What's new

Ladakh: No 'Deal' was Struck with China

Are you free from running over two year olds or selling rat meat? :omghaha:

btw, that was just a joke d!ckweed..

This the same guy who is calling for India china friendship, in the thread about "chinese with drawl", seems some brain damage to him because of that.
 
.
To be precise the school of counter insurgency and Jungle warfare teaches both courses.

they teach you

1) How to track your target for days.

2) How to survive in harsh conditions like snow, mountains, jungles with minimum food and water.

and then some advance training like demolition, cutting of supply routes etc.,.etc..



all can be used for counter insurgency as well as Guerrilla warfare.


The mountain divisions which India placed all along the Indo-Tibet border are all well trained in Guerrilla warfare. In 1962 IA found out this deficiency and so they gave emphasis on this training.

I suggest that you try to distinguish between tactics and a mode of warfare. Using counter-insurgency tactics does not amount to mastery of guerrilla warfare. The groups practising guerrilla warfare in India are the Maoists in central India, who are very well-trained and fight their opposition, police and para-military forces, very well, and several of the insurgent forces in the north-east, the Nagas first, about half-a-dozen more next.

Again, your lack of knowledge truly distinguishes you. The Indian Army got nothing to inspire this school from 1962; it was fighting unsuccessfully against the Nagas, then the Mizos that inpired it.

You should have taken a hint from the name of the school at Vairengte - CIJWS:

The original plans to set up a counter-insurgency unit to train soldiers came about following the government response to the Mizo militancy in the 1960s. Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, then the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief (GOC-IN-C) of the Indian Army's Eastern Command, was the first proponent for the institute.[3]
 
.
It is available in the public domain. Just look up the military districts of the PRC, and the troops assigned to each.

Second, it is not a question of one military district of the PRC defeating the entire IA. You have to count for yourself how many of the Indian Army's 31 divisions (not counting the mountain divisions under raising) are deployed against Pakistan, and how many are deployed against the PLA. That has to be compared against either of the two districts assigned to India (among other borders).

sir 7 divisons are deployed in north east...not sure about ladakh and uttarakhand though...
 
.
Sir, the motto of the CIJWS is "FIGHT A GUERILLA, LIKE A GUERILLA"


I have plenty of knowledge on the CIJWS as my uncle was an instructor there for 2 years before returning to his PARA btn.



To say the IA has no guerilla warfare expertise is quite far of the mark sir, IMHO.

I have great respect and loyalty for the Indian Army. Its counter-insurgency doctrine and practice is among the best in the world, close behind what the South Africans were, and what the British achieved earlier in the middle of the 20th century, in Cyprus, Aden, Malaysia and Borneo.

What this organised, hierarchically structured Army cannot do is to become a guerrilla army. It can provide excellent special forces troops, it is not, and never will be a guerrilla army.
 
.
How much troops can India and China simultaneously bring along the Line of Actual Control in case of a conflict , sir ? What are the estimates ?

China - around 400,000 in a month's time...

India - 1/4th of that but the good news is it's bound to improve, also will depend on our front with Pakistan - which limits us in moving more troops - hence the so called development of a two front war - now this doctrine does not mean that we intend to fight a two front war but to develop capabilities for such an eventuality and that also means improving logistics too.
 
.
I suggest that you try to distinguish between tactics and a mode of warfare. Using counter-insurgency tactics does not amount to mastery of guerrilla warfare. The groups practising guerrilla warfare in India are the Maoists in central India, who are very well-trained and fight their opposition, police and para-military forces, very well, and several of the insurgent forces in the north-east, the Nagas first, about half-a-dozen more next.

Again, your lack of knowledge truly distinguishes you. The Indian Army got nothing to inspire this school from 1962; it was fighting unsuccessfully against the Nagas, then the Mizos that inpired it.

You should have taken a hint from the name of the school at Vairengte - CIJWS:


you must understand one thing... understanding enemy strength is very good... but down sizing your own capabilities is very pathetic... give some credit to IA... you are talking very funny... no body denying PLA strength here... but you are talking like they can walk and take any thing they want... without any risk...
 
.
What's up @Joe Shearer, what kind of a "deal" do you suggest that India cuts with China? and what's up with your severe lack of confidence on the IA vis a vis the PLA?

Neither of those statements are true. They do not represent my position.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
I have great respect and loyalty for the Indian Army. Its counter-insurgency doctrine and practice is among the best in the world, close behind what the South Africans were, and what the British achieved earlier in the middle of the 20th century, in Cyprus, Aden, Malaysia and Borneo.

What this organised, hierarchically structured Army cannot do is to become a guerrilla army. It can provide excellent special forces troops, it is not, and never will be a guerrilla army.

To my knowledge, a guerilla war can be fought only through recruitment of local elements...since local support, logistics, supplies etc are essential for the survival of a guerilla force..
Forces from different part of India trained in Guerilla warfare or counter insurgency can fight against guerilla forces, but cannot be successful in a foreign land without the local support element or creating a deep seated network with the locals...
So in the case of china (bad idea to begin with ), we cannot just send troops trained in CI to fight a guerilla war IN CHINA....the right approach would be to train local tibetans or Chinese to do that work....of course, the repercussions of the same need to be well evaluated before taking these steps..

In short..I agree with Mr. Shearer here...

Please correct me if Im wrong..I speak mainly from my reading of Guerilla warfare
 
.
I suggest that you try to distinguish between tactics and a mode of warfare. Using counter-insurgency tactics does not amount to mastery of guerrilla warfare. The groups practising guerrilla warfare in India are the Maoists in central India, who are very well-trained and fight their opposition, police and para-military forces, very well, and several of the insurgent forces in the north-east, the Nagas first, about half-a-dozen more next.

Again, your lack of knowledge truly distinguishes you. The Indian Army got nothing to inspire this school from 1962; it was fighting unsuccessfully against the Nagas, then the Mizos that inpired it.

You should have taken a hint from the name of the school at Vairengte - CIJWS:

First lets discuss you assertion about IA's lack of Guerrilla expertise

The following is about India's mountain warfare expertise



The term mountain warfare is said to have come about in the Middle Ages after the monarchies of Europe found it difficult to fight the Swiss armies in the Alps. This was because the Swiss were able to fight in smaller units and took vantage points against a huge unmaneuverable army. Similar styles of attack and defence were later employed by guerrillas, partisans and irregulars who hid in the mountains after an attack, making it challenging for an army of regulars to fight back.


So mountain warfare also includes Guerilla tactics. point one. Your assertion is wrong considering that India has vast amount of expertise in Counter insurgency operations which also includes Mountain warfare and Guerrilla tactics in the north east.

India
The Indian Army is among the most experienced and best trained in mountain warfare having fought numerous conflicts in the Himalayas in Arunachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir while maintaining one of the largest active contingents of mountain warfare forces in the world, giving the Indian Army some of the most extensive and well-developed Mountain Warfare capabilities. Major conflicts include the 1962 Sino-Indian War and the Kargil War in 1999. Siachen Glacier is the world's highest battlefield, with about 3000 Indian troops on year round deployment on the edge of a glacier. For over two decades, India & Pakistan have fought numerous skirmishes in this most inhospitable of mountain territories, at altitudes over 6000 meters (20,000 feet) and at temperatures as low as -50 Celsius.

Due to the instability in the region and the need for permanent deployments in the mountainous regions, India's mountain warfare units were vastly expanded after the 1962 war, with the creation of 6 Mountain Divisions.[3] The Indian Army presently has 10 Army Divisions dedicated to mountain warfare (8 Mountain Divisions and 2 Mountain Strike divisions) and another infantry division earmarked for high altitude operations. Each division has a personnel strength of 10,000-13,000 troops and consists of 3 brigades with 3,000 to 4,500 men each, including support elements such as signals, provost, and intelligence units.[4]

In 2008, the Indian Army has sanctioned plans to raise two additional mountain divisions, with goals to be operational in five years. The two divisions will also have extensive air assets, including Utility helicopters, Helicopter gunships and Attack helicopters.[4]


This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (July 2009)
Training:
The Indian Military Academy (IMA), Dehradun conducts preliminary mountaineering and mountain warfare training for all Officer Cadets. Discontinued in the late 1980s, the Bhadraj Camp was revived in 1999 after the Kargil War. The culmination is a course of a 40 km run and climbing a 5500 feet cliff with a fully loaded pack at night.[5]

For more specialized training, the Army operates the Parvat Ghatak School (Hindi: पर्वत घातक, Mountain Strike or Mountain Warrior) at Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh. This high-altitude commando school is the highest of its kind at 15,000 feet. With the mercury dipping to minus 20 degrees providing a freezing tougher terrain to impart training in conditions similar to Siachen.[6]

Another school, the High Altitude Warfare School (HAWS) is located near Gulmarg, Jammu and Kashmir. Set up in 1948 as the 19 Infantry Division Ski School, HAWS has over the years become the Indian Army's nodal center for "specialised training and dissemination of doctrines" in high-altitude, mountain and snow warfare. HAWS Mountain warfare courses are conducted in the Sonamarg area, and snow-craft & winter warfare training in the Gulmarg area. HAWS played an important role during the Kargil War by conducting crash courses for troops prior to their deployment.[7]

Given the extensive experience of the Indian Army in mountain warfare, troops from other nations regularly train and conduct joint exercises at these schools. Because of its experience in fighting wars in mountain regions for over 50 years, as well as its history of recruitment of natives from the Himalayan regions of India and Nepal (such as Gurkha, Kumaon, Garhwal and Dogras), Indian Mountain Warfare Units are considered among the best in the world. Numerous army units across the world are now implementing training modules modeled after Indian Mountain Warfare training systems.[7] These include forces from UK,[8] US,[9] Russia, etc. In 2004, US special forces teams were sent to India to learn from Indian Army experiences of the Kargil War prior to their deployment for operations in Afghanistan. Russian troops also trained at the High Altitude Warfare School in Gulmarg for operations in Chechnya.[10][11] They also visited Siachen and other Army posts.[12]


Secondly regarding my post I said the school offers both counter insurgency which may involve Guerrilla tactics.


In 1962 Indian forces were ill trained for snow mountain warfare but Chinese were well accustomed to this style of war, since they just returned after fighting war with USSR. So after 1962 more emphasis was give on setting up more mountain divisions and training.
 
.
your answer is irrelevant to my question.... i will write 100 text about war... does it matter to any body? war is dynamic in nature.... strategies changes..... so what are you thinking IA personal is stupids? they can't fight a war? you said one Military district will defeat IA... i asked back your claim... which district you are referring in chengdu region... what are the strength of the chengdu region and particular region you are referring....

Let me make it easy for you.

1. The PLA was born in the Chinese Civil War, and fought for decades as a purely guerrilla army.
2. The point about writing a text on war was that their leadership was very well intellectually equipped to fight guerrilla wars, as trained leaders.
3. The tactis used by the PLA in the Korean War closely follow the precepts of Mao in his texts on war (which I have read, btw).
4. It is true war is dynamic in nature, and strategies change. Guerrilla warfare has nothing to do with strategies; it has everything to do with total warfare.
5. Are IA personnel stupid? You should consult A. H. Amin. In his opinion, when sub-continental armies fight, the winner is the one that commits the fewer mistakes. As far as the IA leadership is concerned, it was nothing to write home about either in 1962 or in 1965. The field level people fought well, very well. Would you like examples? And, before you say it, recent leadership after 1971 has not been brilliant.
6. I did not say that one military district would defeat the IA. Please look up my precise statement, do not distort what I say.
7. You need to look up your own facts, and not ask to be spoon-fed. It has already been stated clearly that only 7 divisions are deployed against the PLA. It is also on record how many organisations are available at either of the two military districts, and also how many can be deployed at short notice at any point of the border in given time frames.

If you are so abysmally ignorant about the history of these armies, you should not ask irrelevant questions. The answers to them may seem irrelevant to you.
 
.
To my knowledge, a guerilla war can be fought only through recruitment of local elements...since local support, logistics, supplies etc are essential for the survival of a guerilla force..
Forces from different part of India trained in Guerilla warfare or counter insurgency can fight against guerilla forces cannot be successful without the local support element or creating a deep seated network with the locals...
So in the case of china (bad idea to begin with ), we cannot just send troops trained in CI to fight a guerilla war IN CHINA....the right approach would be to train local tibetans or Chinese to do that work....of course, the repercussions of the same need to be well evaluated before taking these steps..

In short..I agree with Mr. Shearer here...

Please correct me if Im wrong..I speak mainly from my reading of Guerilla warfare

wtf you are using Guerilla warfare to fight us in our country hahahaha man seriously you need to go see your local gp asap, man this is the first time I heard an invading army using Guerilla warfare tactics:omghaha:
 
.
shut up listen to joeshearer and try to learn something , Guerrilla warfare against china hahaha LMAO:omghaha:cannt get more stupid than this

Not all Indians are as stupid as this one. Please don't laugh at us. Our military are really better than these unrepresentative ********.
 
.
feel free what ever you want... @joe come on man... i asked you to provide source for your claim... do you think massive military personal can get food supply chains deep into the AP... as you said 13 per 1 km... so how they can get supply lines and move their armor ?

Your ignorance is astounding.

Please research into how long it took them to build a road from Bum La deep into Indian territory, after pushing back our troops.

That's how they'll do it, if push comes to shove.

Meanwhile, we haven't managed an all-weather road over Se La in 51 years. I've just been over that road.

PS: They might try to deploy armour in Aksai Chin; why would anyone deploy armour in Arunachal? Other than Hong Wu?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Not all Indians are as stupid as this one. Please don't laugh at us. Our military are really better than these unrepresentative ********.

And here comes the savior of India advocating cowardice to IA,even after Chinese have failed in the Chess move and got thrashed like sh!T.

you talk too much my friend... which is needless.... ok you praise PLA no problem with it....

That guy has the tendency to take the enemy side and downplay Indians.

Point here is simple the infrastructure was not built so that the invading force cannot hold on to Guerrilla attacks.

This tactic is called denying the space for enemy.

I have seen in lot of talk shows in which senior generals emphasizing this point.

India only built landing facilities to move these guerillas in case of war and also bought Antonov aircraft for that.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom