China fight with India must because the territorial issues.We should get our 90000 Sq. km. land which India is lawless occuping now(1962,Zhou Enlai tought the territorial would be solve by negotiation,so he dictated PLA evacuate,but India lawless occuping those land again.)But we never occupy New Delhi,because that's invasion.Do you konw the war between China and India in 1962?In that war,we get 6000 Indian captives (includ a general).But PLA only 90 soldiers died in this war.
0
Chinese Army VS Indian Army
Started by
colorwolf2000
, Nov 18 2002 06:09 AM
-
This topic is locked
110 replies to this topic
#41
rain319415
-
- Full Members
-
- 589 posts
CAPTAIN
- Interests:Pc games and Wars
Posted 28 November 2002 - 10:15 AM
This is my hometown-----The Chongqing city of PRC.
#42
Rakesh
-
- Jr. Members
-
- 230 posts
COLONEL
Posted 28 November 2002 - 12:25 PM
This must be the one of the more crazier topics I have seen on this board. I am shocked by the responses given by some of you. You are starting to grow complacent about Pakistani and Chinese power that you completely underestimate India.
While another China-India confrontation is extremely unlikely, I will add my two cents.
First look at both sides of border at the forces deployed. The Chinese have nothing really threatening in the area in terms of land and air power. Tibetan area is lacking proper infrastructure to support major Chinese offensive into India. India has a sufficient defensive force as well as aircraft already in place. If China wanted to invade India, it would require a massive mobilization. China's more powerful divisions and aircraft in the NorthEast will have to be moved to the Tibetan theatre. Chinese engineers will need to build neccessary infrastructure components - such as airfields and roads. All this, unlike in '62, will spark the attention of India - who will appropriately respond.
Second is there any pratical reason for China to invade India? China has its forces firmly deployed against other countries such as Russia, North Korea, SE Asia and Taiwan - why wouldn it suddenly bring India into the equation?
Sino-Indian ties are slowly warming up - this conflict will NEVER arise let us stop this thread.
While another China-India confrontation is extremely unlikely, I will add my two cents.
First look at both sides of border at the forces deployed. The Chinese have nothing really threatening in the area in terms of land and air power. Tibetan area is lacking proper infrastructure to support major Chinese offensive into India. India has a sufficient defensive force as well as aircraft already in place. If China wanted to invade India, it would require a massive mobilization. China's more powerful divisions and aircraft in the NorthEast will have to be moved to the Tibetan theatre. Chinese engineers will need to build neccessary infrastructure components - such as airfields and roads. All this, unlike in '62, will spark the attention of India - who will appropriately respond.
Second is there any pratical reason for China to invade India? China has its forces firmly deployed against other countries such as Russia, North Korea, SE Asia and Taiwan - why wouldn it suddenly bring India into the equation?
Sino-Indian ties are slowly warming up - this conflict will NEVER arise let us stop this thread.
#43
UnitedDiversity
-
- Jr. Members
-
- 507 posts
CAPTAIN
Posted 28 November 2002 - 03:22 PM
lifeisfun, on Nov 26 2002, 09:29 PM, said:
it's not in indias favor neither it's in favor chinese! so this is a BS topic!
#44
lifeisfun
-
- Banned
-
- 1,259 posts
BRIGADIER
Posted 28 November 2002 - 03:31 PM
my response is same as rakesh!
"Quartered in snow, silent to remain. When the bugle calls, they shall rise and march again."
#45
Kelsier
-
- Senior Members
-
- 9,225 posts
Rear Admiral
- Gender:Male
Posted 28 November 2002 - 04:12 PM
China will win like they did already 
Than this time Pakistan will take advantage of this and pick up the rest of India.
Than this time Pakistan will take advantage of this and pick up the rest of India.
#46
Rakesh
-
- Jr. Members
-
- 230 posts
COLONEL
Posted 28 November 2002 - 06:05 PM
My good friend Ameer,
What you talk about is highly improbable. China on the east and Pakistan on the west is India's nightmare scenario but it is highly unlikely. Even if such a situation should present itself, it is most unlikely that a single country will prove victorious.
What you talk about is highly improbable. China on the east and Pakistan on the west is India's nightmare scenario but it is highly unlikely. Even if such a situation should present itself, it is most unlikely that a single country will prove victorious.
#47
harpy1
-
- Banned
-
- 198 posts
COLONEL
Posted 29 November 2002 - 07:34 AM
Sorry but most of you just sit and make topics up with out giving the debate much thought.
China versis india in a scenario in which china invades can,t be done at this moment in time cause the chinks do not have armoured forces geared to a massive offensive campaign, THEY ARE DEFENSIVE IN NATURE, BUT CAN FIGHT LIMITED OFFENSIVE WAR.
To attack india along a 1000 mile border with the highest mountain range in between is not in china,s capacity. There army and airforce is geared to fighting a armoured war with russia.
You people are so stupid how the heck will you move 5000 tanks up the highest maountains in the world. Even assam is full of swamps and jungles.
THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK.
How far will chinase planes have to travel to bomb indian bases. India is a huge nation (this is not iraq or uk).
To bomb indian strategic assets you need long range strike planes.
They have 1950S BOMBERS. Q5s are a joke and su30 have only started to arrive. How many transport aircraft and helicopters will they need. Remember india is a nation of 1 billion.
More importantly if india was seriously challenged INDIA HAS A GDP of $600 billion dollars. They would increase defence expenditure 4 or even 5 fold from 2.5% to 10 or even 15%. thats 50,60 possible 70 billion dollars.
#### the hardware from Europe, Israel and RUssia, would pour in.
The only reason india spends only 2,5% is cause Pakistan is too small to invade india and china is not a serious military threat.
Don,.t start giving me they,ll nuke you bullshit. CAUSE great nations don,t go round nuking each other for fun. BE SERIOUS,
China is rapidly improving nation but most geared to economic growth. Like india which is also growing very fast in industrial power.
Their military is changing ie more modern weapons but they are USA DEFENSIVE SPECIFIC or at best Taiwan offensive specific.
India is offensive specific Pakistan. Indian military does not even seriously prepare for China mass attack is that remote.
If they did it would involve More planes, attach helicopters. cruise missles,
Artillary, para troopers and AWACS/Satilites. Armour will pay no real part due to terrain problems.
CHINA can,t airlift thousands of tanks over the himlayers. They have fewer transports than india. Look it up for yourselves.
WHAT A STUPID TOPIC
China versis india in a scenario in which china invades can,t be done at this moment in time cause the chinks do not have armoured forces geared to a massive offensive campaign, THEY ARE DEFENSIVE IN NATURE, BUT CAN FIGHT LIMITED OFFENSIVE WAR.
To attack india along a 1000 mile border with the highest mountain range in between is not in china,s capacity. There army and airforce is geared to fighting a armoured war with russia.
You people are so stupid how the heck will you move 5000 tanks up the highest maountains in the world. Even assam is full of swamps and jungles.
THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK.
How far will chinase planes have to travel to bomb indian bases. India is a huge nation (this is not iraq or uk).
To bomb indian strategic assets you need long range strike planes.
They have 1950S BOMBERS. Q5s are a joke and su30 have only started to arrive. How many transport aircraft and helicopters will they need. Remember india is a nation of 1 billion.
More importantly if india was seriously challenged INDIA HAS A GDP of $600 billion dollars. They would increase defence expenditure 4 or even 5 fold from 2.5% to 10 or even 15%. thats 50,60 possible 70 billion dollars.
#### the hardware from Europe, Israel and RUssia, would pour in.
The only reason india spends only 2,5% is cause Pakistan is too small to invade india and china is not a serious military threat.
Don,.t start giving me they,ll nuke you bullshit. CAUSE great nations don,t go round nuking each other for fun. BE SERIOUS,
China is rapidly improving nation but most geared to economic growth. Like india which is also growing very fast in industrial power.
Their military is changing ie more modern weapons but they are USA DEFENSIVE SPECIFIC or at best Taiwan offensive specific.
India is offensive specific Pakistan. Indian military does not even seriously prepare for China mass attack is that remote.
If they did it would involve More planes, attach helicopters. cruise missles,
Artillary, para troopers and AWACS/Satilites. Armour will pay no real part due to terrain problems.
CHINA can,t airlift thousands of tanks over the himlayers. They have fewer transports than india. Look it up for yourselves.
WHAT A STUPID TOPIC
#48
rain319415
-
- Full Members
-
- 589 posts
CAPTAIN
- Interests:Pc games and Wars
Posted 30 November 2002 - 02:48 AM
The war between China and India never break out in the future 20 years.In fact,China had been acquiesce
the line of actual control between china and india.
the line of actual control between china and india.
This is my hometown-----The Chongqing city of PRC.
#49
fateh71
-
- Banned
-
- 187 posts
COLONEL
Posted 02 December 2002 - 07:59 AM
This is 2002, not 62. We are still outnumbered but not the ill-equipped force that we were 40 years ago.
My take: If India and China go to war, China will seize the offensive and attempt to steamroll into Indian territory. But the logistical nightmare of preparing and sustaining a military offensive south of the highest mountain range in the world and the opposition offered by a vastly improved Indian war machine will bog down into a slugging match in the border areas.
This time, we're ready. The only military nightmare for India is a joint Sino-Pak offensive, but if that happens there will be even bigger players joining the ring.
Finally, China will not attack India. An Indo-Pak war, if it doesn't go nuclear, has the potential to remain confined in geopolitical terms to South Asia, a Sino-Indian war will rattle EVERY GLOBAL POWER EQUATION.
My take: If India and China go to war, China will seize the offensive and attempt to steamroll into Indian territory. But the logistical nightmare of preparing and sustaining a military offensive south of the highest mountain range in the world and the opposition offered by a vastly improved Indian war machine will bog down into a slugging match in the border areas.
This time, we're ready. The only military nightmare for India is a joint Sino-Pak offensive, but if that happens there will be even bigger players joining the ring.
Finally, China will not attack India. An Indo-Pak war, if it doesn't go nuclear, has the potential to remain confined in geopolitical terms to South Asia, a Sino-Indian war will rattle EVERY GLOBAL POWER EQUATION.
#50
thouse
-
- Senior Members
-
- 3,463 posts
GENERAL
Posted 02 December 2002 - 10:30 AM
This is an article from the NY Times stating that China has kicked India's ass. Somebody should post this on the BR site and see what happens to those RSS fanatics.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 29, 2002
Once a Close Economic Rival of China, India Falls Behind
By KEITH BRADSHER
ONEPAT, India — Raj K. Gupta, a partner in one of India's largest shoe manufacturers, makes a dreaded but necessary trip every two months to Hong Kong and then into Guangdong Province in southern China.
He goes to buy Chinese shoemaking machinery, because India has few producers of such machinery.
He goes to purchase Chinese synthetic leather, because India makes little of the material and most of that is of low quality.
He goes to visit Chinese shoe factories, to draw lessons from their enormous size, advanced technology and highly organized operations.
When he is done, after eating too much Chinese food, which he dislikes, he flies home and thinks about how India, despite democracy, has fallen behind China, a one-party state struggling with the aftermath of Communist economic policies.
"If we were more developed here I wouldn't have to go so much," he groused, sitting in his office, where incense burned in a corner before a group of paintings and statues of Hindu gods. "We should have that kind of technology, both for our international competitiveness and for our domestic market."
India's continued backwardness compared with its neighbor across the Himalayas has become a national obsession. The world's two most populous countries, China and India were close economic rivals just two decades ago, each struggling to bring progress to vast numbers of impoverished peasants.
But now China, by quickly converting much of its economy to an unfettered and even rapacious version of capitalism, has surged far ahead. The average Chinese citizen now earns $890 a year, compared with $460 for the typical Indian, according to the World Bank.
Only slightly more numerous than Indians these days, Chinese citizens now buy one-third more cars and light trucks each year, 3 times as many television sets and 12 times as many air conditioners. China has high-speed freeways, modern airports and highly efficient ports that are helping it dominate a growing number of manufacturing industries.
India's potholed roads, aging airports and clogged ports make exports difficult. China attracted as much foreign investment last month as India did all of last year.
Some blame India's lagging performance on the country's still stifling bureaucracy, although many market-limiting regulations have been lifted since New Delhi began dismantling its "license raj" in 1991.
Some blame the country's cultural and religious traditions, contending that a national thirst for economic equality may have stunted progress. Some even maintain that a democracy may be less able than an authoritarian government to promote growth in a poor country.
Like China, India has a growing middle class — it is just not growing as quickly, perhaps in part because India's expansion started in 1991, 13 years after China's.
The Chinese economy has been expanding by 8 to 10 percent a year for the last two decades, while India's has been growing at a still healthy 6 percent only for the last decade. India's population is growing twice as fast as China's, moreover, so income growth per person has been slower in India.
Both countries are encumbered by many government-owned enterprises with low productivity — for India, most notably, its monopoly on distribution of electricity.
The Indian economy has a few genuine bright spots. Pockets of high-tech prosperity have popped up in two southern cities, Bangalore and Hyderabad.
These have benefited from India's willingness to allow free trade and minimal regulation for new industries, often involving computer software, telephone service centers for financial institutions and other service industries that do not involve moving goods on India's poor roads.
But success stories like Bangalore and Hyderabad remain a tiny part of the overall economy, because software companies hire workers by the hundreds and not by the tens of thousands, as manufacturers do.
"You look around and the rest is a disaster," said Joydeep Mukherji, an Asia analyst with Standard & Poor's. "One billion people are not going to be programming computers; they're going to be making shoes and cars, and serving coffee."
Indian shoe companies had as much cheap labor available two decades ago as Chinese companies, and workers here were better educated. Yet Chinese manufacturers increasingly dominate the global shoe market. "In the shoe industry, China has gotten ahead and will stay ahead," said Martin Merz, a partner in NJB Merz Ltd., a shoe company in Hong Kong.
Mr. Gupta and his family control the Action Group, India's second-largest shoemaker, after Bata. But the newest of Action's dozen factories, next to a dirt road across the city line in New Delhi, is unlikely to inspire fear in foreign competitors. The cramped building has room for just 150 workers, not enough to achieve the economies of scale of Chinese factories, where up to 20,000 toil in a single complex.
Mr. Gupta said local regulations prevented him from building anything bigger. Particularly onerous are laws limiting how much land a company can acquire in a city. The laws are intended to discourage speculation and leave land available for housing, but they make land expensive for new business ventures.
To walk inside the dimly lit factory on a recent morning was to enter a pungent cloud of glue vapor rising from the open pots and brushes that the workers use in assembling shoes. A. K. Sharma, the factory manager, explained that the factory's ventilation had been switched off because of an electricity blackout.
The factory had been running for the last three days on diesel generators, at more than twice the cost of using electricity from the municipal grid; another factory here in Sonepat runs an hour or two on generators every day because of blackouts.
Power failures are rare in the Chinese province of Guangdong, where domestic and foreign companies have invested heavily in power plants, but they are a regular occurrence here. Yet Mr. Gupta had to build his latest factory in the city because electricity was not available at all in many rural areas.
Stacked in the basement are rows of large boxes, each holding dozens of pairs of shoes. Scribbled in purple pen on the sides are the size, style and color of each box's contents. There are no computer-printed labels, and shoe stores in India do not expect them, Mr. Sharma explained.
The boxes, next to many sacks of raw materials, signal another problem. The factory keeps a two-month supply of raw materials and a one-month supply of finished shoes, a huge inventory tying up money that could otherwise be invested in modern machinery. By contrast, Chinese factories keep small inventories, because they receive regular deliveries of raw materials from nearby suppliers and ship finished goods easily on smooth highways to efficient ports like Hong Kong's.
The minimum wage for urban industrial work here is $3 a day. While fairly high by the standards of very poor countries, it is lower than the wages in Guangdong, where competition for skilled shoemakers has pushed up pay.
Some changes are starting to appear here. Construction has begun on new freeways. A quarter of India's states have repealed laws limiting business ownership of land in cities. The central government is mulling whether to allow private distribution of electricity, a step that could bring the investment needed to make blackouts less common.
India is starting to lower its 35 percent tariffs on a wide range of goods, including shoes, forcing producers to compete internationally. Mr. Gupta said he was unconcerned, because tariffs will also fall for imported shoemaking machinery and because he believes that Indian workers make higher-quality shoes.
Indeed, the Gupta family's latest project has little to do with shoes, reflecting instead the human values and limited interest in the global market that still characterize many Indian businesses.
Comfortable with its share of the domestic market and not eager to increase the 3 percent of production that it exports, the family is donating $9 million for the construction of a five-building, state-of-the-art, nonprofit hospital to care for the poor.
While an American family might seek as large a business empire as possible, Mr. Gupta said, his family is more interested in public service.
"What would we have done with that empire?" he asked. "It's a matter of thinking."
Copyright The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 29, 2002
Once a Close Economic Rival of China, India Falls Behind
By KEITH BRADSHER
ONEPAT, India — Raj K. Gupta, a partner in one of India's largest shoe manufacturers, makes a dreaded but necessary trip every two months to Hong Kong and then into Guangdong Province in southern China.
He goes to buy Chinese shoemaking machinery, because India has few producers of such machinery.
He goes to purchase Chinese synthetic leather, because India makes little of the material and most of that is of low quality.
He goes to visit Chinese shoe factories, to draw lessons from their enormous size, advanced technology and highly organized operations.
When he is done, after eating too much Chinese food, which he dislikes, he flies home and thinks about how India, despite democracy, has fallen behind China, a one-party state struggling with the aftermath of Communist economic policies.
"If we were more developed here I wouldn't have to go so much," he groused, sitting in his office, where incense burned in a corner before a group of paintings and statues of Hindu gods. "We should have that kind of technology, both for our international competitiveness and for our domestic market."
India's continued backwardness compared with its neighbor across the Himalayas has become a national obsession. The world's two most populous countries, China and India were close economic rivals just two decades ago, each struggling to bring progress to vast numbers of impoverished peasants.
But now China, by quickly converting much of its economy to an unfettered and even rapacious version of capitalism, has surged far ahead. The average Chinese citizen now earns $890 a year, compared with $460 for the typical Indian, according to the World Bank.
Only slightly more numerous than Indians these days, Chinese citizens now buy one-third more cars and light trucks each year, 3 times as many television sets and 12 times as many air conditioners. China has high-speed freeways, modern airports and highly efficient ports that are helping it dominate a growing number of manufacturing industries.
India's potholed roads, aging airports and clogged ports make exports difficult. China attracted as much foreign investment last month as India did all of last year.
Some blame India's lagging performance on the country's still stifling bureaucracy, although many market-limiting regulations have been lifted since New Delhi began dismantling its "license raj" in 1991.
Some blame the country's cultural and religious traditions, contending that a national thirst for economic equality may have stunted progress. Some even maintain that a democracy may be less able than an authoritarian government to promote growth in a poor country.
Like China, India has a growing middle class — it is just not growing as quickly, perhaps in part because India's expansion started in 1991, 13 years after China's.
The Chinese economy has been expanding by 8 to 10 percent a year for the last two decades, while India's has been growing at a still healthy 6 percent only for the last decade. India's population is growing twice as fast as China's, moreover, so income growth per person has been slower in India.
Both countries are encumbered by many government-owned enterprises with low productivity — for India, most notably, its monopoly on distribution of electricity.
The Indian economy has a few genuine bright spots. Pockets of high-tech prosperity have popped up in two southern cities, Bangalore and Hyderabad.
These have benefited from India's willingness to allow free trade and minimal regulation for new industries, often involving computer software, telephone service centers for financial institutions and other service industries that do not involve moving goods on India's poor roads.
But success stories like Bangalore and Hyderabad remain a tiny part of the overall economy, because software companies hire workers by the hundreds and not by the tens of thousands, as manufacturers do.
"You look around and the rest is a disaster," said Joydeep Mukherji, an Asia analyst with Standard & Poor's. "One billion people are not going to be programming computers; they're going to be making shoes and cars, and serving coffee."
Indian shoe companies had as much cheap labor available two decades ago as Chinese companies, and workers here were better educated. Yet Chinese manufacturers increasingly dominate the global shoe market. "In the shoe industry, China has gotten ahead and will stay ahead," said Martin Merz, a partner in NJB Merz Ltd., a shoe company in Hong Kong.
Mr. Gupta and his family control the Action Group, India's second-largest shoemaker, after Bata. But the newest of Action's dozen factories, next to a dirt road across the city line in New Delhi, is unlikely to inspire fear in foreign competitors. The cramped building has room for just 150 workers, not enough to achieve the economies of scale of Chinese factories, where up to 20,000 toil in a single complex.
Mr. Gupta said local regulations prevented him from building anything bigger. Particularly onerous are laws limiting how much land a company can acquire in a city. The laws are intended to discourage speculation and leave land available for housing, but they make land expensive for new business ventures.
To walk inside the dimly lit factory on a recent morning was to enter a pungent cloud of glue vapor rising from the open pots and brushes that the workers use in assembling shoes. A. K. Sharma, the factory manager, explained that the factory's ventilation had been switched off because of an electricity blackout.
The factory had been running for the last three days on diesel generators, at more than twice the cost of using electricity from the municipal grid; another factory here in Sonepat runs an hour or two on generators every day because of blackouts.
Power failures are rare in the Chinese province of Guangdong, where domestic and foreign companies have invested heavily in power plants, but they are a regular occurrence here. Yet Mr. Gupta had to build his latest factory in the city because electricity was not available at all in many rural areas.
Stacked in the basement are rows of large boxes, each holding dozens of pairs of shoes. Scribbled in purple pen on the sides are the size, style and color of each box's contents. There are no computer-printed labels, and shoe stores in India do not expect them, Mr. Sharma explained.
The boxes, next to many sacks of raw materials, signal another problem. The factory keeps a two-month supply of raw materials and a one-month supply of finished shoes, a huge inventory tying up money that could otherwise be invested in modern machinery. By contrast, Chinese factories keep small inventories, because they receive regular deliveries of raw materials from nearby suppliers and ship finished goods easily on smooth highways to efficient ports like Hong Kong's.
The minimum wage for urban industrial work here is $3 a day. While fairly high by the standards of very poor countries, it is lower than the wages in Guangdong, where competition for skilled shoemakers has pushed up pay.
Some changes are starting to appear here. Construction has begun on new freeways. A quarter of India's states have repealed laws limiting business ownership of land in cities. The central government is mulling whether to allow private distribution of electricity, a step that could bring the investment needed to make blackouts less common.
India is starting to lower its 35 percent tariffs on a wide range of goods, including shoes, forcing producers to compete internationally. Mr. Gupta said he was unconcerned, because tariffs will also fall for imported shoemaking machinery and because he believes that Indian workers make higher-quality shoes.
Indeed, the Gupta family's latest project has little to do with shoes, reflecting instead the human values and limited interest in the global market that still characterize many Indian businesses.
Comfortable with its share of the domestic market and not eager to increase the 3 percent of production that it exports, the family is donating $9 million for the construction of a five-building, state-of-the-art, nonprofit hospital to care for the poor.
While an American family might seek as large a business empire as possible, Mr. Gupta said, his family is more interested in public service.
"What would we have done with that empire?" he asked. "It's a matter of thinking."
Copyright The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
"I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
#51
lifeisfun
-
- Banned
-
- 1,259 posts
BRIGADIER
Posted 02 December 2002 - 12:26 PM
dude just browse arnd the forum b4 posting an article..it has been already posted!
"Quartered in snow, silent to remain. When the bugle calls, they shall rise and march again."
#52
thouse
-
- Senior Members
-
- 3,463 posts
GENERAL
Posted 02 December 2002 - 12:37 PM
Sorry.
"I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
#53
Archangelesk99
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,620 posts
BRIGADIER
- Gender:Male
Posted 02 December 2002 - 03:53 PM
----While an American family might seek as large a business empire as possible, Mr. Gupta said, his family is more interested in public service.
"What would we have done with that empire?" he asked. "It's a matter of thinking."----
Mmmmmmmm, this quote from the aforesaid article is enough to warm the cockles of my heart
Very good that, whether it be Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Vietnamese etc. etc., these core cultural values remain intact, even when the economy becomes westernised. Nay, it is especially even more important then!
"What would we have done with that empire?" he asked. "It's a matter of thinking."----
Mmmmmmmm, this quote from the aforesaid article is enough to warm the cockles of my heart
Very good that, whether it be Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Vietnamese etc. etc., these core cultural values remain intact, even when the economy becomes westernised. Nay, it is especially even more important then!
#54
USAM
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,641 posts
BRIGADIER
Posted 07 December 2002 - 06:06 PM
Guys China cannot challenge America for now they need 20-25 years to bring their econ... at this rate to America and 10-15 or more years to bring the tech = or may be little less to USA and 20-25 or more years to say """' Bring it own"""""""""
Indians are acutally cowards and they will be outnummered and if they can't take on army 3 times small then their size then you can dream .................. and if Pak had the same army and same GDP then without nuke India would be taken over by years. sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Indians are acutally cowards and they will be outnummered and if they can't take on army 3 times small then their size then you can dream .................. and if Pak had the same army and same GDP then without nuke India would be taken over by years. sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
#55
UD2
-
- Senior Members
-
- 3,955 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Canada
Posted 10 December 2002 - 05:36 PM
again... I said this long ago...
if a war start between China and India... the Indian soldiers will employ their best and most praticed tactic...
drop their guns and RUN LIKE HELL
if a war start between China and India... the Indian soldiers will employ their best and most praticed tactic...
drop their guns and RUN LIKE HELL
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed" - President Eisenhower
#56
lifeisfun
-
- Banned
-
- 1,259 posts
BRIGADIER
Posted 12 December 2002 - 12:45 PM
well one more of yar wet dreams...but hey u hav the full right to dream in yar little world
"Quartered in snow, silent to remain. When the bugle calls, they shall rise and march again."
#57
zimo
-
- Full Members
-
- 98 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
- Interests:shooting, chess, driving, paragliding, wine
- Location:India
Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:38 AM
QUOTE(PakistanSSG @ Nov 24 2002, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My friend, if a 10 man assault team of Mujahideen can get through to india, what will stop an army like Chinas? And what do you mean by "Largest Professional Army in the world"? So that means india's army is more professional compared to Chinas and yeah, and would you kindly tell me WHO did WHAT to WHOM in 1962?
Can you please define "huge strategic depth"?
And if the indian army is 1 MILLION strong as you say, how in the world have the mujahideen today, been able to breach through your 'professional' force and caused havoc in your temple?
Can you please define "huge strategic depth"?
And if the indian army is 1 MILLION strong as you say, how in the world have the mujahideen today, been able to breach through your 'professional' force and caused havoc in your temple?
Dear:
Rats and Dogs can enter anywere.
#58
zimo
-
- Full Members
-
- 98 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
- Interests:shooting, chess, driving, paragliding, wine
- Location:India
Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:43 AM
QUOTE(rain319415 @ Nov 28 2002, 09:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
China fight with India must because the territorial issues.We should get our 90000 Sq. km. land which India is lawless occuping now(1962,Zhou Enlai tought the territorial would be solve by negotiation,so he dictated PLA evacuate,but India lawless occuping those land again.)But we never occupy New Delhi,because that's invasion.Do you konw the war between China and India in 1962?In that war,we get 6000 Indian captives (includ a general).But PLA only 90 soldiers died in this war.
oh! really: had an idea of 1965 conflict.
#59
xFalvira
-
- Full Members
-
- 553 posts
CAPTAIN
- Gender:Male
- Location:North-East India
Posted 21 March 2008 - 05:41 AM
epic gravedigging. a six year old thread brought back to life. long live the forum necromancers!!!!
"Fantasies are free and untaxed."
“On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog.”
“Information on the Internet is subject to the same rules and regulations as conversation at a bar.”
"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."
“Religion is a human creation.”
“On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog.”
“Information on the Internet is subject to the same rules and regulations as conversation at a bar.”
"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."
“Religion is a human creation.”
#60
Sino-PakFriendship
-
- Full Members
-
- 86 posts
COLONEL
Posted 21 March 2008 - 08:00 AM
China and India will not have any war unless India completely invades Pakistan or joins USA to invade Tibet.
#61
speedyturtle
-
- Full Members
-
- 539 posts
CAPTAIN
- Gender:Male
- Location:London
Posted 21 March 2008 - 03:04 PM
China, India and Pakistan are three nuclear powers and any war between any of these countries would be diabolical and no one would make a mistake like that.
SPEEDY
enjoy
SPEEDY
enjoy
My Forums
http://www.talklifeforums.com
Only in PAKISTAN we make the most corrupt leaders the most powerful men.
YA ALLAH MUJH PE, MERE PAKISTAN PE AUR MERE MUSALMAAN BHAIYON PE APNA KARAM RAKHNA.
http://www.talklifeforums.com
Only in PAKISTAN we make the most corrupt leaders the most powerful men.
YA ALLAH MUJH PE, MERE PAKISTAN PE AUR MERE MUSALMAAN BHAIYON PE APNA KARAM RAKHNA.
#62
rahulj
-
- Full Members
-
- 200 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 March 2008 - 01:28 AM
QUOTE(speedyturtle @ Mar 21 2008, 04:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
China, India and Pakistan are three nuclear powers and any war between any of these countries would be diabolical and no one would make a mistake like that.
SPEEDY
enjoy
SPEEDY
enjoy
Did i just see a poll option as Tie?!!? Wt kinda buster wud have come up with such options!?
#63
Best of the Best
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,953 posts
GENERAL
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 March 2008 - 06:04 AM
The Chinese would bruce Lee indian armys @ss simply put they would get their asses handed over to em no comparision between the two Chinese are superior hands down when your comparing the two armies, Although Airforce and Naval warfare would be a whole different ball game both sides have decent capability.
#64
Alkhalid-19
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,972 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Pakhtunkhwa
Posted 24 March 2008 - 07:58 AM
-China will start a bombardement for one week
- over the Himalaya will start air battles
- after one week air battle China will start a havy Bombardement with all Artillary calibers..and at the same time the Invasion from the ground and air
-Sea Battles between India and China navy will start at the golf of bengal
--> than there will be one question ...what do pakistan ?
- over the Himalaya will start air battles
- after one week air battle China will start a havy Bombardement with all Artillary calibers..and at the same time the Invasion from the ground and air
-Sea Battles between India and China navy will start at the golf of bengal
--> than there will be one question ...what do pakistan ?
Best Defense is offensive !
#65
el nino
-
- Full Members
-
- 265 posts
COLONEL
Posted 24 March 2008 - 12:13 PM
Best bet for Pakistan to stay out of it i think
#66
Alkhalid-19
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,972 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Pakhtunkhwa
Posted 24 March 2008 - 02:44 PM
QUOTE(el nino @ Mar 24 2008, 07:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Best bet for Pakistan to stay out of it i think
hahahaha haha yes why not that would say all Indians because they know. that when pakistan start a massive atack at the West-Indian-Border it would be the end of India !
Best Defense is offensive !
#67
ballistic
-
- Full Members
-
- 304 posts
COLONEL
Posted 24 March 2008 - 03:42 PM
QUOTE(rahulj @ Mar 24 2008, 01:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Did i just see a poll option as Tie?!!? Wt kinda buster wud have come up with such options!?
there is a situation called stale mate which is very possible in any war situations, especially between 2 foes of comparable capabilities. this situation mite also come into picture due to peripheral reasons like international pressure, economic condition, public reaction and so on.
in past there has been stale mate (like in 65 indo pak war) and we mite see it in future too...
#68
rahulj
-
- Full Members
-
- 200 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 March 2008 - 09:00 PM
QUOTE(ballistic @ Mar 24 2008, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
there is a situation called stale mate which is very possible in any war situations, especially between 2 foes of comparable capabilities. this situation mite also come into picture due to peripheral reasons like international pressure, economic condition, public reaction and so on.
in past there has been stale mate (like in 65 indo pak war) and we mite see it in future too...
in past there has been stale mate (like in 65 indo pak war) and we mite see it in future too...
I understood that buddy! But the choice of words make is looks like a Football match rather than a war, which is gonna spoil so many ppl's life ! So the head banging :)
#69
Rahul MKI
-
- Full Members
-
- 153 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:21 AM
QUOTE(Sino-PakFriendship @ Mar 21 2008, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
China and India will not have any war unless India completely invades Pakistan or joins USA to invade Tibet.
Well said.
War is nowhere in between India and China. Only thing is resolving LAC and related. Trade is working as a catalyst for INDO-CHINA fraindship.
So nothing to say about this topic. This topic is something like.................................
#70
Rahul MKI
-
- Full Members
-
- 153 posts
COLONEL
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:30 AM
QUOTE(Alkhalid-19 @ Mar 24 2008, 02:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
it would be the end of India !
A JOKE!!! for generations to come. Make sure it passes to ur GRAND..........GRAND..............GRAND.......................
#71
Alkhalid-19
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,972 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Pakhtunkhwa
Posted 25 March 2008 - 07:47 AM
QUOTE(Rahul MKI @ Mar 25 2008, 01:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
A JOKE!!! for generations to come. Make sure it passes to ur GRAND..........GRAND..............GRAND.......................
yes it can be a joke it can be also the truth !!
Best Defense is offensive !
#72
Alkhalid-19
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,972 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Pakhtunkhwa
Posted 25 March 2008 - 08:02 AM
You all Indian here in this Forum should know that pakistan Armour and Artillary Corps are more capable and effectiv than the Indian Corps...with the Jf-17 Fleet and J-7PG and J-7P air guard or Air shield !
Best Defense is offensive !
#73
Mangla
-
- Senior Members
-
- 1,138 posts
BRIGADIER
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:21 PM
In every class of weaponary Chinese land army is way more advanced. All class of weapons of India are imported whilst Chinese are home developed or based on foreign know how. India is still proud of developing BMP 2 copy whilst China is making own version of BMP 3 which has an indiginous hull design. Chinese T 96 and T 99 has active and passive weapon systems. Indian T 90 does not unless they decide to import.
Indians believe that they are a multi party democracy makes them superior.
Even Chinese admit they are way behind US but I recall they fought US to a standstill in Korea, when the gap between the two societies was immeasurable.
What is the Indians counterpart of Sinodefence. Chinese are very modest of own systems whilst Indians glorify their foreign systems as the best.
Indians believe that they are a multi party democracy makes them superior.
Even Chinese admit they are way behind US but I recall they fought US to a standstill in Korea, when the gap between the two societies was immeasurable.
What is the Indians counterpart of Sinodefence. Chinese are very modest of own systems whilst Indians glorify their foreign systems as the best.
ONE PARTY STATE IS THE WAY FORWARD. LPD HAS DOMINATED JAPANESE POLITICS AND LOOK AT ACHIEVEMENTS.
#74
Jag
-
- Full Members
-
- 756 posts
MAJOR
- Location:New Zealand
Posted 27 March 2008 - 05:53 PM
QUOTE(UD2 @ Dec 11 2002, 12:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
again... I said this long ago...
if a war start between China and India... the Indian soldiers will employ their best and most praticed tactic...
drop their guns and RUN LIKE HELL :D :D :D
if a war start between China and India... the Indian soldiers will employ their best and most praticed tactic...
drop their guns and RUN LIKE HELL :D :D :D
I am sorry, I restrained myself from replying this earlier.
But dropping their guns and running is already demonstrate once in Kargil, I am not sure if it was Indian or some else, but what I know was it had happen or maybe Indians could learn something from others
Cheers
#75
Jag
-
- Full Members
-
- 756 posts
MAJOR
- Location:New Zealand
Posted 27 March 2008 - 05:59 PM
QUOTE(Alkhalid-19 @ Mar 26 2008, 03:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You all Indian here in this Forum should know that pakistan Armour and Artillary Corps are more capable and effectiv than the Indian Corps...with the Jf-17 Fleet and J-7PG and J-7P air guard or Air shield !
I second that, Indians will be crushed in first hour of the war.
#76
Mangla
-
- Senior Members
-
- 1,138 posts
BRIGADIER
- Gender:Male
Posted 27 March 2008 - 06:29 PM
QUOTE(Jag @ Mar 27 2008, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I second that, Indians will be crushed in first hour of the war.
Indian army is no match to the Chinese. Low to hi tech weapons are imported because own weapons are inferior. Chinese are producing weapons on par with the export version weapons of Russia and. Still China has a way to go. India does not have a BM that can reach Beijing, recently they been claimind to be developing one lol. If India uses nukes first, India will be the obvious loser.
Stop India v Pakistan. Indians only defense is to compare our forces against theres.
ONE PARTY STATE IS THE WAY FORWARD. LPD HAS DOMINATED JAPANESE POLITICS AND LOOK AT ACHIEVEMENTS.
#77
Jag
-
- Full Members
-
- 756 posts
MAJOR
- Location:New Zealand
Posted 27 March 2008 - 07:12 PM
QUOTE(Mangla @ Mar 28 2008, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Indian army is no match to the Chinese. Low to hi tech weapons are imported because own weapons are inferior. Chinese are producing weapons on par with the export version weapons of Russia and. Still China has a way to go. India does not have a BM that can reach Beijing, recently they been claimind to be developing one lol. If India uses nukes first, India will be the obvious loser.
Stop India v Pakistan. Indians only defense is to compare our forces against theres.
Stop India v Pakistan. Indians only defense is to compare our forces against theres.
I never said India is superiour then China, But if you say Chinese force are morden or Hi-tech, I don't totally agree there, maybe to some extend but not full arm forces.
Do you still have Mig-19 in active service?, If Yes, you know what I mean.
#78
Mangla
-
- Senior Members
-
- 1,138 posts
BRIGADIER
- Gender:Male
Posted 27 March 2008 - 07:26 PM
QUOTE(Jag @ Mar 27 2008, 08:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I never said India is superiour then China, But if you say Chinese force are morden or Hi-tech, I don't totally agree there, maybe to some extend but not full arm forces.
Do you still have Mig-19 in active service?, If Yes, you know what I mean.
Do you still have Mig-19 in active service?, If Yes, you know what I mean.
Read Sinodefence. Mig 19 is retired. Maybe use Mig 19 for drones. By the way it is land forces we talking about.
Not all of PLA is modernised. A few army groups have had a influx of newer technologies, not all. The Chinese are building modern weapons on a small scale until newer weapon is built. They see no need to replace all weapons with more modern variants because of the expense and that these weapons can easily become obsolete. Land wise China has no threat therefore bulk of money is spent on airforce and navy. India is still way behind China look at missile development. China can hit all of India the same cannot be said of China. Artillary, tank, helicopter etc etc. Tell me one field India is equal or advanced?
If comparing America to China yes that is a different story but were not.
ONE PARTY STATE IS THE WAY FORWARD. LPD HAS DOMINATED JAPANESE POLITICS AND LOOK AT ACHIEVEMENTS.
#79
Alkhalid-19
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,972 posts
GENERAL
- Location:Pakhtunkhwa
Posted 28 March 2008 - 07:12 AM
QUOTE(Jag @ Mar 28 2008, 12:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I second that, Indians will be crushed in first hour of the war.
hahah no I have speak from weeks and not hour ..you should be realistic like me
Best Defense is offensive !
#80
namec
-
- Full Members
-
- 784 posts
MAJOR
Posted 28 March 2008 - 08:41 PM
QUOTE
Not all of PLA is modernised. A few army groups have had a influx of newer technologies, not all. The Chinese are building modern weapons on a small scale until newer weapon is built. They see no need to replace all weapons with more modern variants because of the expense and that these weapons can easily become obsolete. Land wise China has no threat therefore bulk of money is spent on airforce and navy. India is still way behind China look at missile development. China can hit all of India the same cannot be said of China. Artillary, tank, helicopter etc etc. Tell me one field India is equal or advanced?
Do you understand the concept of stable supply lines? The potency of the army is decided by mobility and the availability of supplies. Once your supply lines are overextended or interdicted the army is as good as finished. China's better tanks and artillery isn't going to help them across the Himalayas. Its as absurd as tanks fighting at Kargil. So an armoured thrust is out. The only viable alternative is through Burma. To do that you need to first convince the Burmese junta(they'll be in trouble if the offensive fails). And second problem again is overextended supply lines.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: PakistaniDefence.Com