What's new

Featured BD not interested in US defence deal under Indo-Pacific strategy

Taimoor Khan

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 20, 2016
11,341
4
16,899
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Excuse me Sir, was not it Pakistan that sponsored Taleban in its soil on the promise that Taleban will help Pakistan on the Kashmir issue once they are in power in Afghanistan?

Now, it is the Taleban that is sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan with the financial encouragement from India. You have slapped your own face and are now blaming others for the devil you are facing.

Goes to show how much you know about the situation.

Those who you are referring to, are bunch of mercenaries, called TTP , and they got nothing to do with the Afghan Taliban. This group was formed by some individuals which were "released" by CIA from Guantanamo Bay, flown into Afghansitan and then use afghan soil to launch terror operation right under the nose of CIA/RAW. Your ignorance is not my problem but I would strongly recommend to educate yourself.
 

bluesky

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 14, 2016
10,054
0
11,342
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Japan
Goes to show how much you know about the situation.

Those who you are referring to, are bunch of mercenaries, called TTP , and they got nothing to do with the Afghan Taliban. This group was formed by some individuals which were "released" by CIA from Guantanamo Bay, flown into Afghansitan and then use afghan soil to launch terror operation right under the nose of CIA/RAW. Your ignorance is not my problem but I would strongly recommend to educate yourself.
I am not talking about TTP (Tehrik-e-Taleban in Pakistan). It is only in 2004. Now, read what Taliban was established by your fundamentalist President Ziaul Haq. I am a foreigner now in your country, so I cannot teach you. But, you should learn the truth by reading texts written not by your govt but by neutral writers.

Everyone in the world knows why and how Taliban was established and who trained them in which soil. Now, read below:


"Pakistan's President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq feared that the Soviets were planning to invade also Balochistan, Pakistan, so he sent Akhtar Abdur Rahman to Saudi Arabia to garner support for the Afghan resistance against Soviet occupation forces. A while later, the US CIA and Saudi Arabian General Intelligence Directorate (GID) funnelled funding and equipment through the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence Agency (ISI) to the Afghan mujahideen.[94]

About 90,000 Afghans, including Mohammed Omar, were trained by Pakistan's ISI during the 1980s.[94] The British Professor Carole Hillenbrand concluded that the Taliban have arisen from those US-Saudi-Pakistan-supported mujahideen: "The West helped the Taliban to fight the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan".
 

Taimoor Khan

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 20, 2016
11,341
4
16,899
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
I am not talking about TTP (Tehrik-e-Taleban in Pakistan). It is only in 2004. Now, read what Taliban was established by your fundamentalist President Ziaul Haq. I am a foreigner now in your country, so I cannot teach you. But, you should learn the truth by reading texts written not by your govt but by neutral writers.

Everyone in the world knows why and how Taliban was established and who trained them in which soil. Now, read below:


"Pakistan's President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq feared that the Soviets were planning to invade also Balochistan, Pakistan, so he sent Akhtar Abdur Rahman to Saudi Arabia to garner support for the Afghan resistance against Soviet occupation forces. A while later, the US CIA and Saudi Arabian General Intelligence Directorate (GID) funnelled funding and equipment through the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence Agency (ISI) to the Afghan mujahideen.[94]

About 90,000 Afghans, including Mohammed Omar, were trained by Pakistan's ISI during the 1980s.[94] The British Professor Carole Hillenbrand concluded that the Taliban have arisen from those US-Saudi-Pakistan-supported mujahideen: "The West helped the Taliban to fight the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan".
LOOK. Afghan Taliban, the original Taliban, the ones who are now negotiating peace with American in Doha, the rulers of Afghansitan before 9/11,...… THEY ARE COMPLETELY separate to the TTP (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) . Its TTP who are doing all sorts of terrorism in Pakistan, NOT AFGHAN TALIBAN. TTP are not in any shape of form answerable to Afghan Taliban (the original Talibans) neither do they listen to them. TTP is controlled and financed by CIA/RAW. TTP is CIA/RAW brain child. Its founder was the ex
Guantanamo Bay inmate called Baitullah Mahsood , who was released and never handed over to Pakistan rather send to Afghanistan, from where he lunched his terror campaign against Pakistan with CIA/RAW blessings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

idune

ELITE MEMBER
Dec 14, 2008
13,663
-40
12,096
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
Friendly advice from Pakistan, learn from our collective mistakes of joining CENTO, SEATO in the 50's and stay away from an alliance which pits BD against a regional country like China.
Absolutely agreed. Issue in Bangladesh is awami regime is directly/indirectly controlled by india. It is hard to say what they will do. But we all know india is fully invested into this anti China project.
 

Destranator

FULL MEMBER
Jul 20, 2018
1,124
-2
1,949
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
Objective reality is an Awami cheerleader dalal creating the illusion of BD not picking sides. By not joining the Indo-Pacific Strategy, BAL is hiding the fact that they are actually in favour of the strategy in order to appease India.
 
Last edited:

Destranator

FULL MEMBER
Jul 20, 2018
1,124
-2
1,949
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
What is so funny? 160 units (To arm each army division with a 16-unit squadron) by 2035 is certainly affordable especially with ToT. Whether we actually do it is a seperate discussion.

We can buy the first few dozens fully assembled and in the meanwhile set up infrastructure and train manpower to assemble the rest.

Attack helicopters are essential for BA given how difficult most of BD terrain is for tank and troop movement. They will make any land invasion of BD an impossible task for the enemy.

UAVs tech has not yet matured enough to offer the firepower that helicopters can provide.

I see your point regarding lack of MRCA and SAM cover which are essential and should be prioritised but we cannot simply pause modernisation all other areas of the military for that.

You answered your own question with one line. You sound like the BAF version of me, dreaming about 160 attack helicopters for BA like the 10 squadrons of fighters.
I have clarified from the start that what I am proposing (160 units in 15 years) is what SHOULD be procured rather than what will actually happen.

Don't know what "dream" you speak of.



You didn't show the math so i guess you want army to order 10-12 aircraft per every year which unlikely to happen. Army Aviation's whole fleet is small, their helicopter fleet is even smaller and they are based at Dhaka. I don't see them talking about having 10 helicopter per division. They haven't even started the process to buy six more Mi-171 helicopter. Attack helicopter is just plan for now and no suitable option is available except American ones,

More importantly i doubt army thinks that they require 160 attack helicopters while BAF wants to operate it too. Even if we get TOT, it will be transferred to BAF. Army doesn't have any infrastructure or personnel to absorb that and same goes for BAF right now.
We need to understand and discuss what our operations needs are for credible deterrence regardless of what decisions are taken by the leaders as they often mess up. This is one of the key purposes of having military forums.

I am quite familiar with military circles and how the military functions and organises itself.

Each Infantry division is authorised to maintain at least 4 fighting arms brigades (Infantry/armour).
That is 12K+ ground troops fighting in the front lines.

16 attack helicopters (mind you not all units will remain operational at all times) is bare minimum coverage for a front line deployment this big.

Sometimes I wish we had a few small scale wars so that people would realise how deficient we are in terms of equipment.

As for training and capacity building, the army can initially work with BAF to fast track churning out more and more helicopter pilots.

BAF should not be in the business of operating attack helicopters.

The 15 year timeframe is for building capabilities from scratch. Why is this so hard to fathom?


It funny to see you talking about attack helicopter's TOT while call BAF's aircraft production plan a vanity project.
I call BAF's plan to build trainer aircraft a vanity project for good reason. How many damn basic trainers do we need?

During wars, it is fighter jets that suffer attrition in the air and need fast replacement/repair.

Should we not be focusing first on building capabilities to assemble, repair and eventually manufacture some spares for fighter jets?

I would like BAF to engage SAAB to help build up training and infrastructure for BAC and tailor the curriculum of the aviation university to enable operation, maintenance, overhaul and eventual (in the long term) assembly and manufacture (spares at least) of Gripens.

SAAB is already doing something similar with Brazil. Granted we would need a lot more handholding and time compared to Brazil but we need to start somewhere.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom