Comments: Flat Nested Threaded Embedded Oldest First Newest First Buying US made machines ? By harsha_06 on Thursday, November 19, 2009 (EST) http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_pm-may-sign-major-guns-deal-during-us-visit_1313510 ************************************************* So why are we going for more US made hardware then ? This news came as a surprise to me. Fighter jets are a different issue. When they are down with no spares to operate then the pilots sit back at the base. But howitzers provide fire support for our advancing troops. If US arm twists with these guns then it is a major blow to the war situation itself. When troops cannot advance there is nothing a nation can do in the event of war. So i like to hear what made the Indian government take a decision to go for these machines ? Was this based on recommendations from with in the defense establishment ? IMO these may be good machines but I dont like to see a major chunk of our hardware being US made so that we become puppets in the hand of US whenever hostilities break out with any of our neighbors. Reply to this Comment India's US fixation! By dhruva0211 on Friday, November 20, 2009 (EST) Great analysis - and great conclusions (allocating money to DRDO may be seriously true) 1) Even though Republican administrations are percieved to be more friendly to India than democrats, it may not be necessarily true. Nixon was a republican who sent USS Enterprise into Bay of Bengal in 1971 war. John F Kennedy was a democrat who sent US air force to India'a aid during the 1961 war with China. Even in George W Bush's first term, Colin Powell regularly irritated India (He made Pakistan a special ally of NATO.) In the end, no US adminstration will be friends of India. We need to take a lesson from Israel on how to stand ground against Obama. Israel has point blank refused Obama's suggestion on bringing halt to settlement activities in West Bank. Now Obama has to go back on his stand and eat his own words. Obama will respect us for our strength - and punish us for our weaknesses. 2) I too would have preferred John McCain win over Barack Obama. Barack Obama made his feelings well known on Kashmir even during his campaign - when he pledged to appoint special US representative for India-Pak-Afghanistan for solving Kashmir problem. Thank god we escaped that hyphenation with Pak and Afganistan!! John McCain was a decorated soldier who spend 5 years in captivity for his country in Vietnam war. Obama, in contrast, is just a big-mouth making grandoise slogans - like "change we can believe in". 3) I too am at a loss at why we Indians tend to be guided by emotions and moral high ground rather than reason, pragmatism, cold-blooded logic and objectivity. One example was the 1971 war - which was a military victory but a political defeat for India. Pakistan was defeated and destroyed - and we could have finished the Kashmir problem there and then (Vajpayee stated as much). But Indira Gandhi choose to release 93000 POW and returned 6000 square miles of captured territory of West Pakistan as a GOODWILL gesture!! India continues to pay for that goodwill - we gained nothing, not even the friendship of Bangladesh. The other example was when Nehru, in his desire to be the world's great statesman, took Kashmir dispute to UN despite having the docuement of accession from Maharaja of Kashmir. The accession document was all that was required for Kashmir to join India. Every state that joined India or Pakistan had to take this route - and Kashmir was legally ours. However, taking Kashmir to UN internationalized Kashmir dispute - and is a tragedy beyond words. we should adopt the same policy that Deng Xiaoping adopted for China "IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER A CAT IS BLACK OR WHITE, AS LONG AS IT CATCHES MICE". 4) Your conclusion is spot-on. We have no option but to develop our own military capabilities. However inefficient the process may be, however long it takes - we should be militarily self-reliant. Russia has a law that only indigenous weapons can serve in its armed forces. Apart from saving valuable foreign exchange, creating jobs - it will allow India to play a more strategic role in the world stage. It can also significanly benefit our economy. US has benefitted immensely from spin-offs in military research. Internet, Microwave, Satellites etc were militarly technologies initially - but created huge economic oppurtunities as well. We should not treat military research as sunk cost only. Reply to this Comment Comments about M777 ???? By harsha_06 on Friday, November 20, 2009 (EST) Can i know the opinion of the intellectuals here about what they think about buying M777 ? My question here is "Which is the best 'ultra-light' howitzer? "......Pegasus or M777. The answer might be obvious because M777 weights 2 tons less than Pegasus and is more portable. The range and caliber of both are the same if we exclude the Ex-calibur round of M777. Also can anyone throw some light on the competitors for the Armys light tank requirment for the mountain divisions in the North East Sector ? Also I would support the Archer system / Caesar system for use in Northern Sector because it suits the requirements of the Army. Reply to this Comment india/us By indus on Sunday, November 22, 2009 (EST) Great article and comments. Look there's few people (leftists mostly) that like Obama and his administration. Everyone, including Israel, Europe, the right/center of the US are just trying to make the best of this situation. Its become obvious now how much of an inexperienced loser and appeaser that Obama is. He is not only throwing India under the bus but also other great allies of the US, while cozying up to the tyrants and totalitarian dictators of the world. In 3 years (2012 elections) there will be a sea-change in US politics because there is a great deal of hate and resentment being built up against the current corrupt administration which does not represent American values and interests. When that happens, I believe the US will become a stronger ally for India. While I agree with the statements that it should be India's goal to become fully self-reliant with its own military-industrial complex, we have to face the reality that we are behind technologically to the US/Europe and so is Russia. While the Russians have been great allies, they are also a totalitarian state so we should keep a respectful distance. Our best bet is to gain as much assistance from the West as possible for firstly (and immediately), being able to defend ourselves from our hostile neighbors and secondly, over a longer term, developing the technological base in order to become completely independent/self-sufficient. While Russia has been generally a reliable arms supplier, let's not forget how substandard their equipment is in comparison to the West. Thousands of Russian Iraqi tanks/planes were wiped out and almost no US assets were destroyed. US equipment is battle-proven. Also our potential muslim enemy states are getting their hands on such cutting edge military hardware from the West. UAE has Apache Longbows, the Saudis have F-15s. These military assets were the result of constant refinement over decades. India cannot hope to catch up unless they buy them and replicate them indigenously. To do it from scratch would always leave us a decade or so behind our potential adversaries. I think we all want the same thing-for India to be a modern military power to reckon with. Frankly I'm not happy with the status quo and I despise liberal/leftists who are ruling currently-they're the reason we're lagging behind others. India could be so much greater but is held back by its weak corrupt leaders (among other things). Reply to this Comment Follow the French route By Narendra Kothapalli on Monday, November 23, 2009 (EST) This is just one of numerous instances when Americans have elected idiots to run their country. It is not just their track record with India, just ask the french, who were abandoned by the Americans during the Suez-canal crisis, the french withdrew full membership to NATO after that and began a policy of self-reliance in military hardware, its own independent foreign policy(not the kind our communists have in mind). However, our indigenous defense programs have little to show for the money and time put into them, with the greatest of respect to Cdr Thakur if we allocate the money to DRDO, it will take another 40 years to induct such an aircraft into the air force. The solution is to allow more private sector involvement, this transformation is moving at a snail's pace,if at all. Russian equipment owing to its sub-standard fabrication which leads to high maintenance costs and the gap in their electronics technology is not necessarily the best choice. Which brings us back to the french, who have a history of being a reliable arms supplier to India, good fabrication and good electronics which make them the best choice for not only defence purchases but their self-reliance in military hardware will also help us better understand the things that we need to do to achieve our own independence in defense equipmennt. But I still want to know more about our defense ties with the french, could Mr Thakur, who has been following defense purchases very closely, throw more light on the subject ? Reply to this Comment Re: Follow the French route By vkthakur on Monday, November 23, 2009 (EST) > The solution is to allow more private sector involvement, this transformation is moving at a snail's pace,if at all. I absolutely agree with you. > Russian equipment owing to its sub-standard fabrication... I don't believe Russian equipment is sub-standard and haven't come across anyone in the Air Force that thought so. It is often not as sophisticated as its western counterpart but it tends to be as reliable. As to the defense ties with France, I am not sure I can add much to what you have already said. They are reliable suppliers and their equipment is good. It was only for a brief period in the 1970s that the IAF did no operate a French fighter. We had the Ouragons (Toofani) till the 60s and from the 1980s onward Mirage 2000. The Mirage 2000 proved exemplary during Kargil operations and saved the Air Force from a lot of embarrassment caused by the total inadequacy of our remaining strike force. Technically, the Super Hornet is what the IAF is likely to lean towards but politically it maybe a good idea to seriously consider the Rafale. After the F/A-18E/F it has the most matured AESA in the RBE2. It is woefully expensive, like other French equipment, because of the limited production run but India can look forward to much more TOT than the US will ever agree to. The French may well be amenable to nuclear sub TOT as part of the deal, like in the case of Brazil. Reply to this Comment Cannot trust anyone, French, US, Russia By neel.vohra on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 (EST) We cannot trust the French either. Didnt they supply countermeasures to the Exocet missile in the Falkland war to the British? American equipment can also come with trojan horses. What is the guarantee that Russian equipment is not compromised. In any sphere, India cannot expect any country or any leader to do what is in Indian interests. Strength has to come from within. Reply to this Comment

Add Your Comment