India's defense expenses to be 2nd highest ($100 bil.) in Asia-Pacific by 2016

[aj_tech123]

maybe 4% would make our neighbour cry

 

[Markus]

maybe 4% would make our neighbour cry

lol that will also make us cry.

But we are terrible behind in modernization and some big deals are going to be signed very soon. Lots and lots of money will have to be pumped in.

 

[aj_tech123]

lol that will also make us cry.

But we are terrible behind in modernization and some big deals are going to be signed very soon. Lots and lots of money will have to be pumped in.

in our case:As the economy grows defence deals grows,
in others case:As the economy fall,we get AIDS for defence...

 

[mike05]

mike no offense but Singapore is just half the size of bangalore and more over which is the smallest metropolitan when compared to the other metropolitan cities in the country and it is easy to administer such a small country and administration of a huge country like india has its own pros and cons and if u want u can implement any rule say the cleanliness i appreciate it but it is whole different ball game here so don't compare the ease with which u develop the infrastructure and others it cant happen over a year it will take time may be decades for a country of this size........... and don't talk about the poor people since our defense spending on GDP % is small compared to other countries its just 2.5 and rest goes for the infra and poor people development BS

No offense taken mate, but I want to be clear yeah I know there is a lot of sensitivity about the poor people but I did not mentioned about that at all so lets leave the poor out on this one.

In context to bringing Singapore was just a reference for a development point which most developed countries including Malaysia follows.

My point is there should be a balancing point between how much is spent on defense and how much goes to developing the nation. I just don't see why India goes in to piles more cash to buy submarines, more advance aircrafts, aircraft carrier upgrades etc etc when there's so much more in the nation that needs attention, but of course sometimes being an ally of the US means buying their products to ensure good relations. Honestly with all the larger powers armed with nuclear weapons most of the "warfare" would be on the tables of diplomacy rather then all fight to the death which means all these fancy gadgets usually just well do nothing. China would rather India stay in power because without a stable India the whole region would be thrown in chaos which is bad news for everyone. That a vice versa for Pakistan and China.

Anyway as said to each his own, I still by my point that the money can be put to better use in this point of the nations development but you know the situation better then myself as you are familiar with the complexities which is not apparent in my society so lets agree to disagree and leave it as that.

 

[mike05]

Nuclear weapons are only useful in a nuclear war just to prevent a Hiroshima or Nagasaki scenario
And for a country like India surrounded by both nuclear powers it offers little deterrence and threat of conventional war is there,though it will be a limited conflict.

To be fair as mentioned on my reply to Black Flame I doubt the politicians on either of the tri party side (India, Pakistan & China) would risk any conflicts conventional or otherwise. Any conflict could possibly lead to nuclear escalation (might be a result from a foolhardy general) and destabilize the region which will in turn be a slap on the other party's face.

If we try to match weapons for weapon with China then India would go bankrupt.

We have 2 concerns relating to defence.
1)80% of our defence equipment is foreign.
2)Large part of equipment be it tanks,fighter jets are obsolete,run out of their time span.

So we have one option to solve both the problems that is indigenisation which takes a lot of time and money.
And if don't start now.,then again in 2-3 decades many of our equipment becomes obsolete and we have to buy from outside.

Also in future there will certainly be returns on it in terms of defence exports.

I would definitely support indigenisation if the funds were put to use mostly for that purpose because it would not help the local industry but also manufacturing sector etc.

Anyway with all due respect Bombensturm I'm going off this thread, its apparent I don't see eye to eye with the usage of the funds with the Indian members and any further discussion on my part in this will just lead to a troll war lol.

 

[ganimi kawa]

About the issue of poverty in India and GoI prioritising defence expenditure over poverty eradication, I would just like to mention two points and tha'll be all from my side!

1. India is well within the international norms when her defence spendings are considered as %age of GDP! We are not the extravagant spenders like many here seem to think.

Shrinking the defence budget by another 0.5% or so will not make a huge impact on poverty levels. It will, however, make a huge impact on Indian defence preparedness!


2. There was a time when India was the world leader in GDP with china. Both of us lost our independance and landed up as "third world".

The fact that there were fewer poor people did not help us in stopping the British from sucking our country dry! Lacking the technological edge in warfare was one of the main reasons we were enslaved!

NEVER AGAIN!

 

[Saamir]

chances of $100 billion only for defence is very lowbut that may include homeland security. but India's GDP will be near $ 2500 billion by 2016.

 

[Honor]

About the issue of poverty in India and GoI prioritising defence expenditure over poverty eradication, I would just like to mention two points and tha'll be all from my side!

1. India is well within the international norms when her defence spendings are considered as %age of GDP! We are not the extravagant spenders like many here seem to think.

Shrinking the defence budget by another 0.5% or so will not make a huge impact on poverty levels. It will, however, make a huge impact on Indian defence preparedness!


2. There was a time when India was the world leader in GDP with china. Both of us lost our independance and landed up as "third world".

The fact that there were fewer poor people did not help us in stopping the British from sucking our country dry! Lacking the technological edge in warfare was one of the main reasons we were enslaved!

NEVER AGAIN!

China did not lost her independance before but we do end up as third world.

 

[Honor]

China did not lost her independance before but we do end up as third world.

Japan will still have 2nd highest defence expenses in Asia in 2016! They had 5 trillion economy!

 

[ganimi kawa]

China did not lost her independance before but we do end up as third world.

OT Alert:

I know that history, bro. By the literal meaning of the word china was indeed "independant"; however by all other parameters ( those that really mattered);it was not!

Do not forget the "Unequal treaties"!

China before the european arrival was one of the world leaders; China after euopeans left was ..........

Please do not take my earlier post literally, read between the lines!

 

[Ras]

I'm very doubtful of the $100 billion defense budget by 2016 forecast. With analysts predicting a $2 trillion Indian economy by 2016, $100 billion means 5% of India's GDP which is exceedingly high for any country.

India should be very disappointed if the economy is only 2 trillion by 2016. Predicted growth should have the GDP reach 2 trillion by 2013.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

India should be very disappointed if the economy is only 2 trillion by 2016. Predicted growth should have the GDP reach 2 trillion by 2013.

On the safe side i say by 2020.Cause even if it happens before i"
ll be only more happier.

 

[black flame]

No offense taken mate, but I want to be clear yeah I know there is a lot of sensitivity about the poor people but I did not mentioned about that at all so lets leave the poor out on this one.

In context to bringing Singapore was just a reference for a development point which most developed countries including Malaysia follows.

My point is there should be a balancing point between how much is spent on defense and how much goes to developing the nation. I just don't see why India goes in to piles more cash to buy submarines, more advance aircrafts, aircraft carrier upgrades etc etc when there's so much more in the nation that needs attention, but of course sometimes being an ally of the US means buying their products to ensure good relations. Honestly with all the larger powers armed with nuclear weapons most of the "warfare" would be on the tables of diplomacy rather then all fight to the death which means all these fancy gadgets usually just well do nothing. China would rather India stay in power because without a stable India the whole region would be thrown in chaos which is bad news for everyone. That a vice versa for Pakistan and China.

Anyway as said to each his own, I still by my point that the money can be put to better use in this point of the nations development but you know the situation better then myself as you are familiar with the complexities which is not apparent in my society so lets agree to disagree and leave it as that.

well dude i understand what u are trying to say...................

India is not buying weapons from any country leave alone US or Russia or Israel or UK to have a good relation.......... we require these weapons to replace the old weapons............. whether it comes from US UK or russia well depend on the tech and politics..... lets leave it at this point.....................

second let me give u an example .......... Say My monthly income for example is $100 per month and spending on a $ 5 KFC Burger every week will be costly when compared to the income ............. but if my monthly income is $10000 it wont be a much of a problem rite and i can buy the burger not just for me i can treat my frnds as well and more over i can have a interior designer renovate my house (infrastructure) and still have enough to save for the future.............

 

[footmarks]

I believe more fully that this is an India that has top-notch corruption, which is well-known world-wide.

Facts also tell us that Indian military projects are either painfully slow in domestic development (so those in the circle can have more secured job/benefits) or unreasonably hiked in price when dealing with externals (so those in circle can benefit from more briberies/embezzlements).

Your type of propaganda results in a slow profit that trickles in over a long span of time. Military projects can harvest a big windfall over night. This is also well known.

Again, I am not negating your arguement. In fact its quite true that Military projects do bring windfall harvest for corrupt officialdom. But so is (Infact even more so) are other projects like Infrastructure projects, Social development projects where Govt "spends" thousands of crores of rupees every year. Govt officials dont really need to rant about external threats to earn money through corruption, internal planned expenditure is more than enough for their 3-4 generations.