South Asians Eating Grass to Acquire Nuke Subs

[Hutchroy]

Dude 70% of your populous is poor

About 70 percent of India is poor: Top adviser - Yahoo! India Finance

Couldn't agree more with you, but, it is Pakistan with the Begging Bowl!

What does that imply?

 

[Luftwaffe]

Mr Haq,

Why do we need to bring in the poor and the starving into the discussion---. They are alreadu living a miserable life---do we really need to harp on it.

Pakistanis need to focus on the threat that we are facing---either the terrorist or the indian---. Being sarcastic about the poor and starving indians is not going to stop the sorities being flown by 140 SU30 MKI's and other aircraft---.

Mr Haq----a good strategy is to never insult and humiliate or degrade a bigger enemy than yourself---.

Here is a video for you----don't insult the big boy---

Loud and Clear either its the enemy we have to deal with or Poverty we chose 1 but the enemy is ruthless she will drag you and pay you for those 800 hundred Years. You always speak what is in my heart and mind we have been fooled for atleast last 4 decades.

 

[Hafizzz]

Source????

he just made up the information.

 

[GoodBoy]

India lies about its real defense spending. If military pensions, nuclear weapons reactors, J&K rifles and Coast Guard are included, India's defense budget exceeds 3.5% of GDP, according to Indian Defense analyst Col Pavan Nair.

Here's an excerpt from his January 2010 article:

"The cost of military pensions in the current year is Rs 21,790 crores. This was the entire outlay on defense till as late as 1993-94 and excludes the further hike in pensions announced in the budget for personnel below officer rank amounting to Rs 2,100 crores. The cost of the MoD which includes the outlay on the JAKLI and the Coast Guard, as also the defense accounts department, canteen department and its own secretariat is Rs 3,170 crores. Both these items taken together (Defense Services Estimates, Civil) are debited to several sub-heads under the General Services head. The CPMFs involved in border management, an important aspect of external security (Assam Rifles, BSF, ITBP, and the Sashastra Seema Bal or SSB) cost Rs 11,397 crores. These forces come under the operational control of the army during war just as the Coast Guard comes under the control of the navy. This cost along with the cost of other para-military forces is debited to the Police sub-head within the General Services head. As stated earlier, it is not possible to compute the cost of the nuclear arsenal but post the nuclear deal, we are aware that 35% of reactors are for military use, therefore the cost to be added to the defense budget could be assessed by adding 35% of the budget of the DAE and DOS which is also responsible for the development and testing of longer range ballistic missiles and satellites for military purposes. This amounts to about Rs 4,456 crores. This is a conservative estimate. Thus the official defense budget amounting to Rs 1,41,703 crores excludes an amount of Rs 40,813 crores or 29% of the allotment. DE in aggregate amounts to Rs 1,82,516 crores which is above the 3% GDP limit specified by the EFC. Unfortunately, defence analysts ignore this aspect when discussing the defense budget. Splitting DE amounts to obfuscation and should be avoided since it can confuse planners and parliamentarians alike.
In addition, the cost of border fencing, border roads and military aid to several countries like Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Nepal and Bhutan running into thousands of crores is shown in the expenditure of various other departments and ministries. "

Haq's Musings: India's Arms Buildup: Guns Versus Bread

Why not include private security guards at schools/colleges/offices or bouncers in pubs as well? It would make Indian Defense/Security Budget cross 10%

Mr Haq you are making a mockery of yourself.

Also, only a person totally ignorant of how pensions work would count Pension outlay as a part of defense budget, because that would amount to double counting. Because every year, as a part of annual wages, a money is set aside for future pension of jawans/officers. The same money is accumulated in a fund that pays for the pension down the line. So the pensions being paid today were part of money set aside as a part of wages in previous years and was counted as a part of defense spending in those years. So that money was already counted in the defense spending in the year it was set aside. And therefor counting it again in the year it was distributed would result in double counting..

So as I said Mr Haq, good try, but no cigar

Come on... you are overestimating Mr Haq's understanding capabilities now. He would simply post the same article again in reply.