of our people, and the virtuous sword arm of Dharma on our side we shall continue to survive it until we prevail. Jai Hind!

The above is a "POWER POST" and an instant classic on BRF. You may not agree with every word, nor receive every point 'as gospel'; but the clarity, comprehensiveness and incisiveness of Rudradev’s awesome post, speaks for itself.

BRAVO RUDRADEV!

rajatmisra · Post by **rajatmisra** » 07 May 2011 17:18

Sorry for an extremely basis query

- WHy the MMRCA when Su30 is there - is there any subsanial difference in roles / capabilities?
- WOuld not Su30, along with LCA, Mig29, Mirage2K upgraded be enough?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 07 May 2011 17:48

I'll put it this way, the Su 30 is a van, which can carry, say, 20 people to a distance of 300 km and back. The LCA on the other hand, is a maruti 800 which can carry about 5 people to a distance of about 100km and back.
So when you need to carry about 8-10 people to a distance of about 250 km, then both the options become uneconomical, due to a multitude of reasons. So to fill this gap you use a mini van, the MMRCA in this case, which can carry 8-10 people to a distance of about 250-260 km. Its more economical than either of the two earlier option.

For your second point, the mirage and mig 29 are quite old, so no matter the upgrade, they will still need to be replaced. The MMRCA is to fill this gap till the AMCA and LCA Mkii make it in sufficient numbers.

Gurulog, please feel free to correct me.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 07 May 2011 17:49

Rahulda,
Could we add Rajatmisra's question to the FAQ thread???

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 May 2011 21:33

yes boss, go ahead and put them in the thread. but I need someone to write up some of those. and most of our mujahids are slacking.

@ vivek k,
you reported a post of mine about the CT regarding PLA shooting down our aircraft with the following

Question to Adminullahs - I respect your decision. I have one question that may help me in the future. If a PAF jet crashes after the OBL kill raid, there was some conjecture that it was shot down by US. Would that be acceptable or fall into the same category as my transgression. You could respond to me at @@@@@ Thanks.

let me reply here.

use your common sense, it's not possible to answer for each and every possible scenario in this way.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 07 May 2011 22:11

To add to that from a role perspective, LCA is envisaged as a replacement for mig 21s which are interceptors, the Mig29s are dedicated air superiority fighters, the Mirage 2000s are designated multi role. The Su30MKIs are air superiority fighters but with very strong strike capabilities. So MMCRA are supposed to fit into the multi role role and will also replace the Mig 27 (IAF has around 100 of which around 40 have been had a upgrade but still have engine concerns).

Apart from the Mig29s and mirage 2000s that Bala mentioned, even the Jaguars airframes are around 30 years old and though have had avionics upgrades, the IAF has been seeking to re-engine (replace the engines) them. That may run into trouble becuase a single vendor situation has occured.

So no shortage of roles and gaps to fill for the MMCRA.

wig · Post by **wig** » 08 May 2011 14:20

gurus,
i want to download some threads from the forum and save the discussions therein.
is it possible? if yes i need some assistance on the computer command sequence that will initiate the process.
thanks in advance