tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4704148890264843595.post8125209886285465892..comments2024-03-27T03:46:07.097-07:00Comments on Raman's strategic analysis: INDIA-CHINA: CAN THE HUMILIATION OF 1962 REPEAT ITSELF?B.RAMANhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12278000644746170031noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4704148890264843595.post-80251646379897468592012-09-26T03:42:59.307-07:002012-09-26T03:42:59.307-07:00Excellent post Sir. Yunnan is really becoming a fr...Excellent post Sir. Yunnan is really becoming a front-line state in Sino-Indian relations. From conventional military to helping insurgency in North East from there <i>(we know <b>Paresh Barua</b> operates from there)</i>. <br /><br />I disagree with <b>peter g</b> on the size factor. In modern warfare numbers only mater when every thing else remains equal and same. Force ratio is a better indicator. An aggressor need at lest 3 to 1 force ratio in easy terrain against a trained enemy. Now what kind of force ratio required in trans-Himalayan terrain <i>(probably the most difficult and literally up-hill)</i>? But, i agree on the sea aspect with him. In case of an escalation sea based supply lines can become battlegrounds. <br /><br />Totally disagree with Visible Trade. War is not trade. All the reasons that Sri Raman has shown for the humiliation in 62, the political establishment of that time must take the blame for it. Post Vietnam and post Afghanistan the kind of argument Visible Trade is making does not even make sense. <br /><br />Lastly must also appreciate Sri Ramans discretion by not talking on the nuclear aspect and cause unnecessary panic. But, will be looking forward to a more broad based post on general nuclear preparedness of UPA govt.<br /><br />Wishing you best of health, regards - tweetingsourav.Souravhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01057985031247882319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4704148890264843595.post-31826456088324849642012-09-17T23:13:17.611-07:002012-09-17T23:13:17.611-07:00I broadly agree with Peter g. on the matter of sea...I broadly agree with Peter g. on the matter of sea change in the last 50 years and on the matter of strengthening the intelligence assets. I am sure the exercise that you have suggested is important for long term planning and should be / would be undertaken periodically. <br /><br />I have 2 other comments:<br /><br />1. You are underestimating the role of navy in this war. My feeling is that it will have substantial role on the outcome of the war.<br /><br />2. Humiliation is a given in any war with China. Very broadly we are at least 30 years behind in production capacity, economic power, aggression assets or support infrastructure. We may win a battle but we do not have the capability to fight a war with China let alone win it. Visible Tradehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04661918087112746069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4704148890264843595.post-63341033547242562832012-09-17T08:49:06.624-07:002012-09-17T08:49:06.624-07:00There is no point in comparing our capabilities of...There is no point in comparing our capabilities of 1962 to the present. 50 years have gone by and our defense capabilities have vastly improved but we should not forget that so has the Chinese PLA.Tibet was a God-forsaken place then but today it is different.Lhasa had nothing except the Potala palace to speak of but today it is a bustling modern city with PLA and PLAAF bases with all weather capabilities. Recent reliable reports speak of five fully operational airbases at Gongar,Linchi,Hoping, Pangta and Gar Gunsa.A well connected rail network over the TAR. Of special significance is is the Qinghai-Tibet Railway line which will assume much strategic importance during any hostilities either offensive or defensive. TAR has over 58,000 Kms of roads. To safeguard these assets,the PLAAF is steadily building up its strength in the TAR. As reported by TOI sometime ago, the Chengdu military region and the PLA airbases in TAR are exclusively tasked for an anti-India role.Missiles have been sited at Qinghai province and obviously the targets are in India.Of course, India has come a long way too, in defence preparedness but the Chinese outnumber us three to one in all aspects, be it manpower or material.There is nothing much we can do about it except to strengthen our intelligence assets .Sadly our intelligence organisations both civil and military are totally Pak oriented.We know a lot about Pak but very less about China. Like you have said, we dont even have many Chinese language specialists worth speaking of. peter g.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12474842889895841900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4704148890264843595.post-61160885855944096502012-09-17T06:37:03.979-07:002012-09-17T06:37:03.979-07:00Thanks, Mr Raman, you are back to your rational ra...Thanks, Mr Raman, you are back to your rational rather than emotional/bigoted analysing.<br /><br />I have thought for a long time that the biggest strategic threat to India comes from China, not Pakistan, and that the latter country poses a tactical threat to us. In your article though you don't consider how China might use their all weather friend tactically in the build up to and actual conflict with India.<br /><br />Also, and please correct me if I am wrong, I believe the Indian air force was not used on Nehru's orders in 1962. Are our current corrupt politicians of whatever party still as insanely stupid as Nehru was?What They don't Want You to Knowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15445149108898531654noreply@blogger.com