India severely lags behind China in terms of infrastructure: Defence Report

[sudhir007]

India severely lags behind China in terms of infrastructure: Defence Report - daily.bhaskar.com

A Parliamentary panel on Tuesday slammed the government for the "slow pace" in matching China in border infrastructure and rejected Defence Ministry's claim that development there was as per India's threat perception.

The Standing Committee on Defence also came down heavily on the Defence Ministry for failing to give a "direct" response to it on "pin pointed" query regarding difficulties faced by India due to poor network of road, rail, and airports and helipads.

The report said the threats perceived by India are not only due to conventional and modern threats but is also due to "slow pace in keeping herself abreast of the technological and infrastructural advancement in comparison to our territorial neighbours, especially China..."

The report dealt with threat perception and preparedness of the forces including incursion on borders, coordination mechanism with the central armed police forces and border connectivity through road, rail and air.

The report tabled in Parliament said substantial improvement and achieving stipulated targets within a time frame and avoiding cost escalations were required with regard to borders.

It also flagged the issue of non-demarcation of Line of Actual Control, limited rail, road and air connectivity, ambivalent claims in defence production, inadequate delivery in research and development and oversight mechanism on the part of administrative departments.

"It is shocking to note that only one road out of 27 ITBP roads is complete and as many as 11 roads are behind schedule and not even the detailed project reports (DPRs) have been finalised," the report said.

The report cited several facts highlighting extremely precarious situation of our defence establishment.

According to the report, China is capable of mobilising 30 division ( each with 15,000 soldiers). It has five fully operational air bases along the border with India and an extensive rail network and over 58,000-km roads in the Tibet Autonomous Region.

A comparison with the Indian capabilities would reveal that PLA troops can easily outnumber Indian soldiers by a margin of 3:1.

The committee sounded alarm bells over India's long term strategy to modernise its defence forces. It pointed out that a steady decline in IAF fighter squadron (each with 18-20 jets) shows "lack of foresight among the decision-makers" because the grim situation would have been averted with "advance planning" and "concerted efforts", it said.


Despite an induction of 272 Su-30MKI fighter plane, IAF will have to do with only 34 squadron till 2017, against its need of 42 squadrons.

IAF is in the process of phasing out its ageing fleet of MiG fighter plane. IAF is expecting to bolster its arsenal with the proposed procurement of 126 French Rafale fighters.

 

[pigtaker]

or I would say India severely lags behind China in everything except democratic. Haha, enjoy your freedom.

 

[janon]

or I would say India severely lags behind China in everything except democratic. Haha, enjoy your freedom.

Freedom comes first. No point in being a rich slave, or a slave with excellent roads.

 

[pigtaker]

Freedom comes first. No point in being a rich slave, or a slave with excellent roads.

Hehe, freedom of what? freedom to rape, to shit on the street, to elect corrupt politician, to openly lie without taking any responsibility, to go bed with hungary belly, to boot-lick your western master, to be treated like dirt by westers, you name it.

 

[chhota bheem]

Hehe, freedom of what? freedom to rape, to shit on the street, to elect corrupt politician, to openly lie without taking any responsibility, to go bed with hungary belly, to boot-lick your western master, to be treated like dirt by westers, you name it.

Good to know rapes dont happen in china,but have to agree on you cannt elect corrupt politicians,to openly lie without taking resposibility,and good to know no one goes empty belly to sleep,boot licking i dont know what you mean by that.

 

[pigtaker]

Good to know rapes dont happen in china,but have to agree on you cannt elect corrupt politicians,to openly lie without taking resposibility,and good to know no one goes empty belly to sleep,boot licking i dont know what you mean by that.

boot licking means you always dance around the tune of western nation. preach what they praise and hate what they loath. never have independent thoughts and judgement.

 

[janon]

Hehe, freedom of what? freedom to rape, to shit on the street, to elect corrupt politician, to openly lie without taking any responsibility, to go bed with hungary belly, to boot-lick your western master, to be treated like dirt by westers, you name it.

Freedom to choose our lawmakers, freedom to express our opinions, freedom to criticize those in power, freedom to speak our minds, and a lot more. Political and social freedom is a big subject, and unlikely to be understood by party-bots.

Anyway, try to sing a different tune. The same old rants are getting boring. Do they pay you for playing a broken record?

 

[dray]

Hehe, freedom of what? freedom to rape, to shit on the street, to elect corrupt politician, to openly lie without taking any responsibility, to go bed with hungary belly, to boot-lick your western master, to be treated like dirt by westers, you name it.

You just joined and started trolling with 25 posts under your belt, sometimes I wonder if most Chinese are like that or is it a small group of Chinese with multiple IDs.

@Aeronaut Request you to check if this user is an old user with multiple IDs, one cannot have any decent discussion with such members around.

 

[Genesis]

Freedom comes first. No point in being a rich slave, or a slave with excellent roads.

I'm not here to troll, but I want Indian's honest opinion, can freedom come from poverty?

One of the reasons I think African Americans face discrimination, don't give me Obama, there are special cases for everything, not because they don't have freedom, not because they don't have rights, but on average they are poor and that comes with an image, not fair, but not entirely unwarranted.

Africa is poor, Africans are seen as crazier than red commis, and looks down right barbaric.

So which leads me to can a poor Indian truly be free? Freedom in its simplest meaning is choices, but a poverty stricken person has none, not the least of which because he must eat before he can think, a hungry person makes some terrible choices, prostitution and crime comes to mind.

Indian voters are bought with a few acts here and there, but by in large the Indian democracy benefits them, but it is not freedom, it is in the truest sense what happens to servants, when I need you, I will give you a carrot, vote for me, then go away for four years, and rinse and repeat.


Now on the other hand, China is cleaning up the environment faster than India due to public pressure, Chinese lively hood has massively increased, no Chinese will ever want for food and water, if he's in his/her village/city, and all Chinese has the privilege of schooling and other social services. There are rare exceptions, key word rare, but let's look at the positives.

So in a sense, Chinese public opinion matters more, the Government can no more steam roll the public opinion than the Americans. Xi ate at a regular restaurant with no guards, and press. Regardless of it's realness, this shows he cares for public opinion. He wants people to support him to like him.

Some actions taken by the government looks unfair but there is actually support for it, despite what it might look from a western perspective, In China the majority rules, in democracy, the vocal minority does.

 

[dray]

I'm not here to troll, but I want Indian's honest opinion, can freedom come from poverty?

One of the reasons I think African Americans face discrimination, don't give me Obama, there are special cases for everything, not because they don't have freedom, not because they don't have rights, but on average they are poor and that comes with an image, not fair, but not entirely unwarranted.

Africa is poor, Africans are seen as crazier than red commis, and looks down right barbaric.

So which leads me to can a poor Indian truly be free? Freedom in its simplest meaning is choices, but a poverty stricken person has none, not the least of which because he must eat before he can think, a hungry person makes some terrible choices, prostitution and crime comes to mind.

Indian voters are bought with a few acts here and there, but by in large the Indian democracy benefits them, but it is not freedom, it is in the truest sense what happens to servants, when I need you, I will give you a carrot, vote for me, then go away for four years, and rinse and repeat.


Now on the other hand, China is cleaning up the environment faster than India due to public pressure, Chinese lively hood has massively increased, no Chinese will ever want for food and water, if he's in his/her village, and all Chinese has the privilege of schooling and other social services. There are rare exceptions, but let's look at the positives.

So in a sense, Chinese public opinion matters more, the Government can no more steam roll the public opinion than the Americans. Some actions taken by the government looks unfair but there is actually support for it, despite what it might look from a western perspective, In China the majority rules, in democracy, the vocal minority does.

There is no conflict between democracy and economics, there are democratic countries with some of the best economies around the world. And there was not much of a difference between China & India till 80's, it's just that China started liberalization couple of decades before us, and they went aggressively about it, which we think a bit recklessly aggressive, but that's subjective. Our democracy is not fully matured, but it will mature with time, we will keep patience.

But yes, no matter what I would personally prefer to live in a democracy, I am never comfortable with the idea of absolute power, and I would be very uncomfortable if I know every statement of mine (even on internet social media sites) is being watched and might get reported with serious consequences.

 

[janon]

I'm not here to troll, but I want Indian's honest opinion, can freedom come from poverty?

One of the reasons I think African Americans face discrimination, don't give me Obama, there are special cases for everything, not because they don't have freedom, not because they don't have rights, but on average they are poor and that comes with an image, not fair, but not entirely unwarranted.

Africa is poor, Africans are seen as crazier than red commis, and looks down right barbaric.

So which leads me to can a poor Indian truly be free? Freedom in its simplest meaning is choices, but a poverty stricken person has none, not the least of which because he must eat before he can think, a hungry person makes some terrible choices, prostitution and crime comes to mind.

Indian voters are bought with a few acts here and there, but by in large the Indian democracy benefits them, but it is not freedom, it is in the truest sense what happens to servants, when I need you, I will give you a carrot, vote for me, then go away for four years, and rinse and repeat.


Now on the other hand, China is cleaning up the environment faster than India due to public pressure, Chinese lively hood has massively increased, no Chinese will ever want for food and water, if he's in his/her village, and all Chinese has the privilege of schooling and other social services. There are rare exceptions, but let's look at the positives.

So in a sense, Chinese public opinion matters more, the Government can no more steam roll the public opinion than the Americans. Some actions taken by the government looks unfair but there is actually support for it, despite what it might look from a western perspective, In China the majority rules, in democracy, the vocal minority does.

First of all, not all Indians are poor. Secondly, there was a time when China was also dirt poor, under Mao and communism. Only after they enacted free market reforms did they start getting rich. The same thing applies to India as well - we were super socialistic until 1993, which is when we opened our markets. In 20 or 30 years from now, poverty in India will also shrink, just as it did in China. Both countries were the victim of a failed, unscientific, psuedo economic system that kept them poor - but China got rid of that system two or three decades before India did. Hovewer, the choice between freedom and poverty is a false choice - Chinese people are committing a logical fallacy in bringing poverty into any discussion about freedom. They are two different things. It's a way of admitting that chinese people don't enjoy political freedom, but instead of admitting that, laugh at India's poverty to feel better. I'm not talking about you, since you are genuinely discussing it instead of trolling; I'm referring to the fellow who started this discussion with his troll post, and many other such chinese posters. Instead of simply admitting that Indians enjoy political freedoms that chinese don't, they have to bring the unrelated issue of poverty.

Now coming to freedoms - there are many freedoms, and in the context of India and china, what we usually refer to is political freedom. Now despite poverty, it is a fact, an undeniable fact that Indians (rich or poor) do enjoy political freedoms that are comparable to the free world. Anybody, rich or poor can vote and elect their representatives, and have a say in the course of government. If we don't like where the govt is headed, we can kick it out - that's a fact, and you will probably see it in the next general elections in a few months time. We also have elections at state and local levels, and in the recent elections in five states, the ruling party got kicked out of power. What does all this amount to? It amounts to the fact that the govt is very sensitive to the voive of the people, and scared of public opinion - as they shoud be. That they are our servants, not our masters.

When China was dirt poor, they had neither money, nor the ability to change those in power. So Mao and the party could do what they wanted, kill millions through stupid economic policies and mass starvation, and enact ''great leaps'' to death.There was nothing the people could do to change the disastrous govt.

About that part about Indian voters being bribed to vote - it is simply not true. First of all ballots are secret - nobody knows who you voted for, except the electronic machine. By and large India's elections are fully free and fair and transparent, especially after electronic voting was introduced. And coming to your questions of whether a poor person can truly be free - there you are muddying the waters of the topic, by confusing different kinds of freedoms. As I explained before, in this context we are talking about political freedoms, not the freedom to buy a car or apartment of one's choice - which of course, a very poor person does not have the luxury of choosing. But political freedom, freedom from oppresion, freedom to criticize, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom of speech - all this applies to rich and poor, old and young.

 

[Genesis]

There is no conflict between democracy and economics, there are democratic countries with some of the best economies around the world. And there was not much of a difference between China & India till 80's, it's just that China started liberalization couple of decades before us, and they went aggressively about it, which we think a bit recklessly aggressive, but that's subjective. Our democracy is not fully matured, but it will mature with time, we will keep patience.

But yes, no matter what I would personally prefer to live in a democracy, I am never comfortable with the idea of absolute power, and I would be very uncomfortable if I know every statement of mine (even on internet social media sites) is being watched and might get reported with serious consequences.

That's not what I asked, you mentioned democracy and economics are not contradictory, and I never said they are. I just said is can a poor person truly be free.

Also please don't mention you started later, that's even more of a embarrassment for you, you started in late 40s, we did too, how did you start later than red crazy commis? That would mean your democracy is truly more broken than our authoritarian government. Which leads me again to can a poor man be free?

Don't say you don't think you could catch up because of it, most predicted in early 200s, you would surpass us.

Then you said absolute power and democracy, there can never be absolute power, popular support is always needed, you know how many dynasties there has been in China? I do, popular support is always important, I have arguments that support my view in my post, you can debate on how it isn't true, but it doesn't change anything, I never asked democracy or no, I asked can a poor man be free.

 

[janon]

That's not what I asked, you mentioned democracy and economics are not contradictory, and I never said they are. I just said is can a poor person truly be free.

Also please don't mention you started later, that's even more of a embarrassment for you, you started in late 40s, we did too, how did you start later than red crazy commis? That would mean your democracy is truly more broken than our authoritarian government. Which leads me again to can a poor man be free?

Don't say you don't think you could catch up because of it, most predicted in early 200s, you would surpass us.

Then you said absolute power and democracy, there can never be absolute power, popular support is always needed, you know how many dynasties there has been in China? I do, popular support is always important, I have arguments that support my view in my post, you can debate on how it isn't true, but it doesn't change anything, I never asked democracy or no, I asked can a poor man be free.

Yes, a poor person can have political freedoms to the same extent that a rich person can. Certain other freedoms, no. That is why are are doing our best to eliminate or at least reduce poverty. Refer my previous post to uderstand why your question is flawed, and you are conflating different kinds of freedoms together.

And yes, we did start much later than you in adopting a market economy. You started with Deng Xiapo's reforms in the 70s, we started in 1993. Before that we had a fully socialistic economy - not the fault of the govt, even the people believed that to be the best system, because everybody was duped by the commie propoganda of the early 20th century. It was our own choice to be socialistic, and a damn stupid one.

 

[OrionHunter]

Hehe, freedom of what? freedom to rape, to shit on the street, to elect corrupt politician, to openly lie without taking any responsibility, to go bed with hungary belly, to boot-lick your western master, to be treated like dirt by westers, you name it.

You're a newbie and already started trolling? Typical Han!

So you don't have corrupt politicians? Your corrupt bozos have made more money in one year than all the politicians put together in South Asia in the last 10 years.

Rapes in China? What's published in your propagandist communist controlled media is barely 1% of the rapes actually happening in the land of the Hans.

Treated like dirt by Westerners? The whole world, except Pakistan and North Korea, see you Hans as the biggest bullies in the world with no respect for international treaties and UN laws. Your communist government doesn't even treat you Chinese as humans, but as robots. Squeak against anyone in the CPC and the poor sod is put in the cooler! No freedom of the press, no human rights, no nothing!

Just a lot of hot air and spit and polish on the outside.

 

[Developereo]

The illusion of freedom is the opium of the democratic masses.

Any democracy beyond a certain size is inevitably controlled by a tiny elite of media and financial moguls: they decide which issues should dominate discussion and which issues get addressed first. Manipulating the masses is child's play since most ordinary voters have neither the time, desire nor ability to understand the complexities of major issues.

In the West, these elite have pushed though massive globalization, massive corporate subsidies/bailouts, and erosion of individual liberties. All this continues to erode the social democratic foundation which has formed the bedrock of the developed economies.

Democracy works wonderfully on a local level but, beyond a certain size, it simply does not scale.