Terror attacks (UK)

[Ram]

They spend more dollars. They do a lot more exercises. They buy a lot of extremely expensive shiny glittery F-15s with no real regard for overall military. Indias military is easily superior to Japanese or Saudi military- we are nowhere as lopsided. Saudis have 600 F-16s which cost them more than the entire Air Force of India costs but they have no navy or army to speak of. In a full-scale war, Saudis dont stand a chance against us on their own. What the US did to Iraqi military- we'd be doing a similar job to the Saudi military if we ever clashed. Japan is a special case- they have special rules & treaty with the US militarily. They can build a lot of stuff on their own but they keep buying US hardware due to treaties it signed at the end of WWII in surrender.

What makes Saudi guys buy 600 ( !!!) F-16's if they knew that US would give them a tough time afterward ? The truth is obvious. The US guys do honor their contractual commitments on most occasions. And there is no point comparing military sizes and geo-political situations. All we have to do is to analyse the feasibility of a big-ticket purchase that i am talking about.

Err no..explain how you are getting the full value if you cannot fix,upgrade or build what you just bought. I dont get your india-china question. My point is,from OUR perspective, full tech transfer beats the pants off a slightly better product that we can only use very conservatively.

My point is , the technologies that we are talking about here ( airborne warning systems , anti-missile systems) are the ones we wouldnt be able to buy or have in the first place unless we buy them from the amricans. Then where is the question of buying a slightly inferior product with tech transfer. And even this idea of buying a slightly inferior product becasue it comes with tech transfer is laughable. We are talking about a war here , where evry single ounce is technology superiority matters.

T-90 tank, MiG-29 and we are getting the complete blueprints of their Aircraft Carrier we are purchasing (Which is FAR superior than our currently operational AC). We also have full tech transfer for Kilo-class submarines.

I dont actually get what you are saying. Admiral Gorshkov ( the carrier) doesnt come with a tech-transfer. I am sure the Russians havnt given us the blue-prints to build Mig-29'. And you cant compare T-90 tanks and the kind of american tech i am talking about. Waise , which country would do a tech-transfer deal for its airborne early warning radars and anti-aircraft missiles systems ? And no way there is tech-transfer deal for kilo-class submarines.

What are their Russian/French equivalent - you will find that those arnt much inferior in quality either. As far as missile technology comes- i am more than happy to stick to Russian built missiles. They are atleast 10 years ahead of the US in missile technology and always have been in the last 30-40 years ( ever since Brezhnev decieded to neutralize the superior US navy by building technological superiority in its missile program). You do realize that for almost every missile America has, Russia has a better one ?

I think you havent got the point. We arent talking about missiles here. We arent talking about buying SAM's or medium range missiles. We are talking about an anti-missile system ( Arrow) , which will in effct, be capable of intercepting a nuclear tipped pakistani missile from landing in Kolkata. France doesnt have anti-missle system nor a airborne early warning system. Russia does have the S-300 to counter the Arrow. But its recognized world-wide that Arrow beats it competition hands down. Why would the chinese go for the arrow , when they could so conveniently gone for the Russian system ?

My bottomline is if you are buying something you cannot fix, cannot maintain, cannot build and cannot upgrade, it is a bum deal. Its like buying something but letting the US have us by our balls. It gets HUGE political leverage in India by our dependency on US maintainance/production because we are simply end-use consumers if we buy from the US, totally dependent on it for supply, upgrades and everything, instead of being independent.

In the world of military purchases , its almost impossible to buy everyhting over which you have complete control of. It doesnt work that way. And the weapons systems i am talking about are the ones which could win India the war. You dont seem to realize that. Even If Russia decides to sell its anti-missile system to India , I can bet you the bottom dollar that they wont go for a tech-transfer.

[CC1981]

What makes Saudi guys buy 600 ( !!!) F-16's if they knew that US would give them a tough time afterward ? The truth is obvious. The US guys do honor their contractual commitments on most occasions.

*SIGH*. When have i ever said that US doesnt honour its agreements ? I said that US will NOT give you enough technical knowhow to maintain, build or upgrade the stuff you buy from them. Saudis dont care about this because US is practically sitting in Saudi Arabia with a huge army and army base- it military is far more for show & chest-thumping than for functionality. If that wasnt the case, tell me then why does Saudi Arabia buy 600 F-16s before it buys a single submarine ?

My point is , the technologies that we are talking about here ( airborne warning systems , anti-missile systems) are the ones we wouldnt be able to buy or have in the first place unless we buy them from the amricans.

False. AWACS is not just an American know-how. France, UK, Russia & China all have it.

. And even this idea of buying a slightly inferior product becasue it comes with tech transfer is laughable. We are talking about a war here , where evry single ounce is technology superiority matters.

No what is laughable is thinking that your 200 Aircrafts that are maybe 10% better than mine are more worthwhile to you when you cannot build any more, fix any of them or upgrade any of them. Your idea that technological superiority is more important than production & design control is utterly laughable. In ALL protracted wars with super-powers, it has boiled down to production sustainability. You get a big fat zero there if you simply are a user of American built weaponry. Bottomline is, my slight technological inferiority is far far heavily outweighted by the fact that i can build more and you cant. I can do suicide missions against your air-squadrons and take MUCH more damage than you can and remain functional- because every plane you shoot down, it is replaced within a week- every plane of yours i shoot down, you are that much closer to permament defeat.

I dont actually get what you are saying. Admiral Gorshkov ( the carrier) doesnt come with a tech-transfer. I am sure the Russians havnt given us the blue-prints to build Mig-29'. And you cant compare T-90 tanks and the kind of american tech i am talking about. Waise , which country would do a tech-transfer deal for its airborne early warning radars and anti-aircraft missiles systems ? And no way there is tech-transfer deal for kilo-class submarines.

What i said were facts. Read up in Bharat-rakshak or Jane's magazine. T-90 isnt much off the M1A1 Abrams tank.

And no way there is tech-transfer deal for kilo-class submarines.

The submarines that India has built in Vizag are literally Kilo-class copies if i am not mistaken.

Even If Russia decides to sell its anti-missile system to India , I can bet you the bottom dollar that they wont go for a tech-transfer.

Russia & India have already a tech-transfer in the most cutting-edge missile tech- MIRV and underwater jet engines (required for a below-sea level submarine launch capability).

[Ram]

*SIGH*. When have i ever said that US doesnt honour its agreements ? I said that US will NOT give you enough technical knowhow to maintain' date=' build or upgrade the stuff you buy from them. Saudis dont care about this because US is practically sitting in Saudi Arabia with a huge army and army base- it military is far more for show & chest-thumping than for functionality. If that wasnt the case, tell me then why does Saudi Arabia buy 600 F-16s before it buys a single submarine ?[/quote'] Totally lacking in logic i would say. Saudis wouldnt care if 600 of the jets it bought from US didnt work ? How stupid is that ? ofcous the fighters work, and that coz the americans give the help when required. You better shrug off this notion that america is a habitual defaulter when it comes after sales maintanece.

False. AWACS is not just an American know-how. France, UK, Russia & China all have it.

The american AWACS is the best. I dunno if U.K or France have one , and even if they have , they probably wont sell it to us. And no point going for the Russian version as the whole point is that we need to better than the Chinsese.

No what is laughable is thinking that your 200 Aircrafts that are maybe 10% better than mine are more worthwhile to you when you cannot build any more, fix any of them or upgrade any of them. Your idea that technological superiority is more important than production & design control is utterly laughable. In ALL protracted wars with super-powers, it has boiled down to production sustainability. You get a big fat zero there if you simply are a user of American built weaponry. Bottomline is, my slight technological inferiority is far far heavily outweighted by the fact that i can build more and you cant. I can do suicide missions against your air-squadrons and take MUCH more damage than you can and remain functional- because every plane you shoot down, it is replaced within a week- every plane of yours i shoot down, you are that much closer to permament defeat.

And for the millionth time i am saying this to you - I am not talking about Fighters and tanks. We wont have to produce the AWACS or the Arrow systems. They are off-the-shelf hardware. The one we will be buying , are the only ones we wil be using , EVER. Arrow , AWACS is not the type that can be produced on a mass scale.

What i said were facts. Read up in Bharat-rakshak or Jane's magazine. T-90 isnt much off the M1A1 Abrams tank.

Please dont compare the arrow/AWACS to the T-90. Do you think the russians will give tech-transfer with their anti-missile S-300 ? Hell no !

The submarines that India has built in Vizag are literally Kilo-class copies if i am not mistaken.

Aaah ! There is difference between the submarines being built with clandestine russian help and the russians offering full-tech transfer deal in it. If the former is the case , your argument is void.

[Lurker]

What has this got to do with comparing US to Islamic rulers of past ?

To highlight that USA always looked after its interest, and we can check our own history for that. Like I have mentioned before, if you consider USA looking after its interest as "right" then the debate about Islamic rule would become irrelevant since Islamic rulers can also raise the same banner of looking after their own "interest".

And from your own post I gather that the Soviets did not do anything untill 1962 as the key resolutions had been passed much earlier and we had lost the Pok part by 1948/49. You will find from those resolutions that India itself abstained from voting in many of those ... while the USSR was simply absent and you want to blame the USA for it ?

Now that is clutching at straws BB. 62, 71, 48 whatever you consider the bottomline is that USA was at the forefront with regards to any resolution on Kashmir, as a sponsor or a party directly supporting the resolution. Russia on the other hand always backed India, either by veto or by abstaining but never supporting it. Could you find me a single resolution where USSR went against India? On the other hand you have all the proof on how USA/West have behaved with India. xxx

[kumble_rocks]

Because that is relevant even today we have an isalmic menace in our society and here looking at history helps to understand why they do what they do.. If tomrorrow that proleem disappears I will throw that part of istory in dustbin.. U can keep discussing that part then for the sake of historical competeness of discusision. I don't have time for irrelevant crap I gues I have made it clear many times but somehow u miss this part.... You here keep harping america created Taliban hence we will not fight taliban even if that means going agist our own interest.. Who says anyone is anyone's freind. it's converegence of interest.. I guess it's not such a pretzel concept to comprehend, is it... And for the zillionth time where does trusting anyone comes in picture ...Why just USA you can't trust anyone in matters of foreign policies it's all about keeping eyes open and watching one's back and that demands cooperation .. You once again are showing your naivete in askin did they declare paki/saudi terrorists state no.... They are watching their own interest we are watching our own... It so happens in one case it's one and same then why not reap dividends ther.. There is no place for emotion in these matters....

What a copout answer. If ours and US interest are one and the same , what kind of dividend are you going to reap when US declares Pakistan and Saudi as their closest allies. Your like thinks our interest lies in aligning with the west . The same West which refuses to clamp done on Pakistan which are the root cause of Islamic terrorism in India. I am not naive , you are. You just don't get it , that we cannot align with countries which support are enemies.

Again selctive reading at work. This is not the first time KR is harping onwhy u are nto discusisng this and that crap.. He has doen it in past and I have made it clear whihc history interests me the history which has relevance today.. I read at islamist behaviour because they still are involved in same $hit and there history helps to gauge why someone behave the way oen does.. I am not going to waste my time discussing history which has no relevance..

And you keep harping the same crap that it is in our self interest to align with the West to fight Islamic terrorism . Pray tell me, what kind of fight USA is fighting wherein , it has 20,000 foot soldiers in Afghanistan which is the hot bed of Islamic terrorism and 200,000 thousand soldiers in Iraq which had no connection with Al-qaeda. And for you to suggest that history of 20 years ago in irrelevant is ludicrous to say the least. The so called Islamic terrorism which India faces has got more to do with Pakistan. But , can we take any action against them without Uncle Sam's blessing . Hell NO.

[kumble_rocks]

And my point is they are at least kicking the third one called taliban/al-qaida so why not take that.

Big deal . They created that monster and now they are trying to kill it . Should I applaud for this ?:wink_smile:

[kumble_rocks]

Back in the early days Chacha Nehru sent them strong feelers (to put it Mildly) that Capitalism = Evil and hence they went looking elsewhere. Its not like US had anything against India .... our shanpatti Babus had this fetish for Socialism and rest is history as the cliche goes.

Pardon me for saying this , but this is the same kind of faux pax that I used to hear from RSS mouth piece way back when I was a member in Mysore supporting Wodeyar under BJP ticket, Do you understand why we were skeptical about capitalism back then . Hint , East India company ruled as for 200 years in the name of capitalism and trading . We were averse to free market and rightly so because we were bitten by a snake called East India Company which bit the hand that fed them.

And what have we learnt from our past mistakes ...NOTHING Zilch ..... also why do we have to care about the morals/ethics of USA ? Why does the US need to earn any brownie points from anybody ? They dont get anything out of appeasing India ... else they would have already done that.

Why is it that the Hindu Brigade fail to understand that aligning with the West means trouble, Are you aware of the plight of Pakistan and Afghanistan back in the 90's when USA dropped them like hot potatoes. USA has a proven track record when it comes to dumping their allies except Israel and Britain. And to suggest that we should work with them to fight against Islamic terrorism is foolhardy , IMO. After all their idea of global war against terrorism means having 200,000 foot soldiers in Iraq and 20,000 thousand soldiers in Afghanistan which actually attacked them. Do you condone this fake war. I don't want India to have any part in this kind of stupid war on terrorism. To think that BJP government was actually considering sending 15,000 Indian troops to Iraq as part of Coalition is a big disgrace to the NDA government. But as usual , I don't hear any criticism from you guys about this misadventure. Am I wrong ?

[CC1981]

Totally lacking in logic i would say. Saudis wouldnt care if 600 of the jets it bought from US didnt work ? How stupid is that ? ofcous the fighters work, and that coz the americans give the help when required. You better shrug off this notion that america is a habitual defaulter when it comes after sales maintanece.

I dont know what the Saudis care about or not- the FACT is, Saudis CANNOT fix, build or upgrade the F-16s they bought- FULL maintainance package from USAF is included. It is NOT a question of being a habitual defaulter- its more of an issue with the INFLEUNCE America has over you if they can DICTATE to your military. And America certainly isnt gonna clear its production line to produce fighters for YOU if you are in a war. If you think that getting stuff fixed by America is the same thing as fixing it yourself, you are wrong- its far less reliable, far more expensive and far slower to get another country to fix your equipment in time of emergency than you doing it yourself. I've already showed the flaw in your theory for bringing in American sales record in their support- it does not concern us. They are selling to countries who DO NOT have serious military threats like China or a nuclear-armed Pakistan. And the ones who do are in bed with America. To them its okay to get their stuff fixed by Americans and rely on them- to us, it is NOT an option ! America is NOT a trusted ally of India and that shall remain as long as America officially backs Pakistan.

The american AWACS is the best. I dunno if U.K or France have one , and even if they have , they probably wont sell it to us. And no point going for the Russian version as the whole point is that we need to better than the Chinsese.

China does NOT have full tech transfer from Russia- they reverse-engineer the stuff and any product built from the blue-prints is superior to a reverse-engineered copy of the same product. It is stupid to go get the best when you cannot fix it, build it or maintain it on your own! The kind of war India will face against China boils down to production capability. NOT firing off foreign-purchased hardware that you cannot build any more of !

And for the millionth time i am saying this to you - I am not talking about Fighters and tanks. We wont have to produce the AWACS or the Arrow systems. They are off-the-shelf hardware. The one we will be buying , are the only ones we wil be using , EVER. Arrow , AWACS is not the type that can be produced on a mass scale.

Me most definitely DO need to produce our own AWACS or Arrows system- one American built AWACS plane shot down = one less plane in our arsenal. If we build it on our own with Russian help, if someone shoots it down, we can replace it in a couple of weeks !

Do you think the russians will give tech-transfer with their anti-missile S-300 ? Hell no !

If they dont mind giving us BRAHMOS technology, they wont mind giving us S-300. Its about us getting the price right. Simple as that.

Aaah ! There is difference between the submarines being built with clandestine russian help and the russians offering full-tech transfer deal in it. If the former is the case , your argument is void. __________________

Err the difference is only on paper- if YOUR shipping yard/factory is turning out an identical replica of a Kilo-class sub, it means you got the technology. Its not like Russian technicians showed up, kicked off all Indians from the shipping yard, build the sub and left. WE built it. Means WE have the technology for it.

[CC1981]

There can be no huge problems with equating the US regime with Islamist fascists- US action in the last 50 years is just as bad, if not worse. Its laughably brainwashed to think that the US is 'doing the right thing'. It may be a better alternative to China or Islamist regimes as the main power in charge- but not by much- its like arguing who is the worse criminal- the murderer or the rapist.

[CC1981]

To think that BJP government was actually considering sending 15,000 Indian troops to Iraq as part of Coalition is a big disgrace to the NDA government.

Spot on. Problem is, hindu fundies get a lot of funding from our NRI bros in US- the money trail to fundies like RSS, Shiv Sena etc. go to NRIs overseas, just like money trail to the mullah in the jama masjids goes to Saudi. I am glad that India and Canada are not involved in the war US started by lying, cheating and being a scumbag. And i am glad that Iraq is turning into a bigger disaster for America than Vietnam, atleast politically. They need to be reminded of the foolishness they bring upon themselves by meddling in stuff it has no clue on. Clinton was absolutely right in not attacking Iraq and unfortunately Dumbya wanted to vent the family fued.

[Ram]

Me most definitely DO need to produce our own AWACS or Arrows system- one American built AWACS plane shot down = one less plane in our arsenal. If we build it on our own with Russian help, if someone shoots it down, we can replace it in a couple of weeks !

I dont know how to react to that to be honest . Its kinda obvious that you know ZERO about AWACS systems, for you to have claimed that "if someone shoots it down, we can replace it in a couple of weeks !". AWACS systems are airborne radars mounted on re-configured Boeing airliners. EACH of these planes cost $1.2 billion dollars. India would be lucky to have one, Let alone build another one in a week, if one of it was shot down. And your reasoning about how the Americans dont maintain it , dont give tech doesnt apply for this. Whats the point in transferring technology if you can have afford only one.

If they dont mind giving us BRAHMOS technology, they wont mind giving us S-300. Its about us getting the price right. Simple as that.

Brahmos was a joint project. Yes, the scram-jet Engine of the missile ( which is the heart of cruise missile tech) was given by the russians, but India fully did the guidance and re-entry of the missile. You CANNOT compare Brahmos to AWACS or Arrow.And FYI , the Brahmos project was predominantly funded by India.

Err the difference is only on paper- if YOUR shipping yard/factory is turning out an identical replica of a Kilo-class sub, it means you got the technology. Its not like Russian technicians showed up, kicked off all Indians from the shipping yard, build the sub and left. WE built it. Means WE have the technology for it.

which means you are saying - Doesnt matter how we get the tech ( buy hook or crook) , we must have it. So are you actually condoning illegal arms sales ?

[CC1981]

US dont have the best potential to do anything with India's internal situation because they DO NOT understand India. Typical skc bootlicker mentality to think that our problems are better solved by aping the US. And if someone doesnt give a rat's hiney about the moral implications of the side they are picking, then they should STFU because they are not part of the solution but part of the problem. Its sickening to see the ignorant tripe about being desh-bhakt when its nothing more than SKC and USKC and toting the ignorant saffronised fundamentalist VHP/RSS fascistic nonsense.

[kumble_rocks]

Our major weapons trading partners have been Russia, France & Israel- we should keep it that way and it'd be the height of stupidity to buy arms from the US- they are the country who's arms come with the most 'strings attached'. They have a long history of selling some top-quality arms for a zillion dollars and then twisting your arm over its maintanance & refurbishing. And right now, US has nothing to offer us that we want. They wont offer the M1A1 Abrams tank or any of their Nimitz class ACs ,any of their nuclear subs or any of their MIRVs. Thats the only things we need on a military basis. On Air-Force front, we only need the Apache- which the US again, wont sell to us. All they'd do is keep offering us their F-16s because now they are phasing out F-16s and the MiG-29 & Su-30MKI are a zillion times better than the F-16. Sure, we could use the JSF/F-22 but US wont sell us that. Plus US *never* sells to anyone except Israel with full tech transfer. Russia on the other hand sells us the planes & the tech. For eg, India now KNOWS how to build one of the best attack aircrafts in the world (Su-30MKI) because Russia sold us the tech as well. America would *never* sell us the blueprints of the F-16. Bottomline, India would be making a huge mistake to enter into arms-relations with the US.

FYI , Bush Administration was willing to sell F-18's to India. BTW, Lockheed Martin in Fortworth Texas was about lay off 5000 employees. Guess what , Bush adminstration signed a deal with Pakistan to sell them F-16's, So much for their war against terrorism. It is useless to align with USA in defence matters in my opinion. We have to be very careful in dealing with them. Check out this article - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1963-2005Mar25.html

[Ram]

FYI , Bush Administration was willing to sell F-18's to India. BTW, Lockheed Martin in Fortworth Texas was about lay off 5000 employees. Guess what , Bush adminstration signed a deal with Pakistan to sell them F-16's, So much for their war against terrorism. It is useless to align with USA in defence matters in my opinion. We have to be very careful in dealing with them. Check out this article - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1963-2005Mar25.html

Its precisely this kind of cold-war mentality that is denying India some of the state-of-the-art weapons it so desperately needs.

[CC1981]

I dont know how to react to that to be honest . Its kinda obvious that you know ZERO about AWACS systems, for you to have claimed that "if someone shoots it down, we can replace it in a couple of weeks !". AWACS systems are airborne radars mounted on re-configured Boeing airliners.EACH of these planes cost $1.2 billion dollars. India would be lucky to have one, Let alone build another one in a week, if one of it was shot down. And your reasoning about how the Americans dont maintain it , dont give tech doesnt apply for this. Whats the point in transferring technology if you can have afford only one.

One is just for show- India would need atleast half a dozen to make them work. And when its wartime and production is necessity of survial, it matters not how much it costs- you want to build it or fix it ASAP and get it going. Certainly not gonna happen when we gotto rely on the US maintance team. As per building them in a week- just for example, in WWII, Nazi Germany was producing a U-boat a week in their peak-production phase. Its not hard to get it built when your entire manufacturing base is prioritised for war production- just like it would be the case if India-China went in a long, protracted war.

Brahmos was a joint project. Yes, the scram-jet Engine of the missile ( which is the heart of cruise missile tech) was given by the russians, but India fully did the guidance and re-entry of the missile. You CANNOT compare Brahmos to AWACS or Arrow.And FYI , the Brahmos project was predominantly funded by India.

The Scramjet is 50% of what makes Brahmos so uber and a highly sensetive info. US doesnt have scramjet technology outside of wind-tunnels. It easily qualifies for giving us a critical piece of technology needed to make the Brahmos for the proper $$

which means you are saying - Doesnt matter how we get the tech ( buy hook or crook) , we must have it. So are you actually condoning illegal arms sales ?

Illegal arms sale is totally different from intelligence-gathering. I dont care about buying nifty toys that we cant do anything about it breaks or short-circuits. India's defence need to match China is acquisition of technological expertise and setting up indigenous defence industry. NOT buying stuff that we cant fix, build or upgrade and we are completely outmanuevered in a protracted war because of this. It also gives America HUGE power over India because America can frack us over if they chose to- they HAVE weilded this clout before. Sorry but if India is to realize its potential, it has to look beyond shiny trinkets from the US for perhaps lesser but far more worthwhile technology from the Russians. And as i said, there are many things where the Russians are better so we make up for it anyways.

[kumble_rocks]

KR , I dont give a rats behind as to the morals and ethics behind various US actions past and present .... right now all I know is that they are the ones that have the best potential to weed out our bugs .... If you think there are better options out there I would hereby like to see them ... As I said earlier you think more about the .. log kya kahenge bakwaas ... well I dont give a rats ass to what anybody thinks about our policies. Thats were we differ. And kindly dont lump me into any group ... I have my own thought process and can understand right from wrong and I know my history fairly well.

Bheem , What is your point here. I didn't doubt your history. In fact you were the one who doubted mine before in an earlier thread. But I let it go. I am sorry to say this, but I rarely see you take any position which does not align with DR. No , they are NOT the ones that have the best potential to weed out our bugs . If that was the case, they would NEVER sold F-16's to Pakistan JUST RECENTLY and have declared that Pakistan is one of their CLOSEST allies. Why don't you get this ?

[kumble_rocks]

Its precisely this kind of cold-war mentality that is denying India some of the state-of-the-art weapons it so desperately needs.

What cold war mentality are you talking about. USA is arming our No1 enemy and Is it some consolation for you if they sell us some arms ? Jesus , get real mate. They have a bad history of dumping their SE Asians allies. Case in point Pakistan and Afghanistan. Only now, they are trying to mend fences with Pakistan because they need them to fight Taliban in NW Pakistan.

[CC1981]

FYI , Bush Administration was willing to sell F-18's to India. BTW, Lockheed Martin in Fortworth Texas was about lay off 5000 employees. Guess what , Bush adminstration signed a deal with Pakistan to sell them F-16's, So much for their war against terrorism. It is useless to align with USA in defence matters in my opinion. We have to be very careful in dealing with them. Check out this article - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1963-2005Mar25.html

We dont need F-18s. The MiG-29 is also a carrier-based craft and significantly superior to the super-hornet. As i said, anything that India could really use form the US, comes with too many strings attached- ie, not worth it. Buying a billion-dollar plane you cant fix, you cant build if it dies and you cant upgrade is a billion dollars wasted. China could waste an entire flight-wing to take out or little gift-wrapped AWACS and its escort and then we just wasted a billion dollars. Now if we could BUILD the damn thing, we are far better off. Infact, AWACS is the instrumentation, not the plane it is held inside. India for eg is already developing its own AWACS plane scheduled to enter service in 2010 using Israeli tech. What we really need is to cozy up to the Italians a bit and get them to sell us the EH101 blueprints.By far, it is the world's best helicopter-based AWACS system.

[Ram]

One is just for show- India would need atleast half a dozen to make them work. And when its wartime and production is necessity of survial, it matters not how much it costs- you want to build it or fix it ASAP and get it going. Certainly not gonna happen when we gotto rely on the US maintance team. As per building them in a week- just for example, in WWII, Nazi Germany was producing a U-boat a week in their peak-production phase. Its not hard to get it built when your entire manufacturing base is prioritised for war production- just like it would be the case if India-China went in a long, protracted war.

Please tell me you are kidding CC. SIX phalcon systems for India alone ! when there are only TWO operationel in the entire world ! You have to get you bearings on Phalcon AWACS right if you have stop me from laughing ! And this aint no world war 2 ! nor is this a U-boat ! Do you know that once ordered , a Phalcon takes a full two and half years to build ? These are not maruti 800 models , to keep churning from the production line.

The Scramjet is 50% of what makes Brahmos so uber and a highly sensetive info. US doesnt have scramjet technology outside of wind-tunnels. It easily qualifies for giving us a critical piece of technology needed to make the Brahmos for the proper $$

I quite dont get what you are saying. The Russians co-operated with us on Brahmos because we had superior technology on missile guidance ( yes , believe it or not . this is true !) and we were willing to shell out the $300 million to finance the project.

Illegal arms sale is totally different from intelligence-gathering. I dont care about buying nifty toys that we cant do anything about it breaks or short-circuits. India's defence need to match China is acquisition of technological expertise and setting up indigenous defence industry. NOT buying stuff that we cant fix, build or upgrade and we are completely outmanuevered in a protracted war because of this.

Again, you are mistaking awacs to be some run-of-the-mill tank. It isnt ! We buy only one , and trust me , it will work fine during war.

It also gives America HUGE power over India because America can frack us over if they chose to- they HAVE weilded this clout before. Sorry but if India is to realize its potential, it has to look beyond shiny trinkets from the US for perhaps lesser but far more worthwhile technology from the Russians. And as i said, there are many things where the Russians are better so we make up for it anyways.

I am talking about weapons systems that can win India a war , that can save millions of people and here you are talking about India realizing its potential ! Dunno what else to say.

[kumble_rocks]

And by the same logic why appease members of Club ummah ? Didnt they screw us more and for longer ? How does that logic work ? If Ummah then something else something else ?

Yes, We SHOULD not appease Ummah. In case you forgot, my stance is have Uniform Civil Code in India. And yes, conversion to Islam should be banned in India. Is this called appeasement ?