Is India on its way to becoming a superpower?

[Ambitious.Asian]

The Agni V isn't even comparable in range to a 60s era ICBM,

yes...Indeed Agni-V is'nt even comparable to 60s ICBM Bcoz Agni-V is far too superior of today ICBM'S........is that u want to proove or are u still in dreams??????

 

[tvsram1992]

You want to flame buddy?

Let's look at the actual history:

"India is merely a geographical expression. It is no more a single country than the Equator."

- Winston Churchill

There was no such thing as India in history. It was a creation of the British colonialists, and they gave it the same name they gave to other unrelated peoples, such as the Red Indians and the West Indians.

And in history there is nothing like China as now

 

[Rusty]

And in history there is nothing like China as now

Your right, China was even bigger in the past

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Your right, China was even bigger in the past

You might wanna check our Chinese members opinions on the Qing dynasty.

 

[notsuperstitious]

You want to flame buddy?

Let's look at the actual history:

"India is merely a geographical expression. It is no more a single country than the Equator."

- Winston Churchill

There was no such thing as India in history. It was a creation of the British colonialists, and they gave it the same name they gave to other unrelated peoples, such as the Red Indians and the West Indians.

LOL, thats just awesome, an ardent imperialist like churchill will tell us now about the white man's burden and a chini whose forefathers were fed opium by the same imperialists will keep parroting that like a CPC bot!!!

Maybe we shud keep posting the opinion of chengiz khan of these hairless chinese as some kind of an intelligent argument on all kinds of threads, but to stoop so low one has to be well trained and paid for this kind of stuff.

 

[Angad_NSA]

The probability of India becoming a super power in future is ZERO! It will end up like Japan, a militarily passive state but an economic power. To become a super power, you need a lot of balls apart from economic might to back that up. India, or rather Indians in general, are only interested in making money, not becoming world leaders while taking huge risks in such an endeavor... and that is not going to change for the next 1000 years atleast.

One of the main attributes of becoming a super power which countries like the U.S and the Soviet Union took for granted is the predatory mindset which existed and still exists in the leadership of both those countries. India as a country and a society is basically a peacenik's paradise. Ofcourse India does fight its wars, but that's only because its territorial integrity is threatened... which is exactly what a docile animal like a Cow does when its calf is threatened. India is no Tiger with a killer streak, and never will be. It's not just the leaders, but the vast majority of the society are basically like so.
Just one simple scenario to explain the Indian mindset, the cuban missile crisis. The cuban missile crisis, wasn't really a crisis at all because the Soviet union never broke any international rules or treaties when it stationed its missiles in Cuba. It was PERFECTLY 100% legal. Infact the Soviet Union was only doing what the U.S had already done in Turkey & Italy, which was it stationed its Nuclear missiles bases there targeting the Soviet Union. In a full scale Nuclear war, the Soviet Union apart from its military industrial complex, had no real economy to speak of and most of its country was turned into rubble less than 20 years ago in the Second World War. The U.S had everything to lose if it initiates a suicidal war because apart from being untouched by the WW2, its economy and civilian infrastructure was the top in the world. And yet the United States not only threatened war on Cuba, but threatened a full scale nuclear war on the entire Soviet Union!! If India ever gets into such a situation, will it show such balls for a showdown? Absolutely NOT! The first thing which will be the standard reply of every Indian and the politicians is: "Comeon, we are the world's most richest country. We will loose everything and a lot of people will die, while the opposing country has nothing to lose and is basically a dictatorship which doesn't care about its people. We gain nothing by engaging in such a showdown. Lets call it quits." With a mindset like that would we ever become a superpower? The Funny thing is this factor is even now vividly in display vis-a-vis pakistan at present.
"Pakistan is an economically bankrupt country and in civil war, we will lose more with a war with pakistan, and that is not a smart thing to do. So Peace is the only Option. Dialogue is the only way forward."
^See the resemblance?
This country simply doesn't have what it takes to rise to the top of the food chain. It will forever remain the cow which defends its calf. Infact, if India grows more economically powerful, the weaker its willpower will become. The fear of losing the material gains will over shadow its willingness to show some balls in the face of a nuclear threat.

Money alone doesn't make one powerful. America has the guts to take the most bold decisions to convert all that economic might to Military power. India simply does not have what it takes to do the above.


So as per the above, the requirements are:
1: Strong Leadership & Society to back them
2: Strong Military

The other 3 other Requirements which are essential are:
3: Heavy Industries
India is a country which doesn't even manufacture the engines for its cars. Indian Heavy Industry is a joke when compared to that of Europe, Russia and the U.S

4: Natural Resources
An important super power attribute is the ability to fight prolonged wars. Soviet union(even now Russia) and the U.S have huge resources, including Oil and Gas. Infact, U.S was the largest producer of Oil and Gas before Oil was discovered in the Middle east. In a prolonged war, both Russia and U.S can safely depend on their own resources. India or even China have to risk their sea lanes, not to mention convince the oil producing countries to give them Oil. Or should do what the Germans & Japanese did, conquer territories for resources. India conquering territories is like saying- India will become a super power. Both are equally lame statements.
Check out the amount of Military production of Soviet Union and U.S during the Second World War to gauge the importance of Natural Resources. It would make you lose your freakin mind! Its no wonder these 2 went on to become Super powers.

Tanks(primary)
Soviet Union 105,251
United States 88,410
United Kingdom 27,896
Canada 5,678
Germany 67,429
Japan 2,515
Italy 2,473
Hungary 500

Tanks(secondary)
Soviet Union 92,595
United States 71,067
United Kingdom -
Canada -
Germany 43,920
Japan -
Italy -
Hungary -

Artillery
Soviet Union 516,648
United States 257,390
United Kingdom 124,877
Canada 10,552
Germany 159,147
Japan 13,350
Italy 7,200
Hungary 447


Military Aircrafts
Soviet Union 157,261
United States 324,750
United Kingdom 131,549
Canada 16,431
Germany 119,307 Also 3,172 V-2 rockets and 10,000 V-1
Japan 76,320
Italy 11,122
Hungary 1,046

Military production during World War II

What this means is:

a: Self sufficiency is important. You should not only be self sufficient in Technology and Knowledge, but you should also be self sufficient in Resources. India lacks that. See Japan & Germany, which had Heavy Industries and also the most intelligent people at that time to build them war machines, but they lacked natural resources.. even the resources in conquered territories of Japan and Germany couldn't match the superpowers.

b: The Axis, were at a serious disadvantage. Only Germany had a decent resources & production. Japan although larger in population than Germany, was lacking in natural resources and couldn't even match Germany(which was lucky due to Sweden and its conquered territories). Poor Germany had to take on the 2 Monsters all alone.(*That's really AMAZING, for a country of Germany's size*).

"The Soviet Union is richly endowed with almost every major category of natural resource. Drawing upon its vast holdings, it has become the world leader in the production of oil, iron ore, manganese, and asbestos. It has the world's largest proven reserves of natural gas, and it is rapidly catching up to the United States in the production of this increasingly important fuel. It has enormous coal reserves and is in second place in coal production (see fig. 7).

Self-sufficiency has traditionally been a powerful stimulus for exploring and developing the country's huge, yet widely dispersed, resource base. It remains a source of national pride that the Soviet Union, alone among the industrialized countries of the world, can claim the ability to satisfy almost all the requirements of its economy using its own natural resources."
Soviet Union - Natural Resources



5: An 'Ok' Economy
Yup! Just an Ok will do. You don't necessarily have to be super-rich to be considered as a Super Power.

GDP of the countries in Billions of USD
Year--------1938--1939 -1940-1941-1942-1943-1944-1945
Germany----351----384--387---412--417---426--437---310
SovietUnion-359----366--417---359--274---305--362---343
Britian-------284----287--316----344-353---361--346---331
USA---------800----869--943---1094-1235-1399-1499-1474

GDP of the Allies and the Axis

As you can see from the above, the economic GDP of Soviet Union and Germany was the same, but see the War production figures are heavily lopsided in favor of Soviet union. This was because of easy access to Raw Materials, and hence it could compete with even the U.S eventhough the Soviet Union had a Poor GDP. Also after the Second World war, the Soviet Union was in absolute shambles, while the U.S which was untouched by the war grew its GDP till it became more than 4 Times Larger than that of the Soviet Union. Further more, Britain and the Soviet Union had the same GDP! But still Soviet Union went on to Challenge not only the massively rich U.S, but also U.K, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, later China and pretty much almost everybody on this planet and earned the rightful Title of Super Power(!) all while having a puny economy. A perfect example of the popular saying "Money ain't everything".

There is another popular misconception(Partially driven by American propaganda of victory of Capitalism over Socialism) that economy alone lead Soviet union to it's demise. As you can see from the above, it is totally untrue. The Soviet Union had always been at a disadvantage. Also what is missed is, the economic problems were present throughout the 80's in the Soviet Union(infact the soviet military budget in 1988, a year before the iron-curtain started collapsing, was one the largest) but what tipped the balance and lead to disintegration was spineless leadership(The Point number 1: ) under Gorbachev who gave into what he called "democracy" & "people's will" which popularly came to be known as Glasnost. Soviet Union & the Iron curtain was essentially territories got during the Czar's era & WW2. Once the pandora's box of "people's desire" was opened over an empire build on military might, the empire was going to disintegrate. Add together the power struggle with Boris Yeltsin, who was keen to see the Union gone so that he could be premiere of Russia, the stage for dis-integration was set. Even during the last minute coup to save the empire, Gorbachev sided with Yeltsin, because he termed it as "military oppression of voice of the people". When the berlin wall was about to be breached, Stasi and KGB were all well prepared with their under cover agents, along with the military, to crush the revolt, and waited for the order to move in. But the order never came from Gorbachev. Be it in Romania, or East Germany.. Soviet union lost the willpower to impose its strength on those client states. Go and ask any Russian historian(not the ones settled in the west) what would have happened- If Khrushchev was in power in the 80's would Soviet union have disintegrated? The Answer would be a resounding no.

Hence:
1: India Doesn't have a strong Leadership and Society, and never will.
2: Its military follows minimum strategic deterrence and doesn't have the nukes required and never will:

3: Heavy Industries still in its infancy, but does India have what it takes to getting this one right.
4: Inadequate Natural Resource.
5: A bright looking economy.

So "Is India on its way to becoming a superpower?" . Absolutely Not!

Nice research, high on octane, but low on substance. It seems Afghan opium supply has enriched lot of brains in US academics.

Joke apart, let me poke some big holes in ur opium research with 3 simple points(tri-sutras):
1. Indo-US deal nuke bulldozed NSG, Australia fell in line like a sepoy.(Did this need 500,000 tanks dear? )
2. China has no huge natural resources, but still its going to be a great power sooner or later.(this craps ur point of having "natural resources" is so so so so so essential ).
3. Military dynamics(producing 50,000 tanks, 200,000 missiles) of world-war-II period doesn't apply today. Warhead technology, precision has improved immensely. Your brain-fart research missed this.

Next time, do a better research or maybe hire some1 from Delhi for consultation.

 

[Ambitious.Asian]

Your right, China was even bigger in the past

but they never dare to Enter India in past as well....

 

[tvsram1992]

Your right, China was even bigger in the past

thanks i thought it was only India that lost many of its territories

 

[GR!FF!N]

the other day i was reading a article about how trillions of dollars worth of transactions in india are locked due to pending court cases on land transactions, why cant you guys do something about it? some cases go upto 50 years ?

we already did..fast track court...but there are huge amount of cases are piled up.so...it'll take time.

 

[Su-11]

1. Indo-US deal nuke bulldozed NSG, Australia fell in line like a sepoy.(Did this need 500,000 tanks dear? )

Is this your Idea of Logic? Getting approval from NSG does not need tanks? What next in your line of Logic? Building toilets does not require tanks?

2. China has no huge natural resources, but still its going to be a great power sooner or later.(this craps ur point of having "natural resources" is so so so so so essential ).

This topic is about Super Power, not "great power sooner or later".

3. Military dynamics(producing 50,000 tanks, 200,000 missiles) of world-war-II period doesn't apply today. Warhead technology, precision has improved immensely. Your brain-fart research missed this.

Have you ever heard of the word 'attrition', n00b? The only way a war time attrition can be countered is from new and fast production. The American latest M1A1 tank production capacity during peacetime was 1000-1100 units per year. They are totally self sufficient in both natural resources and technology, so expect this number to shoot up astronomically when war with a worthy foe breaks out. So American's are brain farting building thousands of latest tanks each year, even during peacetime? And I guess your shitty brain cannot comprehend graphs when you missed the production figures for the nuclear weapons and ICBMs during the cold war and beyond, and that was when BMD technology was not even in play. With BMDs, even attrition of missiles have to be taken into account.

Next time, do a better research or maybe hire some1 from Delhi for consultation.

You have no hope in this life. Atleast in the next life, grow a brain.

 

[Angad_NSA]

Is this your Idea of Logic? Getting approval from NSG does not need tanks? What next in your line of Logic? Building toilets does not require tanks?


This topic is about Super Power, not "great power sooner or later".


Have you ever heard of the word 'attrition', n00b? The only way a war time attrition can be countered is from new and fast production. The American latest M1A1 tank production capacity during peacetime was 1000-1100 units per year. They are totally self sufficient in both natural resources and technology, so expect this number to shoot up astronomically when war with a worthy foe breaks out. So American's are brain farting building thousands of latest tanks each year, even during peacetime? And I guess your shitty brain cannot comprehend graphs when you missed the production figures for the nuclear weapons and ICBMs during the cold war and beyond, and that was when BMD technology was not even in play. With BMDs, even attrition of missiles have to be taken into account.


You have no hope in this life. Atleast in the next life, grow a brain.

1. Still no reply from you on nuke deal.
2. China has no big natural resources. you have no reply to it either.
3. Still the point remains. WW-II scenario had no guidance technology.
4. As I said before, your brain is filled with US academic toilet farts. Hire some1 from Delhi to help u.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Your right, China was even bigger in the past

Oh wait do u want me to post a pic of asoka's empire and burst your gas ballon?I guess it would include all of pakistan and afganistan.So lets not bring x amount of years ago we had x amount of territory.

 

[Fireaxe888]

yes...Indeed Agni-V is'nt even comparable to 60s ICBM Bcoz Agni-V is far too superior of today ICBM'S........is that u want to proove or are u still in dreams??????

Here's an example - The R-7 Semyorka, the first ever ICBM., intrduced in the early 60s. It's liquid fueled and takes a long time to ready, unlike India's solid missiles, but has more than twice the range of the Agni V and can hit the USA from Russia, something no Indian missile can do.

 

[Su-11]

Angad_NSA

#The point you make have no relation to the topic you faggot. Who the **** cares if it is a nuke deal or a toilet deal, it has nothing to do with the topic.
#This thread is about being a super power, not "great power". Japan is a great power, Britain is a great power, but they are not super powers.
#Cold War ICBMs have no guidance as well? I bet you are just trolling. The reason why WW2 was mentioned was because that was the last war where all the major powers fought on the opposing sides. There is a reason why it was called a world war, not because it encompassed the entire world(infact entire world did not take part in it), but rather the industrial and military capacity of the nations which took part in that war was almost the entire world's capacity. Hence the name. The wars after that were simply proxy wars and pales in comparison to the magnitude where the Big boys fought head on with no punches pulled. Hence WW2 is the only example where the Big boys' Maximum military-industrial capacity is revealed.
#Learn the basics of Argument first and then respond before trolling in your pink tutu. lol. I hope that ban was permanent.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Here's an example - The R-7 Semyorka, the first ever ICBM., intrduced in the early 60s. It's liquid fueled and takes a long time to ready, unlike India's solid missiles, but has more than twice the range of the Agni V and can hit the USA from Russia, something no Indian missile can do.

thats because Russia's arms build up was aimed at USA.India don't want to scare Russia or USA or EU by Agni-5.its just aimed at China.anyway,if we can build a missile of 5000 km range,we surely can build a missile of 10000km range.but still..not yet..