Indian Army: News & Discussion

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

Surya wrote: lets not lump unnithan with other journalists - he chose to break away from the pack .

There are many ways Unnithan could have been a decent journalist. But he had already committed himself with an earlier article which you true to form posted right away - hot of the presses :)

This one replete with cover story, and the vomit inducing first para - conveys his intention and that of his masters.
Well every one has views and thats fine.

I am not here to defend him or any jurno , i am sure he is capable of doing that.... Jurnos job are full of risk ask Ajai Shukla :)
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

not much you can do to defend him. :) you can just be the loyal friend

other journos - we will see when we come to those scenarios

why just ajai, I can ask quite a few journos (and not just defence ).

where do you think I am getting some of the background info of how these things workr?? :) from Oracle operators ?? :)
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

Well you are not really aware how many people in BR knows him including so many oldie senior mods ...but never mind , you can always write to IT editor and convey your feelings :)
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

dear austin
how many people in BR knows him including so many oldie senior mods ...but never mind
:rotfl: that is funny

yes all those senior mods would be just as disappointed in him - you see BR admins are such lofty individuals that I have no way to speak to them to find out how they feel?? :)

why would I waste my time writing to IT?? its not like he does not know what is happening

I am quite happy making sure the local library does not subscribe to it.:)
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

Dear Surya , you response is quite amusing :rotfl:

You can work hard in your endeavor with local library , Good Luck :)
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

Its done and stopped long ago. :)

Still chuckling about those senior mods.

Meanwhile watching the rush of people on the forum - seniors and juniors to you and unnithans aide.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

Age gap
Is there a fissure between the Army chief and the defence ministry?
The question whether General V.K. Singh would retire from the Army on May 31, 2012 or exactly a year later has been hanging for more than a year now. And, as of now, it looks like the matter will be sorted out in court.
An ex-servicemen's NGO, Grenadiers' Association of Rohtak, filed a PIL last year, seeking the Supreme Court's intervention in Singh's support. The matter was listed on December 16, 2011 before the division bench of Justice B.S. Chauhan and Justice T.S. Thakur.

As Thakur refused to hear the case, the court ordered that the matter be listed before another bench. Senior lawyer Bhim Singh, who appeared for the petitioner, told THE WEEK that matter has now been assigned to a fresh bench.
Last year, the defence ministry, on the recommendation of Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati, had rejected the Army chief's plea to treat May 10, 1951 as his date of birth. Since then, there was talk that Singh might seek judicial intervention.

Singh can approach either the Armed Forces Tribunal or the Supreme Court. But such a step might upset the government and Singh may face more trouble. “If he approaches the court while in service, he could be sacked,” said a top defence ministry official.

However, in a recent interview, Singh said that he had no confrontation with the government, only a difference of perception. Defence Minister A.K. Antony, on the other hand, is confident that his ministry's stand on the age row would stand legal scrutiny. But a legal battle with an Army general is the last thing he wants now.

Already panting under a big load of troubles, the Congress is certainly peeved by the row. “What is happening is definitely a matter of concern. Those who are charged with the responsibility or are dealing with the issue should arrive at some kind of appropriate solution,” said party spokesperson Manish Tewari.

The dispute arose a few years ago, when a query under the RTI revealed that defence ministry files had recorded two dates of birth of the army chief. The adjutant general's branch, which deals with pensions, had recorded it as May 10, 1951, and the military secretary had noted it as May 10, 1950.

The issue erupted last year when General Avadhesh Prakash was the military secretary. Singh, as eastern commander, had initiated stringent action against Prakash in the Sukhna land scam.

The issue is quite confusing. Singh's school certificate, his record of service, ID card, passport, driving licence and official medical examination reports have his date of birth as May 10, 1951. But, a few other documents, including his handwritten application to the National Defence Academy and his file in the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun, have it as May 10, 1950.

Last September, Antony told Parliament that Singh's date of birth had been maintained as May 10, 1950, when he was selected as corps commander in 2006, promoted as Army commander in 2008, and appointed Chief of Army Staff in 2010. Hence, he concluded, Singh shall retire on May 31, 2012.

The defence ministry has started the process of appointing the next Army chief, who is usually named two months before the retirement of the incumbent. In the ministry's scheme of things, eastern Army commander Lt-Gen. Bikram Singh is likely to take over as the next Army chief. But if General V.K. Singh gets a one-year extension, present northern commander Lt-Gen. K.T. Parnaik may become the next Army chief.

General Singh and Antony have been maintaining that all is well between them. But, defence observers say the dispute has affected the morale of the armed forces.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Viv S »

I know I'm late to this debate but for its worth -

Frankly I am quite annoyed with government for a lot of things, but I can't really fault them for not extending Gen VK Singh's tenure. Three basic reasons why -



1. This mess is primarily of the army's making. The govt isn't responsible for the MS and AG having registered different DoBs.

2. This sort of thing should have ideally been sorted out in the 30 odd years of his service life before he took charge at Army HQ.

3. Its my understanding that he gave multiple written undertakings accepting his older DoB, in and before 2008, with the current explanation being that they were extracted under duress. While that may be true, it drastically weakens his position from a procedural as well as legal viewpoint.



Personally, I have no doubt that his true year of birth is 1951 not 1950, but its not about that anymore. I'm not surprised that the Defence Ministry after examining his records decided to take the easy way out and deny him the extra/remaining 10 months of tenure. I don't believe his honour was in question here, it was more a case of his being a victim of a flawed system and just plain bad luck.

Also, its unlikely that there is a corruption angle here. The general had reputation for being a straightforward, no-nonsense officer who intended to work towards a cleaner more efficient army, a reputation that was known to the government before (and perhaps even why) he was appointed to replace Gen. Kapoor. And its a pity that this controversy will mar his otherwise brilliant legacy.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

VIv S

I started with the same view

now i am not sure - the increased attacks indicate something else.

worse the possible successor raises some other doubts
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

now your friend could have added in the title "loot of army land by MOD officials'
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by jamwal »

http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/slideshows/66541//

Image
बचाने आए मसीहा!
मुश्किल हालात, चारों ओर बर्फ, दूर-दूर तक सड़क मार्ग का कोई नामोनिशान नहीं। राजौरी जिले की बुद्धल तहसील के दूरदराज गांव कंडी में शनिवार, 7 जनवरी को जब एक गर्भवती महिला नसीम अख्तर को प्रसव पीड़ा हुई तो सेना के जवान मसीहा बनकर आए। जवानों ने महिला को चारपाई पर उठाकर करीब सात किलोमीटर बर्फ पर पैदल चलकर उसे एंबुलेंस तक पहुंचाया। जहां महिला ने एक स्वस्थ बच्ची को जन्म दिया।
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9199
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by nachiket »

jamwal wrote: मुश्किल हालात, चारों ओर बर्फ, दूर-दूर तक सड़क मार्ग का कोई नामोनिशान नहीं। राजौरी जिले की बुद्धल तहसील के दूरदराज गांव कंडी में शनिवार, 7 जनवरी को जब एक गर्भवती महिला नसीम अख्तर को प्रसव पीड़ा हुई तो सेना के जवान मसीहा बनकर आए। जवानों ने महिला को चारपाई पर उठाकर करीब सात किलोमीटर बर्फ पर पैदल चलकर उसे एंबुलेंस तक पहुंचाया। जहां महिला ने एक स्वस्थ बच्ची को जन्म दिया।[/size]
Translation:

Difficult conditions, snow in all four directions, no sign of a road for miles. On saturday 7th Jan, when a pregnant woman named Naseem Akhtar went into labor, Army Jawans came as saviours. The jawans carried the woman on a stretcher, walking through the snow for 7 km to an ambulance. The woman gave birth to a healthy child.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

prahaar wrote:Ramanaji, pardon me, but I am not able to understand this reference to 1905 case during British colonial rule (which may have been an internal fight between the British rulers of India). Based on the description of events (google threw up NYTIMES, Indianetzone, etc) it was Curzon who resigned and left. The military member was replaced by a "military supply member". How is all this relevant today?

Yes Prahaar, Curzon had to resign. The INC leaders & bureaucrats think they have the burden of fighting Curzon's battle and spare no effort to put down the Indian Military. First evidence JLN took up residence in Number two house ie Teen Murti House which was the CinC house.

All this thing appears like over the top but you need to sit with old ICS and old IA types and get to the gist of it. That is why civil -military relations gets thrown in to remind those who know the background of it.

Austin again the IAF opinion in this is not without bias. They have a historical fear of IA dominating the services due to being the senior service and numbers. Using the IAF opposition the INC shoots down the idea of CDS repeatedly. So their advice is not germane.
prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2834
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by prahaar »

Ramanaji, thanks for the explanation. I will try to read up more on this topic.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

Older news ... but gives insight into what the ATGM composition of the IA will be in the years to come.

Indian Army goes for Israeli Spike ATGM and Homemade NAG ATGM, Contemplates Javelin from U.S


IMO, this is what IA's ATGM inventory will look like over the next 10 to 20 years.

New/Planned inductions:
  • Man portable ATGM -> Javelin (>60,000 units)
  • Light vehicle & IFV mounted ATGM -> Spike (8,356 units)
  • Heavy & dedicated anti-tank vehicles (NAMICA) -> NAG (7,000 units)
  • Arjun/T90S MBT main-gun-launched ATGM -> LAHAT, AT-11 (?? units)
  • Armed Helicopters -> HELINA (?? units)
Slowly Being Phased out:
  • Man portable ATGM -> Milan/2T (30,000 units)
  • Light vehicle & IFV mounted ATGM -> AT-4/5/14 (100/15,000/250 units)
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Are they expecting to be attacked FSU led Warsaw pact forces?
8)
kunalverma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by kunalverma »

A couple of years ago, during one of the India Today enclaves, I remember thinking Aroon Purie had lost his marbles as he ffawned and gushed over Parvez Musharaff. Gen Ved Malik was also in the audience and it was the most insensitive display - I could see the faces of some of the men who had died and there was Aroon Purie going on like a star struck teenager.
The latest cynical attack on the Army Chief convinces me the man is completely cuckoo! Both Unnithan and Purie know exactly what is the reality of the situation. Take for example the allegation made by IT against VKS that he had petitioned the PM. IT is fully aware that the PMO had asked AHQ for a brief on the issue. The resultant document was bandied about as 'an unsigned petition' from VKS to the PM. Why this duplicity?
AP, despite ITs fading lusture sees himself as a 'kingmaker' and if a cynical headline like 'Self before Service' sells, so be it. Both the GOI and the MOD are in a corner - and the latter are doing what they can to make virulant attacks on a man who has steered the Army out of the rut of corruption charges. The day VKS left for Myanmar, Economic Times in an editorial suggested the Chief of the Indian Army be sacked for by fudging his DOB, he had qualified for NDA where the minimum age was 16. The next day they said, oops, sorry, minimum age is 14 and a half, but the damage was done for who reads the correction on some obscure page. The tactic is only too obvious - somehow get the man to resign in disgust. Once he's out of the way, who cares? Rember Bhagwat?
The day MOD turned down VKS's statutory appeal, the Fin Min met VKS. TOI promptly said a compromise was being worked out. What compromise? Were they planning on a date between 21 May 1950 and 1951. That would put VKS's DOB sometime in November 1951. Contrary to what was being projected, it was the Fin Minister who suggested to VKS that he should resign. Talk of wheels within wheels!s
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by alexis »

pandyan wrote:
kunalverma wrote: Contrary to what was being projected, it was the Fin Minister who suggested to VKS that he should resign. Talk of wheels within wheels!s
Wanderer - Pls. vote for Con party in the next election! Because people like you are the ones who are electing the government leaders/politicians/public servants. You are responsible for the mess that you are raising.
Do you think the matter would have been different under any other party? To my knowledge, no mainstream politician has publicly supported VKS.
I am not sure whether this issue is a creation of a politician or a babu. I think it is the latter. Mainly because AKA shuns controversies and this is a big issue. If found wrong, as someone mentioned earlier, he would have to resign on moral grounds.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34800
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

kunalverma wrote:A couple of years ago, during one of the India Today enclaves, I remember thinking Aroon Purie had lost his marbles as he ffawned and gushed over Parvez Musharaff. Gen Ved Malik was also in the audience and it was the most insensitive display - I could see the faces of some of the men who had died and there was Aroon Purie going on like a star struck teenager.
The latest cynical attack on the Army Chief convinces me the man is completely cuckoo! Both Unnithan and Purie know exactly what is the reality of the situation. Take for example the allegation made by IT against VKS that he had petitioned the PM. IT is fully aware that the PMO had asked AHQ for a brief on the issue. The resultant document was bandied about as 'an unsigned petition' from VKS to the PM. Why this duplicity?
AP, despite ITs fading lusture sees himself as a 'kingmaker' and if a cynical headline like 'Self before Service' sells, so be it. Both the GOI and the MOD are in a corner - and the latter are doing what they can to make virulant attacks on a man who has steered the Army out of the rut of corruption charges. The day VKS left for Myanmar, Economic Times in an editorial suggested the Chief of the Indian Army be sacked for by fudging his DOB, he had qualified for NDA where the minimum age was 16. The next day they said, oops, sorry, minimum age is 14 and a half, but the damage was done for who reads the correction on some obscure page. The tactic is only too obvious - somehow get the man to resign in disgust. Once he's out of the way, who cares? Rember Bhagwat?
The day MOD turned down VKS's statutory appeal, the Fin Min met VKS. TOI promptly said a compromise was being worked out. What compromise? Were they planning on a date between 21 May 1950 and 1951. That would put VKS's DOB sometime in November 1951. Contrary to what was being projected, it was the Fin Minister who suggested to VKS that he should resign. Talk of wheels within wheels!s

The person who actually lit the slow burning fire was a previous sardar chief. His role is to be probed threadbare and understood. Especially how he landed up as the governor of a state.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by merlin »

Surya wrote:Its done and stopped long ago. :)

Still chuckling about those senior mods.

Meanwhile watching the rush of people on the forum - seniors and juniors to you and unnithans aide.
Yeah, really funny to see Austin defend an absolute &%*$ (edited to be charitable to him :mrgreen: )like Unnithan. The first article was bad enough the second one takes the cake. First Unnithan, then that bhikmanga other journo (asking the US embassy allah ke naam pe paise de de baba).
Last edited by merlin on 09 Jan 2012 12:35, edited 1 time in total.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34800
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

kunalverma wrote:A couple of years ago, during one of the India Today enclaves, I remember thinking Aroon Purie had lost his marbles as he ffawned and gushed over Parvez Musharaff. Gen Ved Malik was also in the audience and it was the most insensitive display - I could see the faces of some of the men who had died and there was Aroon Purie going on like a star struck teenager.
The latest cynical attack on the Army Chief convinces me the man is completely cuckoo! Both Unnithan and Purie know exactly what is the reality of the situation. Take for example the allegation made by IT against VKS that he had petitioned the PM. IT is fully aware that the PMO had asked AHQ for a brief on the issue. The resultant document was bandied about as 'an unsigned petition' from VKS to the PM. Why this duplicity?
AP, despite ITs fading lusture sees himself as a 'kingmaker' and if a cynical headline like 'Self before Service' sells, so be it. Both the GOI and the MOD are in a corner - and the latter are doing what they can to make virulant attacks on a man who has steered the Army out of the rut of corruption charges. The day VKS left for Myanmar, Economic Times in an editorial suggested the Chief of the Indian Army be sacked for by fudging his DOB, he had qualified for NDA where the minimum age was 16. The next day they said, oops, sorry, minimum age is 14 and a half, but the damage was done for who reads the correction on some obscure page. The tactic is only too obvious - somehow get the man to resign in disgust. Once he's out of the way, who cares? Rember Bhagwat?
The day MOD turned down VKS's statutory appeal, the Fin Min met VKS. TOI promptly said a compromise was being worked out. What compromise? Were they planning on a date between 21 May 1950 and 1951. That would put VKS's DOB sometime in November 1951. Contrary to what was being projected, it was the Fin Minister who suggested to VKS that he should resign. Talk of wheels within wheels!s

Did you also know that 50 lakhs was paid to the scoundrel to attend ( as appearance fees )?? Security and hospitality extra and to be borne by the orgainsers.

Most of the participants are been paid and future participants will negiotiate their own rates based on the perception of their importance and relevance.

This is standard practice at such "conclaves"
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7826
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

srai wrote:<SNIP>

New/Planned inductions:
  • Man portable ATGM -> Javelin (>60,000 units) The number should be around 40K. We're likley to have 350 odd infantry battalions. Each with 8 Launchers x 8 re-loads translates into ~23K missiles. Add reserve and training, and the number looks like 40K. But I have my doubts whether this will become standard infantry ATGM. It is an expensive missile and we'll need a homegrown solution like manportable NAG to keep the cost down.
  • Light vehicle & IFV mounted ATGM -> Spike (8,356 units) Again, should be in range of 30K missiles. Also, we don't have light vehicle mounted ATGM systems.
  • Heavy & dedicated anti-tank vehicles (NAMICA) -> NAG (7,000 units)this is going to be vehicle (tracked/wheeled) mounted ATGM of the IA.
  • Arjun/T90S MBT main-gun-launched ATGM -> LAHAT, AT-11 (?? units)
  • Armed Helicopters -> HELINA (?? units)

<SNIP>
bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by bmallick »

rohitvats wrote: [*]Light vehicle & IFV mounted ATGM -> Spike (8,356 units) Again, should be in range of 30K missiles. Also, we don't have light vehicle mounted ATGM systems.


Rohit, wouldn't it be more prudent to arm the light vehicle's with a Man portable ATGM. Which in IA's case should be the Javelin, if its the one being procured in numbers for the infantry. If however a bigger punch is needed then maybe a dedicated heavy ATGM is needed on the light vehicle. In such a case, shouldn't it be the Nag/Helina, since its going to anyway be procured by the IA. I just do not understand where does the Spike fit in. If the Spike being procured the man-portable one, then why not use Javelin. If its the Spike-LR/ER ones, then why not Nag/Helina. :evil:

In fact is the army wants to use a smaller missile than Nag for the light vehicles, but one having longer ranges than Javelin, then it should be LAHAT, i.e the one that would be used by Arjun. The missile's tube launched versions exists and have been integrated on light vehicles. Gosh they even have a naval version to speak.

Why should indian armed forces be hell bent on having all the systems in the world in their inventory.
rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 416
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by rajrang »

bmallick wrote:Why should indian armed forces be hell bent on having all the systems in the world in their inventory.
Except 155 mm field guns.
nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by nelson »

Due to compulsions beyond this forum there were no names in my earlier post on VKS dob issue. Now take this FWIW...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRlT4dIP ... embedded#!
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by merlin »

In today's DNA Seema Mustafa makes the claim that the new guy that GoI wants in place is unpopular and that with 50 as DoB we will have that new guy. With 51 we get someone else who is considered a thinking general.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34800
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

merlin wrote:In today's DNA Seema Mustafa makes the claim that the new guy that GoI wants in place is unpopular and that with 50 as DoB we will have that new guy. With 51 we get someone else who is considered a thinking general.

For once, she has hit the nail on the head!
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

I really do not know what qualifies as thinking general , all generals can think hence they occupy those premium position and looked upon with respect , at best a most thinking general is an asset to the Army for its own internal development and less thinking general would still be a good asset but with less to talk about at the end of his tenure.

But when it comes to decision making process the Army chief is just one of the person invited ( or not invited ) to the CCS meeting along with the chief of men in blue and white besides there is the usual suspect the RAW chief , IB Chief ,NSA, CS and top 3 politician and PM.

An army chief like Air Force Chief or Navy one view is important but not binding on the government and the Govt can equally take advise from other grey haired person present ......... Like i remember an instance during Kargil when the Army chief said something to ABV and was expecting some response but ABV just kept quite....it was some plan to open another front or some advise of the Army Chief that ABV simply disregarded which he mentions in his memo.

I think the role of Army Chief ( or for that matter the Navy or Airforce ) in the decision making process of GOI is highly overrated.

The Chief only serves at GOI pleasure and so can be removed according to its dis-pleasure if so deemed necessary.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7826
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

^^^What is the point with the above rant???
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

rohitvats wrote:^^^What is the point with the above rant???
Just that any defence chief view is just one non-binding pov in Gov and there are other views that are as important if not more .....becuase every one will next bring US pressure on Kashmir and the next general being dumb or thinking one as govt motive for extending or not extending his tenure...... which has really nothing to do with present controversy is what i feel .
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34800
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

Austin wrote:The Chief only serves at GOI pleasure and so can be removed according to its dis-pleasure if so deemed necessary.

Actually, it is at the pleasure of the President of India.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

chetak wrote:Actually, it is at the pleasure of the President of India.
If i am not wrong thats for the navy chief becuase i distinctly remember removing AVB needed presidential approval . while the Air and Land forces chief serves at the pleasure of GOI.

I am just wondering had similar incident been related to RAW ,IB chief or CS or other equally important people in GOI circle would we would have seen such controversy ?
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34800
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

Austin wrote:
chetak wrote:Actually, it is at the pleasure of the President of India.
If i am not wrong thats for the navy chief becuase i distinctly remember removing AVB needed presidential approval . while the Air and Land forces chief serves at the pleasure of GOI.

I am just wondering had similar incident been related to RAW ,IB chief or CS or other equally important people in GOI circle would we would have seen such controversy ?

The President is the supreme commander of the Indian Armed Forces. ( and the sole boss, so to speak! )

You cannot have a situation where different services report to different people.
Avik
BRFite
Posts: 228
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 00:16

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Avik »

In today's DNA Seema Mustafa makes the claim that the new guy that GoI wants in place is unpopular and that with 50 as DoB we will have that new guy. With 51 we get someone else who is considered a thinking general.
Guys, lets lay off quoting characters like Seema Mustafa, and taking her opinion on the IA as the gospel. Her general opinion on IA would make assorted other dirt diggers appear saint-like! So, lets not get into a situation ,whereby we quote Mustafa's opinion just because she is dissing Bikram Singh.

And also, can I humbly request that people stop casting aspersions on the incoming Chiefs', whoever he is. Very very few on the forum know much about either, including relevant things like Bde command, Div and Corps command and what formations they commanded and how they performed. I dont want too sermonize, but lets take it easy, atleast with whoever the new chief (if at all) will be
Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2143
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Bala Vignesh »

Actually, it would be better if we could know more about the incumbent chief('s) in the waiting to better understand what is in store for the IA and indirectly, for the nation..
JMO
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Philip »

Sandeep is not a fawning lickspittle journo,available for hire like many other yellow-rag journos.Pl. don't insult him.I have known him for a very long time and can vouch for his simplicity,integrity and steadfastnes.He is widely respectd by many of his eminent peers in the media who hold him in high esteem.He is a fine upright man who has spent years at his job and has rightfully been rewarded by reaching the top in his mag. as def. editor.

All along, one point I could not fathom,long before this article came out,why oh why didn't the chief correct/demand correction when his promotions came up? He had "3" promotions with the same DOB.It means that he was satisfied with the promotions and DOB,unless he wrote for it to be corected at that time.That would remove any doubts about his "honour" and integrity.Babudom can be remorseless and dates,figures,stats,rules are the religion of the babu which he uses to defend his actions or inactions.I agree with ACM Major who said that if the Chief was so upset,he shoulld've resigned and fought from outside.His honour thus would've not then been in question.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

spoke to a number of folks over the Unnithan article. There is suppressed anger at Unnithans hit job.

here is one email I got
The MS(Master Screwers) Br is meant to screw the good chaps, mainly on frivolous technicalities.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

Sandeep is not a fawning lickspittle journo,available for hire like many other yellow-rag journos.Pl. don't insult him.I have known him for a very long time and can vouch for his simplicity,integrity and steadfastnes.

Was waiting for that :) took a little longer to coordinate I guess :)


A hit job is a hit job - whether done by a man of simplicity blah blah
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Austin »

chetak wrote:The President is the supreme commander of the Indian Armed Forces. ( and the sole boss, so to speak! )

You cannot have a situation where different services report to different people.
Chetak this is indeed unique here and i came to know when GF or some other person was being interviewed during VB sacking , it was mentioned that to relieve the Naval Chief they needed Presidential consent which was unique and to sack the other chief the GOI can do so without needing Presidential consent.

You can check this becuase i distinctly remember this was and is the case.
Locked