Libyan War : Political and strategic aspects

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 20 Apr 2011 09:29

US is non commital to escalating the crisis.

To be more precise, Obama is non commital to escalating the crisis; but Hillary is a war monger on the Libyan front. I think she is using this conflict to put pressure on Obama.

If UK/France get into a quagmire, US/Obama might have to chastise them as a way to defuse the crisis, and restore some of the lost credibility of the west.

Western countries do not realize it yet, but Obama's channel of communication with Qaddhafi is the best bet they have of closing this conflict without creating major security issues in the future.

If Q emerges from this war as the leader of Libya, he will be in a vengeful mode. If any of sons is made leader in a compromise, they will be willing to make some concessions on the political front.

The best outcome yet could be that Q's daughter become the leader of Libya. That way, everybody can claim victory and go home. West can claim to have created a 'new dawn for Arab women'. Libya can claim that Q's family (and so by extension, Qaddhafi himself) is still in power.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Apr 2011 09:33

Obama stature is improving on his Libyan decision to not get involved.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 20 Apr 2011 09:50

^^^ he knows he can ill afford a Third war for US. he probably knew from the beginning. Robert Gates is a smart guy and it is unlikely that Obama would have dismissed Gates' views without hearing him out. knowing this, the question is, what was all the posturing about? why all the tamasha over the past 2 months, about freedom/justice when decision was already taken before itself not to get involved??? a diversion to keep attention away?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 20 Apr 2011 12:18

This zany misadventure in Libya is almost certain to end with severe negative repercussions for the Europeans, who blindly followed France, and then Britain - with now both Britain and France vying for "leadership" in that effort (because they apparently still think they will "succeed" in Libya, although they haven't quite defined what that success entails as yet). Incredible and unbelieveable that they got into this mess. The thing about humanitarian crisis imminent in Benghazi, which is declared as the reason for the military action, is pure crap. Either they mis-analysed the situation or they saw an "advantage" - a la the colonial period - and decided to go for it. They will learn the hard way. Remember the American experience in Somalia?

Be sure they will try their best to kill Qadhafi, despite the unctuous protestations otherwise, and be sure that there have been advisors and special forces on the ground for some time already. This announcement is probably post-facto ass covering just in case some legal crap pops up a couple of years down the line in their own countries.

I thought this Cameron chap had some sense. Apparently the Anglo-French competition to see who will piss further in Europe is a delicately poised thing. And the Germans, who wield enough power to make these two pause very long for thought, have wisely stayed out apart from making some pro-NATO noises now and then - at least in terms of publicity. Good move.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Apr 2011 12:38

yes quite surprising that US has not saved its munna so far - after a token one round of B2 and B1 global pawa strikes they are sitting back quietly. I saw the video of the B1s landing back in some remote base in US after their gruelling mission. they had fire trucks spraying water in a arc to welcome the boys back...as they welcome new a/c......got the sense it wasnt going to be a high-repeat cycle kind of deal.

germany has formidable strike power in its tornadoes...but seems to believe in 'recessed deterrance strong silent type' thing...just focussed on capabilities and the baltic rather than stick waving and yelling in the street.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 20 Apr 2011 12:43

With record deficits Ombaba acted wise and cut short his losses after the initial tomahawk barrage and b2 bombing. If unkil continued Libya could possibly have been the AFG for unkil

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Apr 2011 14:08

S&P yesterday downgraded US long term debt to AAA- or whatever its called these days.

lots of kimono shivering in in china, japan and soko the three biggest creditors on US treasuries...

ofcourse the real rating should be probably two levels down

but H&D onlee kya karein.

hopefully the era of US borrowing endlessly using low-yield treasuries will end...they can have the worlds money...but have to factor in the real risks and pay much higher interest. I prime coyote munna like me is paying 12% interest on my home loan and some deadbeat is enjoying a mansion @ 5%, sitting on a napa leather couch (0% interest) and watching WWF on a 55" TV (cheap + 0% down + 1% interest)

it aint fair.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Apr 2011 15:27

Me loves Darth Singha!!

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 20 Apr 2011 17:07

** Singha derailment alert **
** Singha derailment alert **

Purush · Post by **Purush** » 20 Apr 2011 18:38

Pranav wrote:An interview with Saif al-Islam Gaddafi - http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/an- ... story.html

A good read.

Q Jr has put forward his arguments quite well. It remains to be seen if it's all just lies or there is truth to what he says. If its the latter then the 'west/NATO' have proved themselves to Class-A pacquis. And from the interview of the rebel 'leader' posted a couple of pages ago, these rebels indeed seem to be closet beards; check out how he kept referring to 'muslim' this and 'muslim' that. The clown even stormed off the show because he mistakenly thought that the SDRE sitting there was a muslim who disagreed with his tall claims.

Q, Ms Q, Q Jr etc may make noises on kashmir etc but as long as they don't directly meddle in J&K (materials/manpower/$ support to the packees) then the worst they can do is just bark. At best a nuisance that no one takes seriously.

A powerful and pro-pacqui 'west' on the other hand is far more dangerous to us both directly and indirectly. If they get beaten in the deserts of Libya and are forced to limp home and lick their wounds, they may reduce their meddling outside their borders; it can only be a good thing for us. A victory will only embolden them and promote even more meddling in the affairs of other countries (incl India).

Both choices are evil. The lesser of the 2 evils for India appears to be Q.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Apr 2011 01:05

What if saving Q's skin includes among sundry other conditions, support on the "Kashmir" front on behalf of Pakee H&D? He does not have to even appear to be directly providing material resources - his assets are spread all around the usual spots where European fat-cats spread around their surplus away from their home-tax-nets. A couple of millions can easily be shifted all done and sealed far far away from Tripoli.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 21 Apr 2011 01:21

Haven't we already compromised on Kashmir, what with the free border and all?
And all this was done on the behest of the west/US, not Qaddhafi.
West remains the bigger threat than Q ever can be.

Purush · Post by **Purush** » 21 Apr 2011 08:28

As I said, both choices are evil; just that Q seems to be the less evil one for India (IMO).

Besides, if we help save Q's musharraf right now, we may be able to get some oil contracts, maybe even defense deals down the line. A nice little naval base in the Med to 'protect' our shipping that passes through the med/Suez.. hmmmmm? I don't think Q would be that dumb to p!ss off the few remaining 'friends' (I use the term loosely) that he's got left after all the western propagandu efforts have painted him as a Saddam v2. So we may be able to 'persuade' a grateful dictator to 'understand' our needs and positions.

On the other hand, supporting the paktically brilliant west/NATO* gains us nothing except a few verbal pats on the back "good dog, good dog". And the clowns will have a new rich source of oil at their disposal to grow fat on and pester other nations.

If the situation in Libya turns into a drawn out civil war, with Q on one side and the beards on the opp side, the pakees get some relief...they can export their homegrown jihadis to Libya (perhaps even with unkil/auntie's blessings) and take some pressure off internally. A comprehensive defeat of the western backed jihadis in Libya means that the pakis can't export their terrorists; they must be kept bottled up inside pakistan, adding to the increasing internal pressure.

All the above are JMT onlee, so take FWIW.

* Apparently a couple of French Mirage F1s made an emergency landing in Malta yesterday after running low on fuel. Are these guys so incompetent that they run out of fuel in backyard ops?

jimmyray · Post by **jimmyray** » 21 Apr 2011 22:13

Is it possible that Panda is helping Gaddafi ?

West-backed Libyan rebels face Qaddafi who is aided by China, East Europe (Debka news)

Rebels have been also claiming that Belarusians advisors (mercenary) are helping Gaddafi army

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Apr 2011 23:55

qatar has given camo outfits frm its own stock to rebels. photos exist

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 22 Apr 2011 06:26

Here is the US bailout
Libya: US sends armed drones to shield rebels
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ebels.html

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 22 Apr 2011 07:13

In a report yesterday it was said that the Misrata bunch are getting weapons through their port. Tactically the source was not mentioned. Anyone know?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 22 Apr 2011 09:52

jimmyray wrote:Is it possible that Panda is helping Gaddafi ?

West-backed Libyan rebels face Qaddafi who is aided by China, East Europe (Debka news)

Rebels have been also claiming that Belarusians advisors (mercenary) are helping Gaddafi army

If it does then its good for us, Chini- US cooperation with Munna will be put under more strain and hopefully these can start pulling GHQ Rawalpindi in 2 directions.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 22 Apr 2011 22:13

Here's another funny pronouncement from US: U.S. warns of Libya "stalemate" as Misrata battle rages
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/ ... JP20110422

What 'stalemate'? Libyan forces are about to achieve breakthrough in Misrata. Evacuation is in full swing. Once this 'rebel' enclave in the west Libya is taken care of, Q will be in a much stronger position as he can concentrate his forces in the east. This is precisely why fighting east is not as vicious as in the west, since the latter is Q's first priority. Once Misrata falls, it is game over, not 'stalemate'.

------------
Drones may have some impact, but we all know that the main weakness of the drones is accurate and timely intel on ground. The performance of drones in afPak shows that they alone do not have the ability to tip a ground war.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 22 Apr 2011 22:31

There is another theory that has been racking my head for a few days - about the apparent reasons of each of the western leaders in partaking in this war.

US engineered this war to split the political unity of Europe at a crucial time when, because of the economic crisis and Germany's relative strength in that, the whole of Europe was getting united under Germany.

Germany, like many developed countries was badly effected by the American contagion, but it also recovered the fastest, and showed better health than the still sclerotic American economy.

To counteract German economic strength from turning into political domination of Europe, Europe had to be split politically.

Hence, a made-to-order crisis, which Germany would not want or participate in, was created.

This reason also explains the alacrity with which Sarkozy jumped into the war. It gave him a chance to prevent France from falling into Germany's orbit. At any rate, like pakis, they believe that Anglo domination is better than German domination.

-----------
PS
If this is the REAL cause of war, then it means that this war has a definite end-point: it will continue until either one of these objectives are met:
1. America recovers from the economic crisis.
2. Europe is split so badly that Germany does not have a chance in hell of uniting it under its banner.

If Q is able to hold Libya together, then neither of these objectives will be met. So, it is in Germany's interest to see that he does.

What is interesting is that this war may end up bringing all of non-Anglo Saxon large economies together - Russia, China, Germany, and possibly India and Brazil as well. IOW, BRICS+Germany.

Interesting times ahead.

-------------
The thing is, this war is really cheap for the west, in terms of men and money.Only people getting killed are Libyans. The only country getting trashed is Libya. Hence, they can 'sustain' it for a long time.

Even Germany does not have its core interests threatened by this war. Hence, no foreign party has causes for aggravating this war either way. So, I guess, that means that this war can continue for months or even years.

But Germany/China *can* bring about an end to this war by enhancing the fighting power of Q's Libyan forces.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 22 Apr 2011 22:34

US non commital attitude is the wild card. Obama is keeping an option open if he needs to end the war in a hurry.

What this implies is that any aggravation in the war (such as spilling over into Egypt, etc) will be against US interests.

And what *this* implies is that aggravating the war may actually be a means to end the war.

REALLY interesting times ahead.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 22 Apr 2011 22:49

abhischekcc wrote:
This reason also explains the alacrity with which Sarkozy jumped into the war. It gave him a chance to prevent France from falling into Germany's orbit. At any rate, like pakis, they believe that Anglo domination is better than German domination

So do you think that Russia has begun considering Germany a closer ally than France, atleast since Sarkozy has come to power? Russia has historically been oscillating between Germany and France as the two European power poles, so is this Libyan crisis the precipitator of a Russian shift on EU. Is this the precursor to greater cooperation between Russia and Germany?

IMO, Sarkozy could be a tad hesitant to align himself directly with AADE, methinks he is working to reassert Francophone dominance in Africa, trying to position France as the anti-Turkey!

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 22 Apr 2011 22:53

Russia and Germany have a long history of cooperating with each other. And not just during crisis times.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 23 Apr 2011 05:13

Attack of the drones: Now Obama approves the use of unmanned aircraft in Libya conflict

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1KIhvQTE8

Low-flying drones take off to target Gaddafi tanks amid stalemate fears
http://news.scotsman.com/world/Lowflyin ... 6756492.jp

Libya: army may leave Misurata to tribes
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ribes.html

Al Jazeera says more Gaddafi aides leave Libya
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 59,00.html

What happens after Gaddafi is removed?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

Libya says it is prepared for free elections, leader’s role negotiable
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/lib ... story.html

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 23 Apr 2011 06:46

Germany seems to be tentatively breaking free of the Jewish-oligarch-led western world order (WWO) ... it has taken the significant step of banning EVMs. There is a chance that Germany may follow in the footsteps of Turkey, where the AKP has displaced the Army elites from the crypto-Jewish Donmeh sect. By the way, it is common knowledge that Sarkozy has been a Sayan (Mossad sleeper agent). As regards Russia the situation is hard to decipher. Putin seems to have an independent streak but Medvedev seems to be closer to the WWO.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 23 Apr 2011 11:53

>>By the way, it is common knowledge that Sarkozy has been a Sayan (Mossad sleeper agent).

Has been? You mean that he is no longer one? Or that he still is. And common knowledge among whom?

I like the above purported "Jewish oligarch led western world order"... I would like to learn how these chaps did it and replicate it ourselves. Clearly it has significant advantages, not to mention the impossible genius of a high level of predictability in terms of outcomes, not to mention massive control over muliple variables over centuries. And still, a lot of good luck too.

Purush · Post by **Purush** » 23 Apr 2011 12:19

JEM saar

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 23 Apr 2011 12:22

JE Menon wrote:>>By the way, it is common knowledge that Sarkozy has been a Sayan (Mossad sleeper agent).

Has been? You mean that he is no longer one? Or that he still is. And common knowledge among whom?

He would have outgrown Mossad at this stage. There was a Le Figaro story about this. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... context=va

I like the above purported "Jewish oligarch led western world order"... I would like to learn how these chaps did it and replicate it ourselves. Clearly it has significant advantages, not to mention the impossible genius of a high level of predictability in terms of outcomes, not to mention massive control over muliple variables over centuries. And still, a lot of good luck too.

See the thread http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=5525 for a historical overview.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 23 Apr 2011 17:25

Pranav,

I've read the Gamal Nkrumah article some time ago, and the thread which you have linked as well (though I have not participated in it). The article itself is a series of allegations, guilt by association, and innuendo - basically, a point by point challenge to the article will render it utterly transparent as little more than a hack job, which is OK - there are many such articles about many people. Let me just deal with the first few paras (my comments in bold):

As if his marital challenges were not enough cause for concern (it begins auspiciously, concern for whom, apparently the French voter did not give a crap), "Sarco the Sayan" has suddenly emerged (do a google search on Sarco the Sayan and you will find most links are identical words, as in exactly the same - perhaps linking and relinking to the same story... and Sarco the Sayan is in quotes in the Nkrumah article ) as the most infamous accolade of French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The influential French daily Le Figaro last week revealed that the French leader once worked for (really? Worked for? And Le Figaro knows but DGSE does not? DGSE has no special love for Mossad, in fact they have had some difficulties over the past decades) -- and perhaps still does, it hinted ("perhaps" and "hinted" -if they had evidence of any kind they wouldn't have to) -- Israeli intelligence as a sayan (Hebrew for helper - correct, not sleeper agent, one of the thousands of Jewish citizens of countries other than Israel who cooperate with the katsas (Mossad case-officers). So any Sri Lankan Hindu who knowingly or unknowingly helps RAW by perhaps renting out his apartment in, say, Colombo, for a period to one of our agencies is a helper. Would we look at that in a similar light. Of course, no one is directly accusing Sarkozy of being an agent, merey hinting and suggesting that he might be. Sayanim are just that, Jewish people who might help with often logistical details.

A letter dispatched (hmm... deliciously vague. Actually BR admins often get letters like this about various people in India) to French police officials late last winter -- long before the presidential election but somehow kept secret -- revealed that Sarkozy was recruited as an Israeli spy (without even seeing the letter we can be pretty certain that this is absolute nonsense because the chances that a recruitmen is done via letter by Mossad are well, let's say zero. They may bungle now and then, but such incompetence is unlikey in the extreme). The French police is currently investigating documents (what came of it? No doubt suppressed by "them") concerning Sarkozy's alleged espionage activities (come on now, we are still hedging with "alleged" - meaning nothing more than speculative) on behalf of Mossad, which Le Figaro claims dated as far back as 1983. According to the author of the message, in 1978, Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin ordered the infiltration of the French ruling Gaullist Party, Union pour un Mouvement Populaire. Originally targeted were Patrick Balkany, Patrick Devedjian and Pierre Lellouche. In 1983, they recruited the "young and promising" Sarkozy, the "fourth man". Apart from allegations what do we have here? Nothing.

Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky describes how sayanim function in By Way Of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer. They are usually reached through relatives in Israel. An Israeli with a relative in France, for instance, might be asked to draft a letter saying the person bearing the letter represents an organisation whose main goal is to help save Jewish people in the Diaspora. Could the French relative help in any way? They perform many different roles. A car sayan, for example, running a rental car agency, could help the Mossad rent a car without having to complete the usual documentation. An apartment sayan would find accommodation without raising suspicions, a bank sayan could fund someone in the middle of the night if needs be, a doctor sayan would treat a bullet wound without reporting it to the police. Nice description, but Ostrovsky's book is better and more clear in is outlining of this approach. Question is, so what? Is it news that Mossad or the FSB or the CIA or, allah forbid, RAW use similar approaches? No. What this Nkrumah is doing is alleging, based on spurious sources, and using language that is designed to convince without evidence, that Sarkozy is in fact a spy for Mossad. Sorry, it does not wash. Not with the evidence that is available. But does this mean Sarkozy is not a spy? No, it could be that he is a spy sold lock stock and barrel to the Mossad. But there is no evidence that this is the case, and if he were we are unlikely to find such evidence. The question is, now what? Believe he is a spy? OK let's do so. So what? Is the idea that we should always be wary about the backstage machinations of intelligence agencies? But why do we need a unestablishable construct to be wary? We should be anyways. Why waste time chasing after wild geese, and why not take things on a case-by-case basis?

Now on to the thread where these things are discussed, it can be useful to the extent that people are aware of the various notions out there, so that they can be wary and not take things always at face value, including the numerous and sometimes ridiculous causal connections that are taken for granted - as if B naturally flows from A, simply because it comes after it. Let me put it to you like this. Parents, despite the amount of control they exercise over the upbringing and moulding of their children, rarely succeed to the exact extent they want... and do we really want to accept that such grandiose "social engineering" claims (although they might be conceived by those who think they have the ability to "control") are actually going to deliver precisely what the conceiver wants, without any of the human variables that apply not just a few years but decades and centuries down the line. Take the case of Macaulay.. fellow must be spinning in his grave when he sees what his "children" are doing... And if the Jewish oligarch-led world order were guiding world events, I would be extremely cautious about them if I were a Jew - they nearly succeeded in wiping out the entire Jewish community in Europe.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 23 Apr 2011 18:47

JEM, as regards Sarkozy, it will be very difficult to get absolute proof one way or the other. Just as for the case of Sonia, there is credible information she was on KGB payroll, but no absolute proof.

You mentioned difficulties between the DGSE and Mossad ... I would say it is not so simple. One has take into account the historical influence of the Jewish oligarchy over the deep state in France. For example, there is a very good study of the French Revolution by Nesta Webster, published in 1919. She was cited respectfully by Winston Churchill - "This movement among the Jews ... played, as Mrs. Webster has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century." (Zionism versus Bolshevism by Winston Churchill)

Similarly, as regards WW2 and the holocaust, or for that matter 9/11, there is a lot of information that will remain unknown to people who have little curiosity to go beyond whatever they get from mainstream sources.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 23 Apr 2011 22:09

OK noted. Thanks.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Apr 2011 04:01

what a glorious Jewish led conspiracy it must have been when the Jews themselves get persecuted/converted/killed in regular time intervals. Gawd....JEM is right. we should emulate them.....what a glorious conspiracy indeed!!! a grand plan spanning centuries, in which, your own people are perhaps the worst effected.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 24 Apr 2011 07:21

devesh wrote:what a glorious Jewish led conspiracy it must have been when the Jews themselves get persecuted/converted/killed in regular time intervals. Gawd....JEM is right. we should emulate them.....what a glorious conspiracy indeed!!! a grand plan spanning centuries, in which, your own people are perhaps the worst effected.

Did you read the thread cited earlier (http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=5525). If you have any coherent objection to any specific point, you can post it there.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Apr 2011 23:37

a coherent objection would have to be raised against a coherent theory/hypothesis. when there is no such thing, there can be no coherent objection. the idea that Jews somehow created a conspiracy to destroy themselves is ridiculous and comical. India must be cautious with Israel b/c it is still a by product of Anglo imperialism. but there is no need to fall for Christian hatred of the Jews.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 24 Apr 2011 23:42

devesh wrote:a coherent objection would have to be raised against a coherent theory/hypothesis. when there is no such thing, there can be no coherent objection. the idea that Jews somehow created a conspiracy to destroy themselves is ridiculous and comical.

Just mouthing words like "ridiculous and comical" is of little value. There are number of specific and factual points that came up in that thread. If you have no objections, that's fine.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 24 Apr 2011 23:50

the issue of a new world order is not what i'm objecting to. but specifically this notion of "clever and shrewd" Jew that i'm objecting to. it is classic Christian hatred of Jews. there is no need to fall for that propaganda.

the same "analysis" has been applied to India and the concept of a "clever and cunning" Brahmin was given birth to. this is all missionary propaganda.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 24 Apr 2011 23:56

devesh wrote:the issue of a new world order is not what i'm objecting to. but specifically this notion of "clever and shrewd" Jew that i'm objecting to. it is classic Christian hatred of Jews. there is no need to fall for that propaganda.

the same "analysis" has been applied to India and the concept of a "clever and cunning" Brahmin was given birth to. this is all missionary propaganda.

One should look at facts dispassionately, without any bias or self-imposed constraints. I don't generalize about any group, but do try to identify individuals who have played key roles, and their relationships. Anyway, this is getting OT, you are welcome to give your views in the above mentioned thread.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 26 Apr 2011 12:20

Singha wrote:it seems the only country with adequate stocks of 'smart' munitions to wage a strong war for weeks is the khan. they have stockpiled tens of thousands of paveway and jdams for sure and thousands of more costly munitions jsow/jassm/slam etc.

the rest have enough for maybe 2 weeks war usage. and the weapons even if unused are consuming their limited number of takeoff and landing cycles permitted.

its not that India is any better in this regard. I would bet our stocks of PGMs are less than what France UK had. unless we develop Sudarshan and produce them like bata hawai chappals our position will not be comfortable at all -- think of number and density of pak-chinese targets vs the paltry few in Libya ... and on a much much wider area.

within a week IAF would be down to HSLD bombs and low alt release within sam/aa envelope.

Thanks GD for putting your finger directly on the strategic lesson India can derive from this Libya NFZ campaign.

IMHO we will not be building Sudarshans in any great number, for a long time. It simply doesn't fit in with what our doctrine currently appears to be.

We simply do not have the capacity to inflict the sort of aerial punishment against our enemies, that NATO can. We will not have that capacity for decades. There will be no SEAD, no instant sterilization of Paki airspace, no quick and absolute air-dominance while the ground fighting is done by dashing young Baloch rebels embedded with spec-ops cadre. Most likely there will not even be any "strategic bombing" as such... let alone smart munitions, fuel and spares stocks will require us to make every sortie count for the maximum strategic advantage.

IAF as I see it, has four roles in the present doctrine: (1) defence of Indian airspace, (2) interdiction of enemy counterthrusts and supply lines, (3) neutralization of the enemy's long-range strike capability (airbases/missile assets) and (4) CAS for the IA's offensives. Our grunts are the ones who will win the war, or not, by standing on the enemy's soil and killing his sepoys/jihadis mano-a-mano. IAF will only facilitate that.

Accordingly I expect IAF to be very parsimonious with its sparse stocks of PGMs. They will be used only against targets whose priority is very well defined and against which the strike window is limited.

Yes, within a week we will be down to HSLD and dumb bombs and our sorties will be increasingly vulnerable to Paki air defence systems (no chance that we will knock them all out in an initial display of overwhelming shock and awe.)

Within three-four weeks of hostilities, TSPAF may be completely finished. However, I would guess that probably half (or less) of our initial air strength will be serviceable by that point.

And that's as good as IAF being knocked out... because if we keep on losing planes and the Chinese open a new front at that point, we are phugged. Whatever we achieve on the ground will have to be achieved in three weeks, after which the IA in Pakistan cannot count on IAF support.

That is the true cost of facing the spectre of a two-front war. Even if the Chinese don't actually do anything, the mere possibility of their becoming involved places severe constraints on our armed forces that greatly strengthens Paki conventional capability relative to ours.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Apr 2011 00:01

Looks like the tried to bomb Gaddafi's compund to kill him but didnt work out. They claim it was a command center eupehmism for location of leaders!

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 27 Apr 2011 08:27

self deleted.....posted in wrong thread.