Talwar e Pakistan
SENIOR MEMBER
![](/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/MajorGeneral.jpg)
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2014
- Messages
- 6,525
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
They eventually end up being this.
![]()
Nuff said.
That is a military body-building team and its nothing compared to that of other nations.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They eventually end up being this.
![]()
Nuff said.
That is a military body-building team and its nothing compared to that of other nations.
30 % ?
What are the funds that will released which would increase the Fire power by 500 % !!
What force multipliers do you suggest ?
What makes you feel they are clowns ?
Instead of spoon feeding you , I 'd suggest you google and check how many Corps are deployed in the Mountains. Then make a threat assessment based on which all areas are disputed and revisit your remark above.
Please tell me where I am wrong instead of simply stating I cannot know what I am saying.
What you are suggesting is rooted in centuaries old military thinking but warfare has moved on since then significantly and even the IA has appreciated that hence the "cold start" doctrine and the creation of mechanised IBGs. However they have failed to comprehensively address their thinking.
When I say the IA's ability to wage war would be increased by 400-500% as a result of a 30% cut in surplus manpower that is a VERY conservative figure trust me. There is nothing unique in the IA, all other militaries have accepted that to create greater warfighting capacity they need to reduce numbers, spend more per soldier and invest heavily in force multipliers, the IA is behind the curve.
A greater focus on mechanisation, mobility (aviation assets), automated systems and force multipliers is the need of the hour not adding more riflemen.
And if I am so wrong please tell me what is your solution? Or is the current state of the IA acceptable to you? >$20BN a year is spent on the IA, this is a HUGE amount of money, is this reflected in the IA's capabilties? The problem is there is no introspection within the IA and the easiest thing in the world for them to say is "we need more money", as if $20BN a year isn't enough You see the IA coming out with long shopping lists but where is the plan of how they are going to fund it?. Contrast them with the IN, they create 15 year perspective plans outlining exactly where they will be (as a force) in 15 years time and HOW THEY ARE GOING TO GET THERE. The IA said "we are raising a MSC" and then started whining how they didn't have the funds to make it happen so started diving into their war reserves!
To equip a million man army to contemparary standards would require eyewatering sums (we are talking 100s of billons of USD a YEAR), there is just no way India can afford to do so for the next 4 decades thus only option is to cut manpower and invest the freed funds in capital projects.
+ To further highlight how regressive and out of touch the IA top brass are, they still have orderlies; a practice the IN and IAF did away with decades ago.
@PARIKRAMA @Levina @ranjeet
When I say the IA's ability to wage war would be increased by 400-500% as a result of a 30% cut in surplus manpower that is a VERY conservative figure trust me.
Abingdonboy said:I'll say it again, the seniormost IA brass are clowns when it comes to these matters, fine soldiers they may be but they are pathetic planners
You 're right that this is an international mantra. Infact, downsizing is an American mantra, who themselves came to grief in Iraq & Afghnaistan for the lack of boots. But they learnt from their lessons and have increased the size of US army and marine corps since then.Abingdonboy said:It is an accepted fact in the world we live in that once manpower-intensive industries/sectors/roles have been replaced by technology that has increased both the capacity of the relevent industry but also their quality and reliability.
Let's not make this mistake.Abingdonboy said:(this is about 3 times the ENTIRE Pakistani defence budget).
Yes M to Not agree with Downsizing our Armed Forces Although. Im in Favor Increasing the Defense Spending Partially Above 2 Percent As we are Facing More threat PerceptionLet's not make this mistake.
Let's not compare our army with Pakistan's army, instead let's "look east", and you wil find a behemoth-enemy preparing itself for a war.
Do you really want take the risk of downsizing our army? By 30%???
I am against it.
If you want I can paste my conversation with my freinds in army here.
I am sure those who are within army would have a better idea than those looking at it from outside.
@PARIKRAMA @ranjeet @third eye
*Honest politicians is an oxymoron
Eventually become Gay????
That's the official B/S to oil the Americans. Actually the new Strike Corps has been raised to spearhead a military adventure into BD.
Kolkata traffic police is enough for Bangladesh, why do we need a new Mountain Strike Corps for that?
Yep, we saw that at Padua when our villagers eliminated the best part of a SSF Bn using bamboos, degs/frying pans and other household appliances.
Yep, we saw that at Padua when our villagers eliminated the best part of a SSF Bn using bamboos, degs/frying pans and other household appliances.