Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 17 Nov 2011 23:18

The chief designer of JF17 YANGWEI introduce the PAK-China JF17 project at dubai


member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20292 » 18 Nov 2011 02:37

^^ silly presentation. the guys english is terrible and the presentation is hackneyed.

capt maolankar for the win, any day, over this guy.

member_20021
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20021 » 18 Nov 2011 03:31

mahadevbhu wrote:^^ silly presentation. the guys english is terrible and the presentation is hackneyed.

capt maolankar for the win, any day, over this guy.


Yang received all his education in China, in Chinese. He speaks his mother tongue at work and in home. He does not have to speak any other languages than Chinese in his homeland.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20292 » 18 Nov 2011 04:24

One of my finest friends is from the Tongjie University in Shanghai. I tell him and his wife to practise English as well. Thats what I am going to tell you and Wang both.

His presentation's content is not upto the mark. It is highly descriptive and not insightful. I have heard many such Indian presentations as well. Still, they're not up to the mark .

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20067 » 18 Nov 2011 04:54

mahadevbhu wrote:^^ silly presentation. the guys english is terrible and the presentation is hackneyed.

capt maolankar for the win, any day, over this guy.


That's a lame excuse... I don't really care much if any DRDO or HAL scientist speaks in hindi and builds amazing stuffs... do you think all russian and french engineers can speak english...this whole fanciness to the ability to speak english is a non relevant issue in Defense... just my 2 cents

ashi
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 19 Feb 2009 13:30

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ashi » 18 Nov 2011 10:15

mahadevbhu wrote:^^ silly presentation. the guys english is terrible and the presentation is hackneyed.

capt maolankar for the win, any day, over this guy.


He is also the chief designer of J-20, and has played a very major role in J-10 design as well.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12408
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 18 Nov 2011 11:25

It does not matter how well you present, but how good the product is. Perception is not always better than reality.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 11:28

+1. am sure the Mig31, SS-18 or Tu160 designers did not speak english or if so, only at basic level.

however ITvity managers do feel that those with good ppt showing skill as the most expert

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20292 » 18 Nov 2011 12:43

^^

sorry none of the above cuts it as excuses for bad presentation skills. people forget that ppts are not slides for display, but rather props for a extemporary speech by the speaker.

expert speaker good talk

ratta mara hua speaker shitty talk.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 13:06

that would be a fair opinion if he were talking in mandarin. also there are lots of experts who are not good at explaining things in a manner that audience can easily understand and get into.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 18 Nov 2011 13:14

Chances are the Designer would be rarely speaking english if at all in his day to day activity , even the Paki brother would be told to learn Mandarin if they want to work on the JF-17 , many Indian scientist and Defence personal learn Russian language when working on joint projects or on training nothing extraordinary there.

He is certainly struggling with his English but he did an ok job to convey what ever he wanted to.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vina » 18 Nov 2011 16:18

Hmm. Bandar seems to have "Care Free Handling" (AoA and g load protection) etc. I really wonder how mature and idiot proof it's FCS is though. I am not really sure how robust their testing was, they have fielded a fighter in very quick time without a close to decade of testing that FBW fighters like Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon etc, went through. Something doesn't pass the smell test here.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rajanb » 18 Nov 2011 18:05

Singha wrote:+1. am sure the Mig31, SS-18 or Tu160 designers did not speak english or if so, only at basic level.

however ITvity managers do feel that those with good ppt showing skill as the most expert


True. Empty vessels make more soundbetter presentations is the norm of the 21st Century

asgkhan
BRFite
Posts: 1721
Joined: 16 Apr 2009 17:19
Location: Helping BRF research how to seduce somali women

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby asgkhan » 18 Nov 2011 20:54

mahadevbhu wrote:^^

sorry none of the above cuts it as excuses for bad presentation skills. people forget that ppts are not slides for display, but rather props for a extemporary speech by the speaker.

expert speaker good talk

ratta mara hua speaker shitty talk.



From Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerpoint

Criticism
Although PowerPoint has the aforementioned benefits, some argue that PowerPoint has negatively impacted society. The terms "Death by PowerPoint" and "PowerPoint Hell" refer to the poor use of the software. Many large companies and branches of the government use PowerPoint as a way to brief employees on important issues that they must make decisions about. Opponents of PowerPoint argue that reducing complex issues to bulleted points is detrimental to the decision making process; in other words, because the amount of information in a presentation must be condensed, viewing a PowerPoint presentation does not give one enough detailed information to make a truly informed decision.
A frequently cited example is Edward Tufte's analysis of PowerPoint slides prepared for briefing NASA officials concerning possible damage to the Space Shuttle Columbia during its final launch.[10] Tufte argues that the slides, prepared by the Boeing Corporation, had the effect of oversimplifying the situation, and provided false assurance that the ultimately fatal damage to the shuttle was only minimal. Tufte argued:
The most critical information was consigned to the lowest level of importance in the outline style.
The low resolution of the slides encouraged the use of acronyms and undescriptive pronouns instead of specific, descriptive terms and language.
PowerPoint's limited font styling obscured proper notation of key scientific measurements.
Tufte concluded that:
The language, spirit, and presentation tool of the pitch culture had penetrated throughout the NASA organization, even into the most serious technical analysis, the survival of the shuttle.[10]
A review of Tufte's book, The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint can be read online.[11]
[edit]"Death by PowerPoint"
“Death by PowerPoint” is a criticism of slide-based presentations referring to a state of boredom and fatigue induced by information overload during presentations such as those created by the Microsoft application PowerPoint.
The phrase was first coined by Angela R. Garber.[12] Further criticisms of the cognitive effects of PowerPoint have been expounded by others, for example, Edward Tufte (2006)[13] and Kalyuga et al. (1991).[14] Wright (2009) suggests PowerPoint is a convenient prop for poor speakers, it can reduce complicated messages to simple bullet points and it elevates style over substance; and that these three things contribute to its popularity.[15] It can also be called “PowerPoint Poisoning” - a term originated by Scott Adams of Dilbert fame.
[edit]Boredom
“PowerPoint hell” is the tedium some people report on sitting through PowerPoint visual presentations that are too long and complex, making excessive use of the software’s features and when the presenter just reads from the slides.[16][17][18][19]
Retired Marine Colonel Thomas X Hammes says that this effect, which he calls “hypnotizing chickens”, is useful when the goal is to avoid divulging information, as in military press briefings.[20]
[edit]Military excess
A “PowerPoint Ranger” is a military member who relies heavily on presentation software to the point of excess. Some junior officers spend the majority of their time preparing PowerPoint slides.[21] Because of its usefulness for presenting mission briefings, it has become part of the culture of the military,[20][22] but is regarded as a poor decision-making tool.[23] As a result some generals, such as Brigadier-General Herbert McMaster, have banned the use of PowerPoint in their operations.[21] In September 2010, Colonel Lawrence Sellin was fired from his post at the ISAF for publishing a piece critical of the over-dependence of military staffs on the presentation method and bloated bureaucracy.[24]
According to Jim Nelson, who served as a civilian translator with the Russian and American peacekeepers in Bosnia in 1996, one of the Russians said, “If we ever had a war, while you are working on your PowerPoint, we would be killing you.” :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Lalmohan » 18 Nov 2011 21:31

writing (well) in powerpoint is a skill that takes many years to master. that's why the newbies and wannabe's make a hash of it

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20317 » 18 Nov 2011 23:36

Prithwiraj wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:^^ silly presentation. the guys english is terrible and the presentation is hackneyed.

capt maolankar for the win, any day, over this guy.


That's a lame excuse... I don't really care much if any DRDO or HAL scientist speaks in hindi and builds amazing stuffs... do you think all russian and french engineers can speak english...this whole fanciness to the ability to speak english is a non relevant issue in Defense... just my 2 cents



Yeh but come on, HAL guys dont go about imposing themselves on unsuspecting crowd. They do what they are good at and let the English bablers do theirs.

Yang has to make up his mind and alongwith him Jimi too.

Whats the point doing a job if you are not going to do it well.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5347
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 19 Nov 2011 13:04

Found cracks on the F-35B variant, but found these during testing. This is what tells me that the JF-17 testing program wasn't thorough and that they rushed its induction into service since they're finding wing-root cracks on it within a few hundred hours of service itself.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5347
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 19 Nov 2011 13:08

Austin wrote:The chief designer of JF17 YANGWEI introduce the PAK-China JF17 project at dubai



There is a slide at the 1:58 min point that clearly states :

Total sorties: about 10,000


Now, that doesn't necessarily convert to 10,000 hours, not without aerial refuelling which the JF-17 lacks. Journos cannot apparently figure out such a basic fact itself, claiming that the JF-17 fleet has reached the 10,000 flight hour mark.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2011 13:28

Kartik , it was always 10000 sorties and not hours at least that was the stated position.

Although the video mentions the on station time as 3.5 hours probably with the 3 Drop tank and range as 3000 km , internal fuel range is 1800 km, so a sortie lasting more than an hour is a possibility. Interestingly they also mention Block 2 and 3 upgrade as planned.

What seems to be worrisome is that it has been displayed at Dubai with SD-10A BVR missile with a capability similar to R-77E and WVR missile with 2 colour seeker , similar to RVV-MD and Python 4

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 19 Nov 2011 14:44

Kartik wrote:There is a slide at the 1:58 min point that clearly states :

Total sorties: about 10,000


Kartik, the slide says 10,000 sorties but the speaker says "about" 10,000 hours. Pakistaniyat.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2011 15:57

Shiv , considering the speaker is not great with his English , I would say the slide is correct and from other boards what i could gathers its sorties.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 19 Nov 2011 16:58

Austin wrote:Shiv , considering the speaker is not great with his English , I would say the slide is correct and from other boards what i could gathers its sorties.


Austin, the speaker appears to be reading out text. Apart from pronunciation, that man's English is excellent. Did you listen to the whole thing? He mentions that the "basic range" is 1800 km, but the air to air range is 1400 km and air to ground range is 1000 km. From these figures it is not possible to surmise anything about flight hours.

He also says "Look at the cockpit - a full glass cockpit that is not present in any other 3rd generation aircraft". Hmm.. The Chinese don't seem to be pushing this as anything more than 3 gen.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12408
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 19 Nov 2011 21:11

Didn't 3rd gen aircraft have very little BVR, PGM capabilities?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby krishnan » 19 Nov 2011 23:22

why are we arguing whether its 10K sorties or 10K hrs?

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 19 Nov 2011 23:34

shiv wrote:Austin, the speaker appears to be reading out text. Apart from pronunciation, that man's English is excellent. Did you listen to the whole thing? He mentions that the "basic range" is 1800 km, but the air to air range is 1400 km and air to ground range is 1000 km. From these figures it is not possible to surmise anything about flight hours.


I saw a AW&ST report and it quotes 10000 hrs but its possible the jurno was present at the same briefing. Never mind if its sorties or hours but it seems in either case it has put in some decent numbers. So the A2A range of 1400 km includes full compliment of A2A payload or just few same for A2G ?

He also says "Look at the cockpit - a full glass cockpit that is not present in any other 3rd generation aircraft". Hmm.. The Chinese don't seem to be pushing this as anything more than 3 gen.


I though the Chinese always used a Gen minus designation for their fighter so a J-20 would be classified as 4th Gen but a J-10 or JF-17 would be classified as 3rd gen.

As far as Flight Testing Program goes and even Weapons , it would seem JF-17 would have benefited from J-10 program and experience would have helped them speed things up , specially the missile payload of A2A and A2G might well have been developed for J-10 program and JF-17 would end up getting benefited

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5347
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 20 Nov 2011 01:42

Austin wrote:I though the Chinese always used a Gen minus designation for their fighter so a J-20 would be classified as 4th Gen but a J-10 or JF-17 would be classified as 3rd gen.

As far as Flight Testing Program goes and even Weapons , it would seem JF-17 would have benefited from J-10 program and experience would have helped them speed things up , specially the missile payload of A2A and A2G might well have been developed for J-10 program and JF-17 would end up getting benefited


They are no doubt benefiting from the J-10 program..seems like the Block 2 may feature a scaled down PESA or AESA radar derived from the J-10B program as well.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gaur » 20 Nov 2011 02:59

Austin wrote:
He also says "Look at the cockpit - a full glass cockpit that is not present in any other 3rd generation aircraft". Hmm.. The Chinese don't seem to be pushing this as anything more than 3 gen.


I though the Chinese always used a Gen minus designation for their fighter so a J-20 would be classified as 4th Gen but a J-10 or JF-17 would be classified as 3rd gen.

He may be using Amercian designation for the presentation. Surely he doesn't mean to say that no other 4th gen fighter has a glass cockpit.

Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 516
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Nick_S » 20 Nov 2011 03:41

Austin wrote:I though the Chinese always used a Gen minus designation for their fighter so a J-20 would be classified as 4th Gen but a J-10 or JF-17 would be classified as 3rd gen.


Yep, you are right. In China J-20 is designated as a 4th gen platform while J-10 & Bhandar are designated as 3rd gen.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 20 Nov 2011 06:26

Austin wrote: So the A2A range of 1400 km includes full compliment of A2A payload or just few same for A2G ?

Well like "promised mileage" in your car, there is no information on whether you have to drive it at 50 kmph at 25 deg C air temp, at sea level, in 5th gear to get the mileage.

I though the Chinese always used a Gen minus designation for their fighter so a J-20 would be classified as 4th Gen but a J-10 or JF-17 would be classified as 3rd gen.


Full marks to the Chinese for this. It is pure ass licking rahrah USA for the rest of us to be slobbering over a convention that is relevant only to the USA. It only means that we know where the US stands and have no idea where we stand.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 20 Nov 2011 09:17


Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Yogi_G » 20 Nov 2011 09:25

This Alan Warne guy looks like a Chuck Yeager redux. Like the Chinese have white "customers" brought on rent to give a "impression" to others, the Pakis like to have the Goras sing paens on them. Wait whats the definition of Kafir again?

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rajanb » 20 Nov 2011 09:57

Pak AF can beat the Israeli AF! That is an oxymoron, if I have ever seen one! :rotfl:

Vinit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 80
Joined: 01 Oct 2010 08:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Vinit » 20 Nov 2011 10:13

rajanb wrote:Pak AF can beat the Israeli AF! That is an oxymoron, if I have ever seen one! :rotfl:


I think he said the PAF can "battle" the IsAF. On the same lines, I can 'battle' Lennox Lewis.
However, in both cases, what the outcome would be is a completely different matter....

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 20 Nov 2011 10:21

Vinit wrote:
rajanb wrote:Pak AF can beat the Israeli AF! That is an oxymoron, if I have ever seen one! :rotfl:


I think he said the PAF can "battle" the IsAF. On the same lines, I can 'battle' Lennox Lewis.
However, in both cases, what the outcome would be is a completely different matter....


He doesn't actually say that. The video title says so that's all. Warne has been "had". I thingk he should have been Warne-d about Packees.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rajanb » 20 Nov 2011 10:47

Whoever said it, it doesn't matter. Still an oxymoron. Am enjoying my Sunday morning guffaws. :mrgreen:

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5396
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby SBajwa » 24 Nov 2011 03:15

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20111123/main4.htm

Pakistan raising green wall along border to blind BSF
Jupinderjit Singh/TNS

Chicken Neck (Kanachak), November 22
While continuing making concrete bunkers along the international border in the Jammu area, Pakistan is erecting a wall of trees to block the view of the BSF. The line of sight has reduced from 2 km to half-a-km or less, where the saplings have grown to considerable height.

With foggy winter approaching fast, the BSF is worried that the blocked sight would aid infiltration in the region. They have formally (in writing) objected to the Pak Rangers, who replied they were just planting saplings for the sake of environment.

Some saplings planted within last year have grown to considerable height in this highly sensitive and strategic border area near Akhnoor. Encouraged by it, new saplings have now been planted on almost all along the border from Kathua to Akhnoor. The new saplings have come especially in the Samba-RS Pura belt, from where infiltration attempts are often made.

Despite four wars and the continuous proxy war against India, this move to use a natural wall of trees to block movement across the border has been observed for the first time.

The Tribune team witnessed the obstruction in the line of sight of the BSF during the day as well as night hours on this border. BSF sources said they pruned some of the trees, whose branches extended to Indian side, but they can’t uproot trees as they were away from Zero Line.

Most of the trees or the saplings are of Sheesham species but at some places the fast growing ‘Arandi’ (Castor) tree were also planted. This tree spreads in a large area fast as it strews seeds all around it.

The BSF is relying heavily on night vision equipment using the thermal imaging or the satellite imaging to keep a watch on the activity in the counterpart area. “It is an issue of grave concern for us. Earlier, it was just the seasonal wild grass ‘sarkanda’ in which militants used to hide before attempting to enter India. The trees would be there for all time,” a BSF official said.

'Chicken Neck' vs 'Dagger'?

India surrounds Pakistan from three sides at the 'Chicken Neck' area, which Pakistan terms as 'Dagger'. Pakistan uses the name to suggest that its land extending into the Indian territory is like a dagger in India's heart. On the other hand, India calls it the chicken’s neck suggesting that it is a weak neck (of Pakistan) that can be twisted anytime.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20067 » 26 Nov 2011 14:09

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_n ... diers.html
Pakistan accuses NATO of cross-border attack that kills at least 20 soldiers
Pakistani allegations of a NATO helicopter attack that killed at least 20 Pakistani soldiers near the Afghan border early Saturday will probably deal a serious blow to already tense relations between Washington and Islamabad at a time when the U.S. needs Pakistan’s help in brokering negotiations with insurgents in Afghanistan.

Local officials said the alleged incursion occurred about 2 a.m. Saturday at a Pakistani army checkpost in Salala, a village in the restive tribal region of Mohmand. About 50 soldiers were at the checkpost at the time, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on such matters.

NATO officials said they were aware of Pakistan’s claim and were checking into it.

Pakistani authorities quickly denounced the episode as a gross violation of their country’s sovereignty. Islamabad also retaliated as it has in the past when NATO aircraft incursions into Pakistani territory have resulted in casualties -- by shutting down a border crossing used by convoys delivering supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials at the Torkham checkpoint at the Khyber Pass said Saturday afternoon that they had suspended all movement of NATO tankers and supply trucks heading into Afghanistan.

A similar incident occurred more than a year ago, when NATO helicopters crossed over into Pakistan’s Kurram tribal region along the Afghan border and fired on paramilitary troops at a border patrol checkpoint, killing two Pakistani soldiers. The U.S. government and NATO formally apologized for the deaths of the Pakistani soldiers, saying the helicopter crews mistook the men for insurgents it had been pursuing across the Afghan border.

At the time, Pakistan responded by closing the Torkham checkpoint for 11 days, effectively stopping the movement of trucks and tankers ferrying fuel and supplies to NATO troops in Afghanistan. The border shutdown created a massive bottleneck, which paved the way for a series of militant attacks on parked NATO oil tankers and trucks across Pakistan. More than 150 NATO trucks were set ablaze or damaged in those attacks. At least six people were killed.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rajanb » 26 Nov 2011 14:28

^^^ Which brings me to mom-in-law's last trip to the brutally violated land of the sovereign pure. The violation approved by their leaders, albeit privately. "Days and weeks" she said, "not months."

Is the dahej being delivered rackit by rackit?

So have the patient grown impatient? I have been following, as some smart BRFite said: "Normal Programming". Averaging at about 72 a week and I hope now it is 72 a day.

No, I do not hate them. Hate is a self consuming emotion and I would never consume anything for them. Nah! Not worth the trouble. I am indifferent, which to me is the opposite of love. Indifferent as to their travails and yet the pleasure of the screw turning ever so slowly. The equivalence of their Chinese Massas: "Death of a thousand cuts"!

The lull in the gruesome delivery of their new found national birds does dismay at times. But when the birds wake up and strike they seem to do so with a retribution to make up for the days of dismay.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Shrinivasan » 27 Nov 2011 12:48

^^^ interesting to note that Apaches were part of thhe blessing process, imaginr the Kujil it wouls cause the Jernails to see these dirds in IAF colors.. Hmmmm.

saptarishi
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 05 May 2007 01:20
Location: ghaziabad
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby saptarishi » 27 Nov 2011 14:23

they couldn't differentiate the porkis and the terrorists....waise they are one and the same.... :)


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests