gingerbeard

Admin edit: No need to quote the entire thread....
interesting, but i do not thin india have the strength to deny china without terrorial costs. chinese navy are now quite advance, not to mention its land army are having new tanks the Type 96 and the Type 98G which is said to be one of the world's best.

India have slightly better Su30, but the chinese have upgreaded its missile that is even better than the US.

the Chinese have getting the new russian bombers too, the Tu-22M3 and Tu-95 , if u go to the china's army thread the and china's army doctrine, u will know china's army is more up to date than india's.

the point is, india's infrastructure cannot repair its own equipment, they need russian assistance, do u think in war time with china or any superpowers, india would be able to do so?

inida's navy will be supressed by the chinese if they enter chinese territory, the chinese missiles and Kilo subs couls take on even the US carrier fleet. there is recent news where the chinese nuclear subs slip pass US detection in the pacific.

i am not saying india is weak in military strength, but if a war broke out. china will gain the upper hand. the size of the indian army can make and UK, France, Japan out of question due to force projection. but i doubt india have enough to keep away US carrier fleet. also china is right next to india's, so it is not too hard for chinese to invade in a large scale. u got to know what happened in 1962 war.

"Even if its primary military formations, airforce and navy were to be completely destroyed, the occupation of the Indian state is something that is impossible. The total manpower consisting of reserves, police, civil defense, paramilitary and nongovernmental militia is upwards of 50 million people. Over 500 million people are of arms-bearing age. Furthermore, civil defense is a well established institution, prompted after the 1962 war with China, and such its doctrine and formations are well enacted. "

then how come the Brits could countrol india's population?

"With exception of the USN, India is the dominant force in the Indian ocean region. Along with its navy, the magnitude of the shore-based IAF and missile forces can virtually deny the region to any surface force from the Malaccas to the Persian gulf. Even a hypothetical USN carrier force would not lightly tangle with this in conventional terms. "

i would want to know what does IN have. not trying to insult u or anything, but u havent said wat india has got to keep away the US carrier fleet.

"With regards to the first, India is heavily dependant on foreign oil for its needs. As the Indian economy continues to boom, oil requirements grow exponentially. India's relationship with Iran, UAE, Oman and even speculations in the N. African desert require adaquate security of tankers transiting from the Gulf to India's west coast. It is necessary that IN must be overwhelmingly capable of providing this security, as the Indian economy is dependant on this influx. "

if u r talking about war with neigbours, china's economic development is way ahead india's, also faster economic growth rate compare to india's

"Obviously, the only potential enemy India has with these nations is China, whose energy need requirements are in an even more critical position than India. Its pipeline projects basically all are based out of Pakistan. Even with these, the vast majority of its oil will continue to be shipped from the ME. And even the Pakistan-pipelines require shipping oil/lng from there to Pakistan in any case. The pipelines can easily be neutralized by IAF/IA. IN's role is to deny the Chinese navy access to the region, and interdict its shipping by IN's overwhelming regionalized superiority. "

chinese have a larger airforce, the normal standards of the chinese planes are better than india's.

"With regard to the second point, force-projection, what the Tsunami disaster basically displayed to the surprised world the speed, size and effectiveness of IN's deployability to troublespots in the region. India, being that its a regional superpower strategically unconstrained in its natural sphere of influence --(unlike, for example, China which is contained by strong and hostile littoral nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, which as well have US backing)-- has a vested interest in the surrounding states and has the ability to intervene, humanitarianly or otherwise, as was displayed with the Indian Peacekeeping Force in SL and the put-down of the invasion of the Maldives in the 80s, and by the Tsunami deployments now. "

no, india took a long time to react. i saw ont he news where the indians were complaining how slow the government has reacted to this matter.

"Another goal of this is the ability to land troops in nearby trouble spots. The intital landings of IPKF in SL was done mostly by air, and then only after ports were secured. While IAF is going hellstrong on strategic transport capability (that itself another topic), IN is concentrating on having the ability to conduct forced landings in hostile territory. Potenial targets: Pakistan (unlike in the previous wars, Indian conventional superiority now allows India to not only fight on the border, but literally to establish a beach head in Balochistan directly to create another front bypassing traditional defended borders, and supply this front quite at want); Sri Lanka (intervening in the civil war); or Burma (any full-scale India-China war will have the PLA streaming through the Burmese jungles around the Himalay. "

but the chinese would have taken air supriority, due to the much larger air force china has.

"Now, all that above is simply regarding Indian military systems of foreign origin, India’s own military industry is taking off in a huge way, and foreign systems are increasingly being replaced with Indian systems in increasing margins each passing year. I’ll go in detail with specific systems when I address posts, but, suffice it now to say that over 50% of new procurements in the last 5 years are indigenous, Indian-made systems (95% of all systems of whatever origin being locally-manufactured, notwithstanding.) "

u got to realise china's military industry has taken off in an even bigger way, surprising the US. due to economical advantage and the better infrastructure, china would be able to produce mroe weapons and better quality faster than india's. also as i said before, india needs russia to repairs its weaponry. it shows during a war with china, india would not have enough weapons to fight.

"The average Jawan, by all accounts, Indian and foeign, and buy His successes and achievements throughout all deployments in the world, is man for man on par with the best in the world. The Indian military combat training have physically tougher training standards and requirements than any of the Western counterparts, Its officer corps are also on average have higher education levels. Its combat schools are world-standard, and some, like its High Altitude Training School, or its Counter-Insurgency and Jungle Warfare School are universially recognized to be among, if not the, best in the world. In every world competition or military exercise with a foreign power India’s special forces have conducted, they have almost always had the top honors. "

i doubt it, how many officer corps are there? and each officer in the west have university degrees. india have a very low proportion of university graduates. so entering an army of india's size would proof the numbers are very minimal.

"Secondly, India has the benefit that most countries do not have of continuous active combat deployments for over 50 years. Either in Kashmir, or in counter-insurgencies, this has allowed the Indian military to hone and refine its wartime tactics. Every unit in the Indian military has significant real combat experience, which by and far most countries in the world do not. 50% of deployments of active duty soldiers are in wartime situations and conditions. "

so is the US.