Blain,
Thanks very much for the post. You took your time and that is respected.
But again---the post is going in circles---you were very specific in what you wrote---don't take the sting away from your original post.
You meant what you said---that is how I understood it---what I wrote back was in response to that---we both know that.
Mastan, what exactly is it that you are referring to? Obviously I mean what I say, otherwise what kind of a man would I be?
When you point out specific issues with my post, please quote me so I know what you getting at. My initial comment was about this statement of yours
"To say JF 17 would bring the enemy to the peace table is like making myself the laughing stock in front of those from across the border."
I agreed with this statement and in my previous post I had said this twice that wars are not won on the basis of a single weapon system. My point was even more general than the one you were trying to make.
What it comes down to is---that in going after the JF 17---pakistan has basically waved the white flag---they have admitted that they cannot compete with the opponent---and there is nothing wrong with this approach---at least they are being prudent---they know their limitation---they know the limitations of the enemy---.
Not sure why going for the JF-17 is akin to waving the white flag? If anything it has shown that PAF and the GoP will do what they must. Had Pakistan "completely" waved the white flag , we would not be buying new combat aircraft and enhancing our maritime capabilities. Instead we would be spending money on other important things such as social welfare and education. So this waving of white flag is out of place. Pakistan has ongoing disputes with India and those carry on so the issue of the white flag does not even figure. In line with our economic situation, Pakistan will make selective purchases and investments and the JF-17 is the latter case. Pakistan has never competed with India and nor should she. We have made gradual capabilities enhancements when we have been able to afford them or manage them. The same goes on now.
About the Amraam's---I guess the recent news of two days ago---Mr Blake---was conveniently ignored----the non-usage of american equipment against india.
Since you are such a history buff , how about you find a few articles from 1964 on microfiche (Library of Congress has an excellent collection) about the USMAP in Pakistan. The Americans had placed the exact same restrictions on us then and do so now. The same goes for India. As soon as a war starts between Pakistan and India, the Americans will stop supplying spares to both. However none of this stops us or anyone else from using them. This is something that people should understand clearly.
You have proved nothing---but rode piggy back on my post---and with cut, paste and post you have taken the meaning out of what I have written and twisted it around one more time---good try---your post is still there---read it again.
Lets not play games here. Post what exactly is it that you have a problem with. I don't hide behind words. I meant every single thing I stated. If you have a specific problem with a point, please use quotations so I understand what you are trying to say. I have no idea about the part in my very first post which seems to have irked you to no end.
In your last para---what are you saying---we can confront india with a little here a little there
What is a little here and little there? On the ground, there is a parity of capabilities. In the air and at sea, we are at a disadvantage, however this advantage is not any worse than in the past. If anything, going nuclear has ensured one thing and it is that neither side can afford to overwhelm the other. This goes more so for India.
your quote" ---To what end? And if that is your goal, why can this not be done with PAF's current plans? Have enough multi-role aircraft with decent standoff and strike capability. Have good radars and have a good training program. You get a fairly aggressive capability to deter aggression".
What a spinner Blain---what a spinner---indeed. You again twist my words.
Mastan, you really need to stick with facts. Your posts are increasingly confusing. Where is the spin? Please explain clearly and use quotations properly.
Under paf's current planes----they can't even run away from their own shadow---and talk about confronting india---ground radars are sitting ducks---multirole aircrafts---what multirole aircrafts---that can be taken away or destroyed on the ground by the u s of a.
Ground radars? So do you think the Erieyes are for storing at the PAF museum in Karachi? What about the F-16s flying right now? What about the JF-17s ability to conduct air interdiction and surface attack? Your sole point, which started this debate was negating the importance of the JF-17. Your words
Let me re-phrase it----JF 17 is a great plane of its own kind---BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE DOCTOR HAD ORDERED---.
So you want Pakistan to go for more Western aircraft so we can be embargoed even more? My point is to the contrary. I support the JF-17 induction. I think its exactly what the PAF needs to avoid getting into another difficult situation if the F-16s are sanctioned again. Your post is fairly contradictory and I feel I am not the only one who sees this.
These are different times---the u s will not hesitate to strike to destroy any threatening american weapons against india---.
All the more reason to stick with the JF-17s.
All my posts lead to one thing---pakistan didnot kill alqaeda on the slopes of hindukush---the pak millitary stayed angry with the u s of a even after agreeing to help them---the pak airforce failed to procure a platform between 2002 and 2005---because of bad assessment---that peace will prevail with india.
Americans had a better opportunity to kill AQ in the hills of Tora Bora. It would be better to question the American side why they allowed the AQ folks to get away instead of this self-flagellation. PAF failed to acquire anything because the GoP failed. It was the inability of the GoP to conduct its foreign policy in a manner which would have allowed its armed services to acquire the required equipment. To your last point, there is no option but for peace to prevail. Us buying 250 F-15s will not change this fact and neither would their purchase of a similar number of Su-30s and MMRCAs.
Oh---I almost missed it---you conveniently missed out on that part---about paf's failure to decipher india's mindset after 9/11.
And this has what to do with the JF-17 issue on hand? Lets stick to the topic on hand. Its not the PAF's job to understand "India's" mindset. This is diplomacy and beyond the scope of the discussion on hand.
Paf is in a stage of self denial---they almost again blundered us into all swedish awacs---thanks to Musharraf---we would have been tanked one more time. And look at the audacity of the ACM---after retiring he lambasts Musharraf for that---even though the ACM rented out his house to the swedish company for 4500 u s dllars---. Didnot have the decency to keep his mouth shut for awhile.
Again, this has nothing to do with the JF-17 issue and despite the fact that you have made incorrect statements again, I do not want to derail this topic of JF-17 with 10 other angles. Lets stick to the point on hand instead of bringing non-essential points to the discussion please.
Time has been the worst enemy of pakistan and pakistan air force---they always bet on the wrong horse---and the horse bit them in the behind every time.
It has been our ACHILLES heal for the 22 years for now.
Some bets are good, some are not. The JF-17 is definitely a good one any which way you look at it.
You will learn my young friend---in time you will learn what I am saying. Twenty five years ago I was sitting in the same chair as you were and there was someone else sitting in my position---how the roles have reversed---it is a fascinating process.
Patronizing tone should be avoided. Age is not an issue here (you'd be surprised to know that we are pretty close on that count). Trust me on this. This is the least bit courtesy that you should allow others who post on this forum given that you really have no idea about the background of most here. Stick to facts when responding instead of deflecting valid points with inane points about age, diapers, youth of others etc. etc.
Regards
