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
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by krisna »

Muppalla wrote: Though corruption is a reason but I do not think it is corruption the reason for which they want an "Yes Man". It relates to policy decisions where current General and a large sections of his successors have put their foot down. They want a "YES Man" to abolish The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) and implement common borders and common currency in JK.

The fight started on this part. Actually AKA was supportive to this General but the press is all about AKA as fall guy. It is possible they want to get rid of this General anyway by firing him but they also want to get rid of AKA who is another opposer to AFSPA abolition.
AKA has been in politics for many decades.
AKA does not do anything superior authority saying yes. IMO he is not a major obstacle.
He is for inertia, does not want to take decisions. hence this mess.
high school physics First law of motion.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Since Civil Military Relations(CMR) is being bandied about lets go into it.

The concept of civil-military relations is first introduced in the US. US is the first modern state to enshrine its guiding prinicples in the document called Constitution. The basic principle is to limit the arbitrary power of the rulers. Hence they have checks and balance: Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. Even the legislative is bi-cameral: Representatives and Senators. To embody the concept of civilian control the elected President is also the Commander-in-Chief. And all the Commanders of the individual forces and the Joint Chiefs of staff are confirmed by the civilian Senate. The Preseident has to present the budget which has to be approved by the Congress. So the Congress can control funds allocated to the military. So why such rigorous civilan oversight of the military?

Well before the Revolutionary War, King George's troops had arbitrary powers of search and seizure and the civilians did not have any say in the process. In order to preclude a return to such un-democratic measures, the tight control of the military was introduced. The US also has a "posse comitatus" law that prevents the US military from operating in the US with out Congressional ratification of such orders. Initially it was for US Army and then extend to other branches and some others were added by the DOD.

In India CMR is not the same as in US. In India, CMR is used as a bludgeon to browbeat Indian military due to the origins of the national institutions from pre-Independent British India. I submit that CMR are so fractured in India due to the inherently contradictory objectives of the two branches of the government. The civilians still see the Indian military as a legacy from the pre-Independence India, even after so many decades. The other negative is the TSPA behavior.

The politicians negative prespective is fed by the civil service for their own reasons.

In essence in India, civilan control of military has become civil service control of military.



So some reform and attitude adjsutment is required to go forward.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Philip »

Why more T-90s? Since it has been reported in some quarters that extra upgraded ones are being acquired,as part of the original intended number/order .

Turnaround,as more facts have become available which shed new light on the issue.However,still wished that Gen.Singh didn't give those media interviews which made him vulnerable to accusations of a man desperate to save his seat.As for IT,knowing SU from his past record,where he has had access to the MOD for certain exclusive reports like the ATV,I feel that he may have been the victim of a disinfo campaign,perhaps and that the ed-in-chief is the main culprit as it is he who determines what the content/cover will be.

(Incidentally,has anyone noticed the historic "changing of the guard" at the Chindu,Frontline,etc.,from Jan 19th.,where N.Ram has stepped down in favour of Sid Vardarajan?)

Going after the Cong/UPA.The party has such an historic record of achievement pre-and post Independence.It is part of the political consciousness of modern India.It's political health affects the nation.It is a shame that the current leadership has capitulated and discarded many of its patriotic values.What really astonishes me is its utter lack of common sense and the inability of the PM to speak on any crucial issue,allowing anarchy to rule.In a crisis,he seems to be the first man heading for the nuclear bunker and resembles the captain of the ill-fated cruise liner who allegedly jumped into the lifeboat to save his skin ahead of the passengers! With his dereliction of duty,Babudom seems to be having a roaring mischievous time as the headless chickens of the cabinet run in circles splattering blood everywhere.He seems afflicted with mental paralysis or has he taken "maun"? It would be a perfect first name for him.I just saw AKA on TV saying that it was not good for the issue to be discussed in the media/public.He cut a sorry figure.Gone are his chances now of succeeding the mouse! I suppose a beaming Kalmadi out on bail and wanting to get back his IOA privileges says it all.SG appears to be more concerned at winning elections and staying in power,keeping her fingers on the party's pulse across the country.The good doctor was supposed to keep the health of the govt. stable ,but he appears to have read his responsibilities as being in charge of a country mela where "stable" means much horse trading!
Roperia
BRFite
Posts: 778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Roperia »

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a PIL by ex-servicemen in support of Army chief General V K Singh in the row on his date of birth, ruling that in a purely individual service dispute, a public interest litigation had no place in the judicial arena.

A bench of Chief Justice S H Kapadia and Justices A K Patnaik and Swatanter Kumar said the aggrieved person (Gen Singh) had already moved court and refused to go into the merits of the PIL by little known Grenadiers Association (Rohtak Chapter) despite repeated attempts by its counsel, senior advocate Prof Bhim Singh.

"We will make no comments on the facts of the case. The person who has the right to move the court has already filed a petition. That petition will stand on its own strength and legs. If we entertain a PIL on the issue, it will create a conflicting situation leading to chaos. If we dismiss the PIL on merit then the affected person will suffer," the bench said while rejecting the petition on the ground of maintainability.

The PIL was filed by the association in December when the age issue was getting controversial.
SC nixes PIL on General's age, says it’s private dispute

This clarifies a lot!
Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Virupaksha »

explains why the VKS had to go to court at that precise moment.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Philip »

It is going to be farcical to see the false smiles and hypocritical courtesies,salutes and namastaaes between Gen Singh and the PM,DM,Def.Sec. and other assorted VVIPs,VIPs from the govt. and assorted babudom at the Republic Day Parade.If there is an iota of common sense within the GOI,it will wrap up this issue before the RDay celebrations,as just the very sight of seeing the COAS in public is going to draw attention to his cause and remind everyone each time his face is shown on TV.Watch put for Doordarshan showing as little of him as possible in its telecast! .With the GOI now taking a hard line attitude on the issue and leaving it to the SC to decide,the historic "Battle of the Birthday" will now be fought on the fields of "justice".May the best general win!
Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Badar »

Philip wrote:It is going to be farcical to see the false smiles and hypocritical courtesies,salutes and namastaaes between Gen Singh and the PM,DM,Def.Sec. and other assorted VVIPs,VIPs from the govt. and assorted babudom at the Republic Day Parade.
Not really, You salute the uniform and not the man ... etc etc.
kunalverma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by kunalverma »

Surya wrote: kunal,

That IT cover was a shocker and I have mixed feelings about that. On one hand it woke a lot of us to think more carefully of brutality of the war and how we should never let our soldiers suffer this indignity

I had some exchanges with the photographer but he then dropped off the radar. Do you know if where he is right now??
Yes, I guess that's also true. But I think a soldier's dignity, especially in death has to be respected. During Kargil, I often found myself surrounded by some real horrific stuff and with a liecence to film, could have shot away. But one has to draw ones lines and it's a thin line at the best of times.
Nope, no idea where this guy is now.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Rahul M »

prof bhim singh of the panthers party ?
Kapil
Webmaster BR
Posts: 282
Joined: 16 Jun 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Kapil »

From Outlook's latest issue:

The Generals and Particulars:

http://outlookindia.com/article.aspx?279633

Whether army chief Gen V.K. Singh was born in 1950 or 1951 is a swirling controversy that has finally reached the doors of the apex court for resolution. The army chief’s unprecedented step of approaching the Supreme Court for redressal has put the government in a bind, even as the million-strong army watches the unfolding drama in dismay. The issue agitating military circles though is not so much about Gen Singh getting or not getting another year in office. It is the larger question of how the manipulation of promotions and seniority at higher levels has led to unfortunate consequences in the reputed institution the army is seen as.

The question many ask is about the sanctity of the line of succession and the advisability of drawing one up. Gen V.K. Singh’s successor, if he retires in May this year, will be Lt Gen Bikram Singh. In the swirl of allegations, a recurrent theme is that of a strong lobby within army HQ that wants someone from a minority community to get a shot at becoming the chief. Those in the know say the matter first surfaced in 2006, when Gen V.K. Singh received a letter from the Military Secretary (MS) informing him that while the MS branch has 1950 as his year of birth, the Adjutant General (AG) branch has it as 1951.

Gen J.J. Singh was the army chief then, and those who served at army HQ then say it was in 2006 that a line of succession was drawn up on the basis of a “seniority list” of officers. It is pertinent to note that earlier, when Gen J.J. Singh was in the running to become chief, there was speculation that if the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) was created, and then chief Gen N.C. Vij was given that post, it would be Lt Gen Shammy Mehta and not J.J. Singh who would be army chief for the next three years. The Sikh lobby in Punjab was activated and began lobbying for J.J. Singh. Minorities Commission chairman Tarlochan Singh wrote to defence minister George Fernandes in January 2004: “It is for the first time in 50 years that a Sikh officer has a chance of becoming the army chief.” It so happened that the post of CDS was not created and Lt Gen Mehta retired. When contacted, the adc to J.J. Singh, who is now the governor of Arunachal Pradesh, responded by saying “His Excellency has a packed schedule” and could not respond.

Something similar has been at work now, and the controversy over Gen V.K. Singh’s date of birth is the last hurdle. Consider this: Maj Gen Ravi Arora (retd), who topped the 1972 batch (the same batch as Lt Gen Bikram Singh) with a gold medal and was doing well, was in February 2005 rejected by the promotion board for promotion from brigadier to major general. Though the normal period for making representations against a promotion board decision is 90 days, a hurried board meeting was held as early as April that year to consider those who had made representations against the previous board decision. Even so, Arora’s representation was kept pending. He lodged a statutory complaint in May that year, and the defence ministry in 2006 gave him full redressal. But he was again rejected by the next promotion board, held in July 2006, along with four officers of the 1972 batch who were being considered.

Curiously, in November 2006, yet another promotion board meeting was held, and even though Arora had not made a representation, he was approved for promotion to major general. But in the process, his seniority was counted down by a year and he was now considered to be with the 1973 batch. As an officer dealing with the matter at that time told Outlook, “Clearly, Arora was approved because, by now, he was not a threat to Bikram Singh, who had been brought into the line of succession.”

If Gen V.K. Singh’s year of birth is taken as 1951 and he retires in 2013, then his successor, according to seniority, should be Lt Gen K.T. Parnaik, presently heading the Northern Command in Udhampur. Those who believe that the date of birth anomaly is manufactured say it became an opportunity for those operating in army HQ at that time to shorten Gen V.K. Singh’s tenure to enable their favourite to take over. This, it is alleged, is why the issue suddenly reared up in 2006. Gen V.K. Singh wrote back to the MS branch in May 2006 that, since the AG branch has the correct date of birth, the MS branch too should correct it accordingly.

In September 2007, Gen Deepak Kapoor was the army chief and the animosity between him and Gen V.K Singh is well known. It is alleged that the role played by Singh in bringing to book the accused in the Sukhna land scam in 33 Corps was not liked by Gen Kapoor. Reason: Kapoor’s military secretary, Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash, handpicked by him to hold this important appointment, was indicted by a court of inquiry only because of Gen V.K. Singh’s tough stand. Says Maj Gen N.B. Singh (retd), who served at army HQ around that time, “As chief, Gen Kapoor used to publicly make derogatory remarks against V.K. Singh, then commanding the Eastern Command in Calcutta.”

In January 2008, V.K. Singh, as a lieutenant general commanding army’s 2 Corps, was to take over as army commander, a crucial appointment that would enable him to become army chief. He was informed by the MS branch that his year of birth will be taken as 1950 and that the AG branch was being asked to make the change in its records. Singh’s reply was that he had not sought a change of his year of birth, as it is 1951 according to the matriculation certificate given by him to the AG branch. He, however, wrote that army HQ could do “anything which is required to be done in the larger interest of the organisation”. Within a span of a few hours, he got a missive from K. Purshottam, the deputy MS, saying his letter was “not in conformity with the response asked”. He was asked to confirm acceptance of his date of birth as 1950 or “action deemed appropriate will be taken”. Singh again replied (see box) that “whatever decision taken in organisational interest is acceptable to me”.




Gen V.K. Singh, seen above in the film Prahaar, in which he plays himself, says his sense of honour made him move SC.


Quite evidently, Singh was pressurised to accept 1950 at a crucial time in his career, when the stakes were high. But even his detractors, who are enraged at the manner in which he has “besmirched the reputation of the armed forces”, feel he should not have buckled down. “He who claims to be upright should have stood up to this bulldozing and made his stand clear. By acquiesceing, he has exposed himself to the charge that when the stakes were high, he backed down and now that he is chief and has a chance to remain so for another year, he backtracks,” says an officer.

Gen V.K. Singh’s statutory complaint to the government was rejected earlier this month and it is after this that he has filed the petition in the Supreme Court. As things escalated, the view gained ground that the defence ministry, headed by A.K. Antony, has not been proactive enough to resolve the matter. Outlook also has access to a January 14 letter written by Subramanian Swamy to the prime minister after meeting the defence minister. He writes: “From what he told me, it appears that the resolution of the matter is not in his hands.” Further, “I have been told authoritatively but orally about the opinion of the Attorney General of India, but his opinion is based on a question that was posed in a rigged manner against the rightful claim of Gen V.K. Singh.”

Contrary to the anguish which some retired generals have expressed at these developments, most senior serving and retired officers are actually hopeful that this episode might just serve a positive purpose—that it could be the catalyst needed to initiate introspection into the manipulation and interference in appointments at higher levels that has bedevilled the army in recent years.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

^
In January 2008, V.K. Singh, as a lieutenant general commanding army’s 2 Corps, was to take over as army commander, a crucial appointment that would enable him to become army chief. He was informed by the MS branch that his year of birth will be taken as 1950 and that the AG branch was being asked to make the change in its records. Singh’s reply was that he had not sought a change of his year of birth, as it is 1951 according to the matriculation certificate given by him to the AG branch. He, however, wrote that army HQ could do “anything which is required to be done in the larger interest of the organisation”. Within a span of a few hours, he got a missive from K. Purshottam, the deputy MS, saying his letter was “not in conformity with the response asked”. He was asked to confirm acceptance of his date of birth as 1950 or “action deemed appropriate will be taken”. Singh again replied (see box) that “whatever decision taken in organisational interest is acceptable to me”.
This forced acceptance is vitiated from the beginning as there is a veiled threat.

Now so many skeletons are tumbling out and many more would come out in the open that is the greatest fear of INC. Maun Muni is no longer an emperor with cloth. This seems to be not the issue of DOB alone. VKS action in not accepting the DOB manipulation seems to have upset the applecart of scamsters.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

Outlook remains fairly neutral - shocker

The repercussions of the Punjabi cat fight at the top echelons continues.


Regret that a decade ago I used to be in awe of JJ Singh. sigh....
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Viv S »

Kapil wrote: Quite evidently, Singh was pressurised to accept 1950 at a crucial time in his career, when the stakes were high. But even his detractors, who are enraged at the manner in which he has “besmirched the reputation of the armed forces”, feel he should not have buckled down. “He who claims to be upright should have stood up to this bulldozing and made his stand clear. By acquiesceing, he has exposed himself to the charge that when the stakes were high, he backed down and now that he is chief and has a chance to remain so for another year, he backtracks,” says an officer.
I think that just sums up my position on the matter. I agree that his actual date of birth is 1951 and that MS applied undue pressure on him to accept the older incorrect DoB, but while most folks can apparently reconcile themselves to his acquiescence to MS' demands as a matter of expediency, I'm having a hard time doing so.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

Well You don't need to see this as Black and white issue for VKS. This would have been the case if he had not raised the issue continuously ever since it was raked up by MS/MOD in 2006 when the said line of succession was being drawn up and names of officers to be sacrificed for those chosen successor would also been finalised. VKS realised this and also realised that he could finish this beast only from inside and not by being forced out. His action is an honorable one.What is done is in the interest of the organisation. Else MOD manipulation would not have come to the forefront.
Ramana garu has called for Court of Inquiry into the whole episode and if such a thing happens, many a lost careers would come tumbling out. When cadets join NDA with dreams they never know that dreams would be trampled upon by the unfair machinations of top few. That will expose the rot within.
Last edited by chaanakya on 21 Jan 2012 20:18, edited 1 time in total.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Pranav »

Viv S wrote:but while most folks can apparently reconcile themselves to his acquiescence to MS' demands as a matter of expediency, I'm having a hard time doing so.
Suppose a drug addict mugger ambushes you at night on a lonely street and points a gun at your head and demands "say XYZ or I'm going to shoot". Obviously you are going to humor him. What you said at that point should certainly not be binding on you for the rest of your life. Tying yourself to a commitment extracted under duress, by a scoundrel, is not honor, but silliness.

In this case, VKS just said that he would accept any decision. He did not say that he is waiving the normal due processes, which includes the possibility of appeal.
Last edited by Pranav on 21 Jan 2012 20:32, edited 4 times in total.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

I think that just sums up my position on the matter. I agree that his actual date of birth is 1951 and that MS applied undue pressure on him to accept the older incorrect DoB, but while most folks can apparently reconcile themselves to his acquiescence to MS' demands as a matter of expediency, I'm having a hard time doing so
.


We have not been in those sort of environments (senior postions0 to understand the pressure that can be brought in
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Pranav »

Kapil wrote:Consider this: Maj Gen Ravi Arora (retd), who topped the 1972 batch (the same batch as Lt Gen Bikram Singh) with a gold medal and was doing well, was in February 2005 rejected by the promotion board for promotion from brigadier to major general ...

As an officer dealing with the matter at that time told Outlook, “Clearly, Arora was approved because, by now, he was not a threat to Bikram Singh, who had been brought into the line of succession.”
So it seems that Lt Gen Bikram Singh has been the anointed one since 2005, at least.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by harbans »

Self del
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34901
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

THE PRICE OF BEING HONEST
By RSN Singh


The matriculation or higher secondary or 12th board certificate serves as the unimpeachable basis for date of birth in respect of Indians. The Supreme Court too has ruled as such in unambiguous terms. Some vested interests inside and outside the country are, however, desperately trying to turn this simple truism upside down in case of the present Army chief Gen VK Singh. They have for very long been engaged in subverting the very institution of Chief of Army Staff (COAS) by engineering a controversy with regard to age of the present incumbent in their bid to supplant him with a convenient and pliable officer.
All through his career, till he became Lt Gen, his date of birth (10 May,
1951) as reflected in the matriculation certificate was taken as the basis and never doubted. However, towards very late in his career when he appeared on the horizon of being the strongest contender of Army chief some vested interests fabricated a controversy that his date of birth was 10 May, 1950 based on legally untenable rather preposterous arguments.
It is common knowledge that but for a specific succession plan initiated some years ago, the ‘age’ controversy in respect of Gen VK Singh would not have been created. Why such premiums on a succession plan? This question should nag any intelligence hand dealing with internal and external intelligence. Besides the succession plan there were also moves to prevent Gen VK Singh from becoming COAS.

The entire controversy poses some very serious questions. Why is the discomfort level with Gen VK Singh so high in certain quarters? Is Gen VK Singh being targeted for being non-pliable, upright and intolerant of corruption? Is there a design to weaken the professional moorings of the Indian Army by manipulating and attacking its moral and social fabric?

It is about succession
The controversy is not merely about age and tenure of present chief. More importantly, it is about succession, which was scripted few years back (2006) by none other than, the then Army chief who allegedly bent backwards for a government sinecure on his retirement and was rewarded as such. The succession script naturally attracted vested interests in the form of politicians, arms lobby, businessmen and ambitious Army officers. The controversy needs to be, therefore, understood in its simple entirety.

It is a moral issue
The controversy surrounding the age of the Army chief continues to concern the Indian people about the state of health of the Indian Army. It is indeed denting the very edifice of the Indian Army. The senior officers in the Army depending on their career calculations are divided over the issue. The other rank and file perceive the controversy in the manner they are fed by the rival camps. The overall consequence is that the image of the Army and the honour and the moral authority of the office of COAS has never been attacked so viciously by insiders and vested interests for non-operational reasons. The Pakistani press is agog with half-truths on the issue and has been insinuating poor health and the unity of the Indian Army.

When an Army chief vouches for a simple detail like his date of birth, it should be moralistically and euphemistically unassailable. Lack of truthfulness and integrity in the leaders, who have chosen the profession of arms has invariably resulted in the compromise of a country’s physical integrity. The armed forces sensitivity to moral issues is best exemplified by Admiral Jeremy Michael Boorda of the US Navy, who committed suicide in 1996 over the controversy of his wearing a medal which he was not entitled to.

It cannot be denied that the psychological integrity of the Army has been fraying over the years. Gen VK Singh’s ‘age’ controversy should not be viewed in isolation. It is actually a manifestation of the deterioration, misuse and subversion of the office of the COAS for nearly a decade.

Who created the controversy?
An impression is being sought to be conveyed by the vested interests and detractors of Gen VK Singh that the controversy was created by him just to ‘enjoy’ the office of the COAS for an additional year. This is travesty of truth.

The fact is that as far as Gen VK Singh is concerned, it was never an issue. Nor was the issue ever raked by the Army HQs or mod in his service career as he rose to the rank of Lt Gen with his date of birth as 10 May, 1951. The first time the issue was raised (2006) when an Army chief known for his ambitions for presidentship of social and golf clubs, and penchant for working out succession plans several notches downwards. He raked-up the issue to ensure passage of one of his favourites, purely on sectarian considerations to the office of the COAS. In this case, he had planned succession three interventions below.

Legal and financial implications
When pondering over this particular succession plan, the said Army chief went by the Army list, which gives the date of birth as 10 May, 1950; the Army list is prepared by the Military Secretary (MS) branch and contains minimal details such as date of birth, date of commissioning etc. The MS branch otherwise deals with postings, promotions, deputation, retirement etc. And it is not the legal repository or otherwise of personal and family details of an officer. Right from the time an officer enters the training academy, till he retires and even after, all records are maintained by the Adjutant General (AG) branch. As per the AG branch, the date of birth of Gen VK Singh is 10 May, 1951. It may be highlighted that like the records maintained by AG’s branch, the Army list has no financial implication.

It may also be reiterated that by the time Gen VK Singh rose to the rank of Lt General he had undergone several promotion boards— all with the date of birth as 10 May, 1951. It includes the board from brigadier to Major General and subsequently Major General to Lt General—all personally approved by none other than the Prime Minister himself. If indeed the contention of the MS branch that Gen VK Singh’s date of birth is 10 May, 1950 is tenable, then all his promotion boards are illegal and have huge financial implications. In fact, the legality of his entire career comes under question.
On 14 December, 2007, the MoD had queried MS branch for reasons of recording DOB as 10 May, 1950 & asked for reconciliation of the correct DOB with AG branch and asked for conduct of enquiry for the same. Noting on the file was found saying “enquiry not to be conducted” - sinister designs on vested interests for not to settle the issue towards rightful conclusion.

How was the controversy created?
The said Army chief, in order to effect his succession plans, activated his MS and tried to beleaguer Gen VK Singh by generating the age controversy. With the same foul intention, an explanation was sought. Notwithstanding 1950 or 1951, Gen VK Singh’s claim to the post of COAS was not affected. It was the fate of Gen VK Singh’s successor, which hung on these dates. The said Army chief’s protégé could only realise the appointment of COAS, if somehow Gen VK Singh was made to agree that he was born in 1950.

For Gen VK Singh the issue of date of birth was never a controversy. The MS branch for the first time indicated to him that as per the Army list, his date of birth was 10 May, 1950 and not 10 May, 1951. The subsequent Army chief also reignited the controversy, rather very strongly, after the issue of awarding of NOC to government land to a private party for allegedly extraneous considerations in Sukhna Cantt came up. The person, who allegedly played the key role in the scam, was the MS himself. He, along with many others is facing trial by the judiciary. Reportedly, the same lobby has been joined by the Adarsh scam lobby to dislodge Gen VK Singh.

In addition, the role of arms lobby cannot be ruled out. There are insinuations that one retired Lt General, dabbling in arms business has been active in the bid to supply tatra vehicles, manufactured abroad, through an Indian public sector enterprise (BEML) at nearly double the cost than what is available off the shelf. Reportedly, the Army chief, despite all kinds of persuasions has turned it down and thus invited the wrath of this supplier and many others of his kind.

Readers will recall that Gen VK Singh took over office when the Army was bedeviled by a series of scams and unsavory incidents. He took upon himself to stem the decline and undeniably has made a difference. It is natural that the vested interests treat him as the enemy and has joined the rival camp sphere headed by the senior officer, who stands to benefit most, if Gen VK Singh was made to be born on 10 May, 1950.

This officer is blatantly playing the sectarian card and has reportedly been keeping a very close relative of arguably the top decision maker in good humour at the place of his posting to influence matters. The volt face by the law ministry on the age issue is being attributed to this factor. Reportedly, there has been an allurement of post retirement sinecures by some people in the government to Gen VK Singh, if he were, to accept his date of birth as 10 May, 1950.

Therefore, many vested and corrupt interests are riding over the ambition of one individual. Even the media has not been spared. One TV channel based on a fake municipality certificate beamed a programme to show that Gen VK Singh was neither born in 1950 nor 1951, but in 1949. The bluff was easily called and in face of legal action the channel apologized.

The dilemma of a chief
Under the circumstances, what does a chief do? Reportedly, Gen VK Singh was seriously contemplating to resign, out of sheer disgust. But then he was rightly advised that it would amount to surrender to negative and anti-national forces. Moreover, most rank and file, who have no clue about the details of the fabricated controversy would construe that Gen VK Singh’s contention was legally and morally invalid right from the outset.

Gen VK Singh was advised by certain quarters to go to the court. He was told that legally his is a watertight case. He emphatically rubbished the advice on the grounds that it would not only morally be wrong, but will set a precedence, which will destroy the moral and institutional fabric of the Indian Army for all times to come. Thereafter, no military personnel will have faith in the administrative and judicial system of the Army. No Army chief will have the moral authority to enjoin upon Army personnel to refrain from going to civil courts.

This dilemma of Gen VK Singh was exploited just before he took over as COAS by powers that be in Army HQs. In fact, the same power treated this dilemma as vulnerability. Gen VK Singh, then Lt General, was asked to give an undertaking that he will not raise the issue of age. In response, the general replied to the effect that he would act in the best interests and traditions of the Indian Army. Nowhere did he give an undertaking that he accepts his date of birth as 10 May, 1950. The detractors of Gen VK Singh have however been misquoting the said letter in the media.

Since Gen VK Singh cannot go to court, the AG branch of the Army sought the opinion of four retired chief justices of India. The logic behind approaching more than one judge was to obtain various shades of opinion and avoid any possible insinuation about the move being motivated and partisan. All the four judges have unanimously given the view that Gen VK Singh’s date of birth, 10 May, 1951, is unimpeachable.

Why different dates of birth?
The best judges are the readers. I am, therefore, making an endeavour to explain as to how the anomaly in the date of birth did actually arise.

Gen VK Singh entered Birla Public School with date of birth as 10 May, 1951.
He passed out from school with provisional matriculation certificate with date of birth as 10 May, 1951.

Meanwhile, when Gen VK Singh was still in school, the teacher then, one Mr BS Bhatnagar, who was keen on sending maximum students to National Defence Academy (NDA), as he did every six months, brought Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) forms for entry into NDA from Delhi. The forms were filled by him, who erroneously entered the date of birth as 10 May, 1950 instead of 10 May, 1951. Mr Bhatnagar later on went on to become principal of Lawrence School Lovedale as also Dally College Indore. He also has vouched that there was indeed an error in filling the date of birth on the UPSC form with regard to Gen VK Singh.

Even his medical examination form as an air force candidate before joining NDA reflects 10 May, 1951 as his DOB.

Gen VK Singh passed the NDA exam and submitted the provisional certificate, which reflects the date of birth as 1951.

Once the provisional certificate arrived at the UPSC, the anomaly was observed and the date of birth was settled as 10 May, 1951. Gen VK Singh has the acknowledgement letter, but unfortunately the details of correspondence are not available with the UPSC, which as per the rules destroys most documents after lapse of certain years.

When Gen VK Singh graduated from NDA and entered Indian Military Academy (IMA), his date of birth in the IMA dossier is reflected as 10 May, 1951. The covering envelop, however, mentions 10 May, 1950 probably due to the anomaly that had been settled long back, but still persisted due to clerical oversight or negligence. This envelop with no legal sanctity is being overplayed by the detractors of Gen VK Singh.

When Gen VK Singh passed out of IMA, the identity card issued by the adjutant bears his date of birth as 10 May, 1951.

On joining the unit, Gen VK Singh filled up the prescribed form giving all details, which was countersigned by the commanding officer with date of birth 10 May, 1951 and forwarded to AG branch at Army HQ. These forms are filled at certain intervals of service and contain all personal and professional particulars. In all these forms the date of birth in respect of Gen VK Singh is reflected as 10 May, 1951.

Subsequently, in 1971 on completion of young officers course, Gen VK Singh visited his village and found that his original matriculation certificated had arrived. This certificate too carries his date of birth as 10 May, 1951. He submitted the same to the AG’s branch in the Army HQs through his unit in April, 1971.

Gen VK Singh in his journey to the rank of general has undergone selection boards right from the rank of major and upwards. In each of these boards, his date of birth is reflected as 10 May, 1951.

Conclusion
The most critical asset of armed forces of any country is the character of its leaders, who command men by example and moral authority more than anything else. Weapons and equipments are function of time, geopolitical environment, and security circumstances. They can be acquired from the domestic or international market. Character cannot be purchased or borrowed.

Any Army can be destroyed by a successful propaganda campaign against the very leaders who provide sustenance to the moral and psychological fabric of the organisation. In the history of warfare, it has been practiced by adversaries in war and peace with mixed success. At times, it has proved to be detrimental to victory against otherwise superior foe.

At present the same is being perpetrated on the Indian Army not by adversaries like Pakistan or china, but from within by Indians, which include Arms Lobby and other vested interests. The pawns in this game are some scheming and ambitious Army officers.

One venerable retired Chief Justice of India, in his solicited opinion, conveyed that Gen VK Singh’s age must be upheld as 10 May, 1951, failing which there will be huge impetus to corruption. The former judge has grasped the controversy in its entirety.

Finally, I may ask the readers what would have been the response of the government if hypothetically the case was converse i.e. If Gen VK Singh’s date of birth was 10 May, 1950 in the matriculation certificate and 10 May, 1951 in the UPSC form or the Army, list? And what would have been the verdict of the readers if general had insisted that the government must go by the UPSC form or the Army list? If the verdict is a ‘no’, then why the present controversy?
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2182
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by eklavya »

Viv S wrote:
Kapil wrote: Quite evidently, Singh was pressurised to accept 1950 at a crucial time in his career, when the stakes were high. But even his detractors, who are enraged at the manner in which he has “besmirched the reputation of the armed forces”, feel he should not have buckled down. “He who claims to be upright should have stood up to this bulldozing and made his stand clear. By acquiesceing, he has exposed himself to the charge that when the stakes were high, he backed down and now that he is chief and has a chance to remain so for another year, he backtracks,” says an officer.
I think that just sums up my position on the matter. I agree that his actual date of birth is 1951 and that MS applied undue pressure on him to accept the older incorrect DoB, but while most folks can apparently reconcile themselves to his acquiescence to MS' demands as a matter of expediency, I'm having a hard time doing so.
It is in the interest of the Indian Army that the machinations of the unscrupulous and unprincipled men who pressured VKS to accept 1950 as his birth year, and it appears damaged at least one more illustrious career (Maj Gen Ravi Arora) along the way, in order to manipulate the 'line of succession' are not able to achieve their aims. It will deeply damage the Indian Army if this consipiracy is allowed to succeed, apparently with the support of the highest powers in the land. This isn't about Gen VKS anymore, its about demonstrating to the rank and file that the promotion process is not thoroughly manipulated. If the rank and file lose faith in the way the senior commanders are assessed and appointed, there will be serious negative repercussions all the way down the chain.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Maybe there is a need to have a court of inquiry or commission composed of retired generals (retired before 2002) and go into the issues. Its now bigger than General VK Sngh's DOB.

The Commission should call at a minimum JJ Singh, Khare, Gangadharan, Kapoor, Prakash, and Purshottam and come to the bottom of things to restore confidence in the promotions policy.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Viv S »

Pranav wrote:
Viv S wrote:but while most folks can apparently reconcile themselves to his acquiescence to MS' demands as a matter of expediency, I'm having a hard time doing so.
Suppose a drug addict mugger ambushes you at night on a lonely street and points a gun at your head and demands "say XYZ or I'm going to shoot". Obviously you are going to humor him. What you said at that point should certainly not be binding on you for the rest of your life. Tying yourself to a commitment extracted under duress, by a scoundrel, is not honor, but silliness.

In this case, VKS just said that he would accept any decision. He did not say that he is waiving the normal due processes, which includes the possibility of appeal.
What if the masked man had a knife and told you to jump off the roof of skyscraper? Would you jump or take your chances in a fight with him?

Point is such MS demand = masked man + threat to life analogies, are scarcely accurate let alone scientific.

Surya wrote:We have not been in those sort of environments (senior postions0 to understand the pressure that can be brought in
Well he was a Lt Gen when the issue arose, a rank that less than 3 out of every 1000 officers attains. Is the issue of making it to a four star rank worth a compromise that strips one of 10 months in office? Sure. But having done so he has to stick with it.

When the UPA govt persists with individuals like TR Baalu and A Raja, how far does the excuse go, that they had to do so or the DMK would have withdrawn support and brought the govt down?
eklavya wrote:It is in the interest of the Indian Army that the machinations of the unscrupulous and unprincipled men who pressured VKS to accept 1950 as his birth year, and it appears damaged at least one more illustrious career (Maj Gen Ravi Arora) along the way, in order to manipulate the 'line of succession' are not able to achieve their aims. It will deeply damage the Indian Army if this consipiracy is allowed to succeed, apparently with the support of the highest powers in the land. This isn't about Gen VKS anymore, its about demonstrating to the rank and file that the promotion process is not thoroughly manipulated. If the rank and file lose faith in the way the senior commanders are assessed and appointed, there will be serious negative repercussions all the way down the chain.

There is no doubt that there is a major rot at the higher echelons of the Indian Army. And that the only solution is sweeping changes enforced across the board, encompassing not only the Army but the IAF and IN as well. The Goldwater-Nichols Act would serve as a possible template for a deep restructuring of the military.

That said, the issue here has to be dealt on its merits and whether the COAS stays or leaves, would make little difference to the greater issues at hand here, to wit the lack of fundamental reforms.
KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by KrishnaK »

Viv S wrote:Well he was a Lt Gen when the issue arose, a rank that less than 3 out of every 1000 officers attains. Is the issue of making it to a four star rank worth a compromise that strips one of 10 months in office? Sure. But having done so he has to stick with it.
One can just as easily attribute it to 'wanting to fight the machinations'. The only thing that would've come out of Gen Singh resigning, was that the army would have found itself short of one honest and upright officer.

That you chose to compare this situation with the telecom scam is preposterous.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Viv S, Are you familiar with the concept of 'Apad Dharma'? If not please read about it in the Mahabharata.
narmad
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by narmad »

Another Article by Maj. Gen. R.S.N. Singh

Biggest fraud on Indian army?
January 22, 2012 By Maj. Gen. (retd) R.S.N. Singh

Gen V.K. Singh never has asked for a change in his DOB. This issue was fabricated and pursued from the year 2006 by two Army Chiefs and their cronies, i.e., three Military Secretaries, when they realised that a three-year tenure as COAS for Gen. V.K. Singh would derail the chances of one particular individual.
In fabricating this falsehood, these gentlemen used an incorrect entry in a document called Army List. This document has no legal sanctity whatsoever with regard to the details of an officer. There are scores of serving officers whose names or their IC numbers or their DOB is wrongly mentioned. This author is aware of a serving Brigadier, wherein the Army List carries his father’s name in place of his. He has never felt the need to correct this glaring mistake because the document has no legal significance.
Firstly, there was no need for Gen. V.K. Singh to apply for a ‘change’ in his DoB.
As the legal custodian of all personnel particulars (including DOB), the Adjutant General’s Branch has never had any issue over his DoB (May 10, 1951). Does the Army HQ or the MoD now have the gumption to declare that in matters of personnel detail of an officer, the Army List will prevail over all other documents. In that eventuality, the Military Tribunal and the Supreme Court will be inundated with cases.
Then why has this fraud been perpetrated on Gen. V.K. Singh? Why is an erroneous entry in the UPSC application form being flogged as an argument to intimidate him into accepting 10 May 1950 as his DoB, when it is not? An application form is only an application form. The entries therein have to be verified from other sources and documents, which was done in Gen. Singh’s case upon his commissioning.
Then there is the argument that Gen. Singh ‘accepted’ 1950 as his year of birth in 2006 and 2008, and therefore it could not be changed now.
An individual’s ‘acceptance’ of a particular DoB, not supported by relevant documents, cannot even get one a driving licence or a passport, let alone make him an Army Chief. Such acceptance was made under duress.

— Maj. Gen. R.S.N. Singh was a military intelligence officer
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Philip »

I have spent some time brooding about why gen.Singh accepted the incorrect DOB when pressurised by his superiors at the time.On the face of it it appears that he was acccomo-dating,no pun intended! However,when one examines his statements,he was assured by his superiors that the error would be rectified.In such circumstances,in order that a controversy be avoided,and in giving him the benefit of the doubt, he probably felt that it was OK to go along with the recommendations and that the anomaly would be set right later. However,the IA cannot be given any marks for competence when they gave him his commendation certificates with his correct DOB.Such an anomaly should've been immediately corrected or flagged by whoever was in charge,but as the error in his DOB mentioned earlier in no way affected his succession/promotions, he therefore cannot be accused of "falsifying" his DOB for promotional gain.At the worst,with reports now coming in of many other cases of errors,it speaks of a degree of incompetence within the IA's own babudom,much spring cleaning to be done.

The silver lining in this fiasco,is that for the first time,light is being shed into the manipulations to narrow down the field of succession to favoured individuals,who appear to be cogs in a huge machine ,where the tentacles of the arms manufacturers and their touts have considerable influence.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Line of succession is not a tenable argument as India is not a monarchy! Especailly this Republic Day.

So where did the army top brass come up with such ideas?
kunalverma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by kunalverma »

narmad wrote:Another Article by Maj. Gen. R.S.N. Singh

Biggest fraud on Indian army?
January 22, 2012 By Maj. Gen. (retd) R.S.N. Singh

There are scores of serving officers whose names or their IC numbers or their DOB is wrongly mentioned. This author is aware of a serving Brigadier, wherein the Army List carries his father’s name in place of his. He has never felt the need to correct this glaring mistake because the document has no legal significance.

Then there is the argument that Gen. Singh ‘accepted’ 1950 as his year of birth in 2006 and 2008, and therefore it could not be changed now.
An individual’s ‘acceptance’ of a particular DoB, not supported by relevant documents, cannot even get one a driving licence or a passport, let alone make him an Army Chief. Such acceptance was made under duress.

— Maj. Gen. R.S.N. Singh was a military intelligence officer
Ever since we have lady officers in the Indian Army, god help the individual who marks the wrong box in the OTA or AFA form when it comes to determining the sex/gender. His/Her goose will well and truely be cooked for ever!

If one goes through VKS's so-called 'Acceptence Letters', at no stage does he say that his DOB is 1950. Besides, each letter has to be seen in conjunction with the correspondence preceding it. Anyway, once the issue is in front of the judges, selected leaks can hardly help GOI from removing egg from it's face! At the rate at which things are going, GOI better start preparing to take on the environmentalists, for to 'eat crow' they'll have to kill it too!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Krishna Menon and his coterie claimed merit and tampered with the Army. So seniority was the new touchstone. Guess in 2006 they figured out how to fix the seniority system by eliminating those who are before their anointed/chosen folks. This is the crux of the problem.
Roperia
BRFite
Posts: 778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Roperia »

Ex-Army chief General Shankar Roychowdhury backs Gen Singh in age row
New Delhi: In the government vs Army Chief row, former army chief General Shankar Roychowdhury has come out in favour of General VK Singh becoming the first former Chief of Army Staff to do so. Speaking on this week's 'Devil's Advocate' to Karan Thapar, he said Defence Minister should have ideally overruled his bureaucrats who were advising him on the matter.

"I wouldn't want to name names but certainly the government could have handled the case better with having regard and respect for a chief of a service. I think they should have shown more understanding rather than go by the pages of an order which directs that if you go by change of birth you should have out it in before completion of five years of service. They should have given it more consideration," he said.

When asked whether the government should be blamed for the controversy, he said, "I would not say that in respect of the Defence Minister because he is a very fine person. But certainly the Ministry of Defence which is the arm of the government which more or less controls the defence services. They have been guilty of not putting a broad approach to it."

Holding the civil servants responsible, he said, "This is a case where the minister also should have exercised his judgement and taken a decision on the case. Perhaps, he should have overruled the bureaucratic advice he was getting. That would have been better."
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60256
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Wow! Its very important what he thinks due to his background.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Pranav »

Viv S wrote: Point is such MS demand = masked man + threat to life analogies, are scarcely accurate let alone scientific. ...

Is the issue of making it to a four star rank worth a compromise that strips one of 10 months in office? Sure. But having done so he has to stick with it.
The point is simple - when a gang of scoundrels extracts a statement from you under duress, you are not bound by what you say to humour them.

Duress in contract law - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress#In_contract_law

Even so, in this case VKS has never accepted the 1950 date, nor ever waived the normal appeals procedure.

If this affair causes long-hidden skeletons to start tumbling out, then it is all for the greater good.
Last edited by Pranav on 22 Jan 2012 10:29, edited 1 time in total.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

ramana wrote:Maybe there is a need to have a court of inquiry or commission composed of retired generals (retired before 2002) and go into the issues. Its now bigger than General VK Sngh's DOB.

The Commission should call at a minimum JJ Singh, Khare, Gangadharan, Kapoor, Prakash, and Purshottam and come to the bottom of things to restore confidence in the promotions policy.
Well I thought that you have made this suggestion in a previous post. I strongly endorse it. This is PromoionGate scam. Must be investigated.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

eklavya wrote:
It is in the interest of the Indian Army that the machinations of the unscrupulous and unprincipled men who pressured VKS to accept 1950 as his birth year, and it appears damaged at least one more illustrious career (Maj Gen Ravi Arora) along the way, in order to manipulate the 'line of succession' are not able to achieve their aims. It will deeply damage the Indian Army if this consipiracy is allowed to succeed, apparently with the support of the highest powers in the land. This isn't about Gen VKS anymore, its about demonstrating to the rank and file that the promotion process is not thoroughly manipulated. If the rank and file lose faith in the way the senior commanders are assessed and appointed, there will be serious negative repercussions all the way down the chain.
+100
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7827
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

I would definitely want JJ and DK to stand in court and be asked to answer for their acts of commissions and omissions. The IA needs this catharsis to rinse itself of all the poison that had accumulated within.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34901
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

Are we next going to buy amreki tanks too??

American tanks to roll on Indian soil
New Delhi, Jan 22, 2012, (PTI)
For the first time, American tanks will roll on Indian soil in wargames codenamed 'Exercise Yudh Abhyas', which will mark the beginning of the series of military engagements scheduled between the two countries for this year.

For the first time in Indo-US wargames, Americans will deploy their tanks in the company-level Exercise Yudhabhyas scheduled to be held in the Mahajan field firing ranges in Rajasthan desert in March, Army sources told PTI here.

Apart from fielding three tanks, the US will also deploy around 200 men accompanied by armoured personnel carriers for the wargames, they said.

In the last edition of the exercise, the American Army had brought its Stryker infantry combat vehicles which were being inducted into war operations in Afghanistan.
However, it is not yet clear which tanks would be deployed by the American side for the exercise.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Surya »

Ha ha

someone was asking if any ex IA chief had supported VKS - well here we go :)

meanwhile an email from another ex army men group

Guys..here's a totally new dimension to this sad episode....of course, we are all backing the Chief - any day. The sheer irony of the whole episode is that ........in India, the Govt decides the age of the COAS...in neighbouring Pak...it is the COAS who decides the age of their Govt :mrgreen:
Vashishtha
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 23:06
Location: look behind you

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by Vashishtha »

Guys..here's a totally new dimension to this sad episode....of course, we are all backing the Chief - any day. The sheer irony of the whole episode is that ........in India, the Govt decides the age of the COAS...in neighbouring Pak...it is the COAS who decides the age of their Govt
ROFLOL!!!
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7827
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

chetak wrote:Are we next going to buy amreki tanks too??

American tanks to roll on Indian soil
New Delhi, Jan 22, 2012, (PTI)
For the first time, American tanks will roll on Indian soil in wargames codenamed 'Exercise Yudh Abhyas', which will mark the beginning of the series of military engagements scheduled between the two countries for this year.<SNIP>
It is a good development IMO. Let the "Bash on regardless" guys go face to face with what is actually one of the best tanks out there and realize where they stand in their T-90s. At least, this will lead to better appreciation of what Arjun has acheived.
Locked