Neighborhood First: EAM Jaishankar to visit Bangladesh next week

[bluesky]

About 48 years too late

Yes, it was 48 years ago that the Kala, Nata aur Bhukha Bangalis were kicked out by the tall and handsome people in the west of India.

 

[namefield_empty]

This is true in practical sense, north eastern states share 98 percent of it's border with Bangladesh, China and Myanmar and only 2 percent with rest of India. Land locked North East India is practically sandwiched between Bangladesh and China. This region do not add strength to India rather weakness and headache. So, calling India is surrounding Bangladesh on three sides because of north East is meaningless.

Don't get ahead of yourself. Lemme explain to you in a way you will understand. Imagine a pair of concentric circles, the outer one is India and you are sandwiched on all sides by us staring into the dead end of the Bay of Bengal. You are encircled from all sides, with India occupying all the vantage points. Let's just say that you face an uphill task. As for the Siliguri corridor, what stops us from carving a way through Rangpur and Mymensingh. Bangladesh will be overrun in a couple of days from all sides in the event of hostilities. Our paramilitary stationed in NE is enough for you weaklings. Now stop this warmongering.

 

[Arthur]

But don't you think, tanks number are very low? BA has only 340 tanks, while India has 4000. To achieve minimum credible deterrence in armor, we need at least 1000 tanks assuming most of the Indian tanks will remain in Western India. Only 340 tanks for 10 division army is not enough. Same is the case with MLRS, Artillery even APC in BA inventory. All of these things need to increase for at least 3 times in quantity than what currently it has.

Well we won't have to match them 1 on 1 basis. No tank battle like Chawinda is possible in Bangladesh Terrain.

We bought about 300 T59 from China since the 80's. About 174 was upgrade to Durjoy as of 2015. Upgrade of the rest is finished by now.

& Those 300 doesn't include about 274 T59 we bought from China surplus. Rumor is, Army is working on a different upgrade package this time.

And if you consider 2 regiment Light tanks & 1 regiment Amphibious tanks to be bought ( in Tender-Evaluation stage), Armour Corps is well set by 2025.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

Yes, it was 48 years ago that the Kala, Nata aur Bhukha Bangalis were kicked out by the tall and handsome people in the west of India.

Inferiority complex much?

 

[bluesky]

Inferiority complex much?

No, we are going superior to you in the economic front. Why inferiority complex?

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Well we won't have to match them 1 on 1 basis. No tank battle like Chawinda is possible in Bangladesh Terrain.

No, I was not talking about 1:1. But Bangladesh is long way behind to achieve even 1/3rd or 1/4th of the equipment of what India has to maintain a minimum credible deterrence against it. If we want to maintain even 1/4th of armor of India, still we need to maintain least 1000 Tanks. Below it, I do not think, Bangladesh will be able to withstand Indian armored advance. Same is true for all other equipment needed for land warfare. Every army equipment we have now need to increase at least a factor of 3. Then we can say, we have minimum equipment to withstand any hypothetical Indian military assault.

 

[Arthur]

No, I was not talking about 1:1. But Bangladesh is long way behind to achieve even 1/3rd or 1/4th of the equipment of what India has to maintain a minimum credible deterrence against it. If we want to maintain even 1/4th of armor of India, still we need to maintain least 1000 Tanks. Below it, I do not think, Bangladesh will be able to withstand Indian armored advance. Same is true for all other equipment needed for land warfare. Every army equipment we have now need to increase at least a factor of 3. Then we can say, we have minimum equipment to withstand any hypothetical Indian military assault.

Good point there. But deploying 1000 tanks to the frontline will be a logistical nightmare itself. Same goes for our adversaries.

BA always wanted to avoid that complex logistic chain & wage a blow that at the same time will be fatal & simple to sustain.

 

[UKBengali]

No, I was not talking about 1:1. But Bangladesh is long way behind to achieve even 1/3rd or 1/4th of the equipment of what India has to maintain a minimum credible deterrence against it. If we want to maintain even 1/4th of armor of India, still we need to maintain least 1000 Tanks. Below it, I do not think, Bangladesh will be able to withstand Indian armored advance. Same is true for all other equipment needed for land warfare. Every army equipment we have now need to increase at least a factor of 3. Then we can say, we have minimum equipment to withstand any hypothetical Indian military assault.

You are incorrect.

Most of BD is not suitable for tank warfare.

Only the NW of the country can be traversed by standard main battle tanks. India could attack with most some hundreds of tanks here.
As well as the hundreds of upgraded tanks, BD also has modern anti-tank missiles to knock out Indian armour.
Batteries of FM-90C SAMs and the numerous MANPADS will protect BA from Indian aircraft

Main problem for BD now is the weak BAF that IAF can take out in hours.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Good point there. But deploying 1000 tanks to the frontline will be a logistical nightmare itself. Same goes for our adversaries.

BA always wanted to avoid that complex logistic chain & wage a blow that at the same time will be fatal & simple to sustain.

Not all the One thousand Tanks are at a once. Any such war will involve many days, possibly months. So multiple tank battle at multiple locations are likely. In such a case, number matters.

 

[namefield_empty]

If we want to maintain even 1/4th of armor of India, still we need to maintain least 1000 Tanks.

Nothing will happen even if you get 2000 tanks, that is why i asked you to have a look at your geography.

Consider for a moment that hostilities break out and you attack us(India will never even think of acting first against a brotherly nation), what will be your objectives. You can ill afford to cross into Bengal plains as that would be your graveyard. Remaining is the north east, where your tanks are ineffective. Your borders with lower Assam are riverine, and that with Meghalaya are dense hilly tracts where you would be decimated. Our armed forces in NE are specifically trained in jungle and guerrilla warfare and in fact they train your forces too.

Your only bet is to mount an attack on Barak, which would give us a chance to retake Sylhet once and for all.

There is a reason why Bangladesh haven't built any infrastructure in the north western areas of Rangpur or bridges over the upper extent of Jamuna. You are too afraid of us, your entire strategy is based on defence and resistance. So stop taking the high ground and come to your senses. As i have said, our paramilitary is enough to deal with your country in case you transgress your remit.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

No, we are going superior to you in the economic front. Why inferiority complex?

So that's cute, keep dreaming

 

[Bilal9]

Not all 10 divisions are under eequipped. I won't go to details due to official secrecy, but strike elements of BA can mobilise more than 50,000 troops, more than couple hundred tanks, ADA, hundreds of Artillery pieces within few minutes notice.

Guys please see my post about how superior coordination and tactics can make a difference against a much better equipped army. Coordination is where it is at. But I'm afraid, there, too we are weak. Certainly more advanced training is called for.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/bangladesh-army.168816/page-349#post-11710048

 

[VikingRaider]

Not all 10 divisions are under eequipped. I won't go to details due to official secrecy, but strike elements of BA can mobilise more than 50,000 troops, more than couple hundred tanks, ADA, hundreds of Artillery pieces within few minutes notice.

So I guess you are part of either Bangladesh army or other defense brunches? If my assumption is correct, then really glad to hear something from a defense specialist! And also feeling a bit secured by knowing that BA can mobilise such numbers in a few minutes!
@Arthur

Good point there. But deploying 1000 tanks to the frontline will be a logistical nightmare itself. Same goes for our adversaries.

BA always wanted to avoid that complex logistic chain & wage a blow that at the same time will be fatal & simple to sustain.

I heard somewhere that deployment of mass soldiers in a small theater is a technical fault, and also USA army use a method name METIC -TC. So can you please tell me brother ( if you are s specialist about it) how many soldiers and air craft can we deploy at once if any war really happen?

I heard that in 1 Sq miles ( or km can't remember) area with people of one thousand, deployed number of army personnels should be 25.

Is it true? If that's true then what should be our number of amred forces as a small country and also a densely populated area?

Do we have sufficient amount of army personnels or we need to increase it in numbers? Is it possible to give me some light please?
@Arthur

 

[Arthur]

So I guess you are part of either Bangladesh army or other defense brunches? If my assumption is correct, then really glad to hear something from a defense specialist! And also feeling a bit secured by knowing that BA can mobilise such numbers in a few minutes!
@Arthur

I am not from the armed forces. I Just have a good network. And people I mingle with don't like it when their secret is out.

BA was always critical about preparedness & response times. I have visited many installations & they all seem to have their own trick to make it happen.

I heard somewhere that deployment of mass soldiers in a small theater is a technical fault, and also USA army use a method name METIC -TC. So can you please tell me brother ( if you are s specialist about it) how many soldiers and air craft can we deploy at once if any war really happen?

I heard that in 1 Sq miles ( or km can't remember) area with people of one thousand, deployed number of army personnels should be 25.

Is it true? If that's true then what should be our number of amred forces as a small country and also a densely populated area?

Do we have sufficient amount of army personnels or we need to increase it in numbers? Is it possible to give me some light please?
@Arthur

Yes, more or less. Amassing too many platform in a small area is just making easy target. Especially if it's a small country like BD.

Commanders has to calculate how many personnels & equipment they need to operate in a scenario or to carry out a mission & that's what they go with. USA is master of that. Look at their Invasion of Iraq. They prepared extensively but the number was just enough to do the did.

Large number doesn't mean all of it will be mission ready. Preparation, Preparedness & right mindset is the key. When the new divisions reaches full strength the number will be sufficient. BA currently looking at 2,00,000. But around 2,25,000-2,50,000 is a good number IMO.

Size is a relative matter though. If you read back history, there is plenty of examples set by small defenders giving a befitting lesson to a much bigger invasion force.

 

[VikingRaider]

I am not from the armed forces. I Just have a good network.

That's fine brother . You have good network with them,that means your informations should be more reliable than others who doesn't have this network.

And people I mingle with don't like it when their secret is out.

BA was always critical about preparedness & response times. I have visited many installations & they all seem to have their own trick to make it happen.

Yes that should be like that. I also heard that our military actually don't open the secret about our artillery and logistics. For defense purpose they should do this.

Yes more or less. Amassing too many platform in a small area is just making easy target. Especially if it's a small country like BD.

Commanders has to calculate how many personnels & equipment they need to operate in a scenario or to carry out a mission & that's what they go with. USA is master of that. Look at their Invasion of Iraq. They prepared extensively but the number was just enough to do the did.

Large number doesn't mean all of it will be mission ready. Preparation, Preparedness & right mindset is the key.

Thanks for this part! So I assume that it will not be easy for others to dismantle us so easily as they always loudly bray.

Size doesn't matter though IHMO. If you read back history, there is plenty of examples set by small defenders giving a befitting lesson to a much bigger invasion force.

Yes that's true.