India has largest, most experienced mountain army in the world, says Chinese military expert

[MayaBazar]

The whole of India was never a country in it's entirety in the first place, so partition doesn't count. Secondly, by the time Maharaja Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession and IA troops moved in, pak army with tribal warlords already took over AJK & GB by the time we reached in to stop their advance.

That's a week excuse.

Pakistanis won over Indians by killing thousands of Indians through Direct Action Day and forced Indians to agree to partition.

India could not recover GB & AJK after J&K accession to India.

 

[GamoAccu]

Ignorance is a bliss

Cambrian Patrol: Gold

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...n-Patrol-Competition/articleshow/55002311.cms

https://www.oneindia.com/india/indi...ring-exercise-cambrian-patrol-uk-1925467.html

https://newsonfloor.com/newsdetail/indian-army-emerges-champion-in-scout-masters-contest-37217.htm

These are just a few

I am talking about this International Army Games that held every year.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-games-2018/articleshow/65352082.cms?from=mdr

 

[Joe Shearer]

The solution is simple. Make India Military responsible for both monitoring and protecting the borders. Paramilitary forces including BSF, ITBP & Assam Rifles need to be moved from HM to DM. If ICG can be part of DM why not BSF & ITBP? We need to put a stop to this blame game and turf war.

Army revives interest in ITBP command
Move follows call for improved patrolling along border with China

By Imran Ahmed Siddiqui in New Delhi

• Published 6.06.20, 1:59 AM
• Updated 6.06.20, 1:59 AM

• 2 mins read

The ITBP is the first line of defence on the LAC and the army remains behind it(Shutterstock)

The Indian Army has renewed its demand for operational command of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police, amid talk of “intelligence and command failure” leading to the ongoing stand-off and Chinese build-up along the Line of Actual Control in eastern Ladakh.

Government sources said the army has recently revived its demand to take over the operational command of the paramilitary force, which reports to Union home minister Amit Shah.

“The turf war between the defence ministry and the home ministry over the control of the ITBP is a long-standing issue but it has again gained momentum in the midst of the escalating tension between Indian and Chinese troops in eastern Ladakh. The army has repeated its demand saying the paramilitary force was not sufficiently equipped to meet the challenges posed by the Chinese troops at the disputed frontier,” said a home ministry official.

The ITBP, which guards the 3,488km China frontier which passes along Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir, is the first line of defence on the LAC and the army remains behind it.

Sources said the army’s contention was that the China frontier is under constant threat, considering frequent border skirmishes and face-off and several incidents of transgression by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

“The army feels it should have the command of the ITBP to ensure better patrolling along the LAC especially at sensitive areas which have witnessed transgression and face-off in the past,” said a defence ministry official.

The home ministry, however, has a different view. It has cited said that according to international conventions, paramilitary forces guard the borders and the army remains behind the first line of defence.

“Even on the Chinese side, the People’s Armed Police, also a paramilitary force, guards the border while the People’s Liberation Army is stationed behind this first line of defence,” a home ministry official said.

The home ministry has cited that the Border Security Force (BSF) guards the Pakistan and Bangladesh borders and the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) stands guard along the borders with Nepal and Bhutan.

“The home ministry has said that it was not in favour of handing over the command of the ITBP to the defence ministry. Instead, it has decided to deploy more border guards and increase ITBP presence along the Chinese frontier to counter transgressions,” the official said.

Sources said the Indian Army had for the first time in 1986 demanded operational command of the ITBP. But the demands became more insistent since 1999 when a Chinese intrusion at Chip Chap in the disputed Aksai Chin region was reported while Indian troops were engaged in the Kargil war with Pakistan.

Shah has been maintaining that the 90,000-strong paramilitary force was raised on October 24, 1962, specifically for guarding the Chinese frontier after the India-China war.

https://www.telegraphindia.com/indi...ndo-tibetan-border-police-command/cid/1778752

@Joe Shearer @Nilgiri

I could not disagree more.

The Army need not take control over the border forces, these are two discrete objectives and two discrete tasks that should never have been conflated. Almost as important as getting the Army out of counter-insurgency is the task of getting the Army out of day-to-day border patrolling and security maintenance.

The turf war is another thing. The Home Ministry has no business running very large numbers of armed people; it has enough to do to improve fundamental policing, and should focus on law, and also, to a lesser extent, on order. We have the horrible example of the US in front of us to persuade us to turn our faces from the increased militarisation of prevention of crime and maintenance of public order.

For border security, there could easily be a separate ministry for national security; for counter-insurgency, that is a fact of life in India given the upper-caste Hindu tendency to dominate and to crush any minority, whether tribal, or Dalit, or any other, there can simply be a conjoint ministry for internal security. Taking these away from the Home Ministry should persuade it to concentrate on improvement of policing; for starters, by implementing the Dharma Vira Commission's report, and by depriving state governments from the ability to meddle with the police and the general administration through the weapon of punitive transfers, removing this to administrative and police commissions in each state.

I didn't understand the alphabet soup of abbreviations you used. A glossary would be useful.

That's a week excuse.

Pakistanis won over Indians by killing thousands of Indians through Direct Action Day and forced Indians to agree to partition.

India could not recover GB & AJK after J&K accession to India.

I question this arrogant assumption that an entire people, that two entire populations that had taken to armed revolt against an oppressive regime should be coerced back into our domain, simply because the then Maharaja's ancestor had put together a crazy quilt of totally disparate realms through bribery, acquisition of feudal rights, annexation during its period of weakness and outright conquest.

The Vale of Kashmir is a different matter. There is enough reason to believe that Nehru's otherwise inexplicable restraint on the Indian Army was influenced by Sheikh Abdullah's declaring the Koshur-speaking area to be the area that was pro-India and that he wished to govern, excluding other parts such as Sudhanoti and Gilgit. Ladakh and Baltistan and Jammu were different propositions yet again.

It is sickening to read of repeated bellicosity relating to Gilgit and the Mirpur fringe; what do we gain by it?

 

[MayaBazar]

I could not disagree more.

The Army need not take control over the border forces, these are two discrete objectives and two discrete tasks that should never have been conflated. Almost as important as getting the Army out of counter-insurgency is the task of getting the Army out of day-to-day border patrolling and security maintenance.

The turf war is another thing. The Home Ministry has no business running very large numbers of armed people; it has enough to do to improve fundamental policing, and should focus on law, and also, to a lesser extent, on order. We have the horrible example of the US in front of us to persuade us to turn our faces from the increased militarisation of prevention of crime and maintenance of public order.

For border security, there could easily be a separate ministry for national security; for counter-insurgency, that is a fact of life in India given the upper-caste Hindu tendency to dominate and to crush any minority, whether tribal, or Dalit, or any other, there can simply be a conjoint ministry for internal security. Taking these away from the Home Ministry should persuade it to concentrate on improvement of policing; for starters, by implementing the Dharma Vira Commission's report, and by depriving state governments from the ability to meddle with the police and the general administration through the weapon of punitive transfers, removing this to administrative and police commissions in each state.

I didn't understand the alphabet soup of abbreviations you used. A glossary would be useful.

My point was not on merging paramilitary with the military rather to make both of them part of Ministry of Defence (MoD) instead of paramilitary being under Home Ministry (HM) on the lines of how both Indian Navy (IN) and Indian Coast Gaurd (ICG) are under Ministry of Defence (MoD).

 

[Joe Shearer]

My point was not on merging paramilitary with the military rather to make both of them part of Ministry of Defence (MoD) instead of paramilitary being under Home Ministry (HM) on the lines of how both Indian Navy (IN) and Indian Coast Gaurd (ICG) are under Ministry of Defence (MoD).

And my point was that even the Coast Guard ought to be separated out and detached from the Indian Navy.

The Navy should be looking at the security of sea lines of communication, at destroying the ever-growing Pakistani submarine fleet, at monitoring and controlling the increasing PLAN presence in the Indian Ocean, and at a forward presence in the South China Sea, to pre-empt any adventurism in the Indian Ocean.

It should not get involved with managing rogue fishing fleets in the over-fished Bay of Bengal, subduing the Sri Lanka Navy's antics in the vicinity of the Palk Straits, and restraining the capitalist owners of mechanised fishing vessels who constantly tempt the Sri Lankans into lashing out against blatant poaching with forbidden net types outside our coastal waters. Or patrolling against terrorists on boats aiming for landfall on the Konkan coast.

 

[MayaBazar]

I question this arrogant assumption that an entire people, that two entire populations that had taken to armed revolt against an oppressive regime should be coerced back into our domain, simply because the then Maharaja's ancestor had put together a crazy quilt of totally disparate realms through bribery, acquisition of feudal rights, annexation during its period of weakness and outright conquest.

The Vale of Kashmir is a different matter. There is enough reason to believe that Nehru's otherwise inexplicable restraint on the Indian Army was influenced by Sheikh Abdullah's declaring the Koshur-speaking area to be the area that was pro-India and that he wished to govern, excluding other parts such as Sudhanoti and Gilgit. Ladakh and Baltistan and Jammu were different propositions yet again.

It is sickening to read of repeated bellicosity relating to Gilgit and the Mirpur fringe; what do we gain by it?

AJK/Mirpur has been packed with Punjabhis but GB's culture is quite different. If Valley can be part of India, I do not see a reason why GB can't be.

 

[Joe Shearer]

AJK Mirpuris has been packed with Punjabhis but GB's culture is quite different. If Valley can be part of India, I do not see a reason why GB can't be.

Because they don't want to be.

@waz @WAJsal

 

[MayaBazar]

Because they don't want to be.

@waz @WAJsal

We just do not know. We will only know the truth when we are in control of GB.

If people of GB ask for independence when they come under Indian control, then I support granting them independence with my whole heart.

 

[Joe Shearer]

AJK/Mirpur has been packed with Punjabhis but GB's culture is quite different. If Valley can be part of India, I do not see a reason why GB can't be.

Let me remind you: GB was never part of the Maharaja's domain. First, you should read up on the circumstances of its conquest by a combined Anglo-Kashmiri campaign. Second, you should be aware of the tactics used by the J&K army during the conquest; it will make your blood run cold. Third, you should be aware that immediately after this formal conquest, the British took over the region on lease, so never did the Dogra administration run over there. Fourth, you should know that when the lease was terminated, and the territory handed back, a reluctant British sub-cutaneous layer of administration encouraged a revolt supported by a mutiny, imprisoned the J&K wazir, the local governor, killed his loyalists among the J&K troops, ambushed a relieving party and killed them all, and then mounted three columns to attack the rest of J&K.

We talk so lightly about resuming dominion over these places without knowing the first thing about them.

We just do not know. We will only know the truth when we are in control of GB.

If people of GB ask for independence when they come under Indian control, then I support granting them independence with my whole heart.

And why should a single Indian farmer's son die to prove this totally unnecessary point? Would you contribute your son to the cause?

 

[Zapper]

I am talking about this International Army Games that held every year.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-games-2018/articleshow/65352082.cms?from=mdr

No team could win every military competition out there. There are tons of competitions which specialize is certain aspects, while we won some, we didn't in others and it's the same with every country. On that note, pakistanis didn't even participate in the main MBT competition...can I say y'all were expecting that you'd loose anyway!!

 

[Joe Shearer]

That's a week excuse.

Pakistanis won over Indians by killing thousands of Indians through Direct Action Day and forced Indians to agree to partition.

India could not recover GB & AJK after J&K accession to India.

Would you analyse the thousands and let us know where these killings occurred? Other than in Calcutta?

No team could win every military competition out there. There are tons of competitions which specialize is certain aspects, while we won some, we didn't in others and it's the same with every country. On that note, pakistanis didn't even participate in the main MBT competition...can I say y'all were expecting that you'd loose anyway!!

Completely agree.

Why should we even aim to win all? that is patently ridiculous. Being represented in all is sufficient.

 

[MayaBazar]

Let me remind you: GB was never part of the Maharaja's domain. First, you should read up on the circumstances of its conquest by a combined Anglo-Kashmiri campaign. Second, you should be aware of the tactics used by the J&K army during the conquest; it will make your blood run cold. Third, you should be aware that immediately after this formal conquest, the British took over the region on lease, so never did the Dogra administration run over there. Fourth, you should know that when the lease was terminated, and the territory handed back, a reluctant British sub-cutaneous layer of administration encouraged a revolt supported by a mutiny, imprisoned the J&K wazir, the local governor, killed his loyalists among the J&K troops, ambushed a relieving party and killed them all, and then mounted three columns to attack the rest of J&K.

We talk so lightly about resuming dominion over these places without knowing the first thing about them.



And why should a single Indian farmer's son die to prove this totally unnecessary point? Would you contribute your son to the cause?

Do you think Travancore joining India was a mistake and Malayalees are unhappy being part of India?

Would you analyse the thousands and let us know where these killings occurred? Other than in Calcutta?

The point is Indians lost to Pakistanis. How many thousands died is not the main point. People die in most wars.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Do you think Travancore joining India was a mistake and Malayalees are unhappy being part of India?

No.

The point is Indians lost to Pakistanis. How many thousands died is not the main point. People die in most wars.

The point is that this was highly exaggerated. Do your homework and find out for yourself. No war, no loss, just a romanticisation of the mutual antipathy between Noon on one hand and Nehru and Patel on the other.

 

[rott]

I am wrong. India is stronger. Also we have very less troops in GB as many are in quarantine due to Covid. GB is open for you guys. Come on!

Bro, just keep praising India. They love them praises. Just keep them coming.

 

[xuxu1457]

Chinese people will generally be some polite praise, in China's television or news is also the case.
If you ask the Chinese about the Arjun tank in India, they will praise it again.The general saying is that the Arjun tank is also one of the world's first-class tanks.
It is purely polite to praise first.