You cannot say you care about it and then sign deals with countries that protect Myanmar from UN Security Council resolutions and turn around & expect others to do your dirty work.
Excuse me!! Our dirty work?!
You sound like these Rohingyas are part of some kind of CIA black op or Mexican drug cartel.
I thought it was always the other way around for USA.
Ethnic groups including Rohingyas in Burma are suffering more than two decades. The EU at least maintains arms embargo on Myanmar.
Tell me again what USA has done so far except putting sanctions on some Burmese military officers? It was quite clear that the west can't do shit in UN while China, Russia protect Myanmar. In the meanwhile your closest allies are investing, supplying weapons and even supporting Myanmar in UN.
Your humanitarian groups can't do anything in Myanmar while obstructing our plans to relocate these Rohingya ingrates to Bhashan Char and encouraging these refugees not repatriate unless MM gives them citizenship. That complicates this issue more and makes our locals life harder. Now you are making 10 years plan for Rohingya and telling us to wait till Myanmar's general election.
What can you possibly achieve after the election when your dearest Suu Kyi talks exactly like those general about ethnic cleansing? If Myanmar still wants to come on your side you will welcome that country with open arms. You can't do anything like you can't with Iran, NK. You slap arms and economic embargo more quickly for WMD which haven't killed a single life after WW2 but it takes you forever to take action about genocide or ethnic cleansing.
All you can do is weaponizing your dollar, selling weapon and pulling political strings on others. You are no match for China-Japan in our economic-infrastructure development in BD. We can still weapons from Europe. We never had to worry about that before when you refused to sell and we won't have to worry about it in future either. Before doing our "dirty work", how about you do some of our legal works first? Like other unsolved issues mentioned in the first thread or sending back Mujib's killer. Sheltering a killer of a democratic country's elected president..........whose dirty work are you doing here actually?
Anyway if your IPS is suppose to make us anti-china then you can keep dreaming and consulting with your minion India before "resetting" ties with us.
P.S:- If we don't become anti-China please don't get upset and start destabilizing BD and another proxy war here like you do in ME.
What is so funny? 160 units (To arm each army division with a 16-unit squadron) by 2035 is certainly affordable especially with ToT. Whether we actually do it is a seperate discussion.
Attack helicopters are essential for BA given how difficult most of BD terrain is for tank and troop movement. They will make any land invasion of BD an impossible task for the enemy.
UAVs tech has not yet matured enough to offer the firepower that helicopters can provide.
You answered your own question with one line. You sound like the BAF version of me, dreaming about 160 attack helicopters for BA like the 10 squadrons of fighters. You didn't show the math so i guess you want army to order 10-12 aircraft per every year which unlikely to happen. Army Aviation's whole fleet is small, their helicopter fleet is even smaller and they are based at Dhaka. I don't see them talking about having 10 helicopter per division. They haven't even started the process to buy six more Mi-171 helicopter. Attack helicopter is just plan for now and no suitable option is available except American ones,
More importantly i doubt army thinks that they require 160 attack helicopters while BAF wants to operate it too. Even if we get TOT, it will be transferred to BAF. Army doesn't have any infrastructure or personnel to absorb that and same goes for BAF right now. It funny to see you talking about attack helicopter's TOT while call BAF's aircraft production plan a vanity project.
One UCAV may not provide the firepower a helicopter does but with the price of one Apache you can buy at least five Wing Long 2 which provides more firepower and UCAV has more types of weapon with longer range than attack helicopter. So at cheaper price, operational cost and without risking precious pilots lives we can use UCAV more efficiently than attack helicopter. Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict showed the usefulness of UCAV. When your adversaries have VSHORAD and SHORAD capabilities you wouldn't risk using attack helicopter.
Army has enough anti-tank weapons so besides UCAV we can use our trainers, F-7 to destroy enemy armor. Also new Mi-171sh-VN/Black Hawk can take out enemy armor while transporting troops. So 160 or less attack helicopters with ToT isn't really necessary right now, instead we can get ToT for UCAV, ATGM and combat-transport helicopter like Mi-171VN to do that job.
You misunderstood me...sorry that's my fault because of my choice of words...what I'm trying to say is FM said "সামরিক সহযোগিতার বিষয়ে যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের আগ্রহের বিষয়ে জানতে চাইলে তিনি বলেন , " যুক্তরাষ্ট্র ডিফেন্সে যেতে চায় , ইক্যুইপমেন্ট বিক্রি করতে চায় , কিন্তু আমরা মারামারিতে নাই । সুতরাং ওই বিষয়গুলোতে আমাদের অনীহা আছে " । But Bangladesh itself made initial request for US made weapons (fighter jets,missile systems,attack helicopter) back in 2018
I'm sure Bangladesh knew the pros and cons of buying US weapons and still made that request. Now US is responding to that request and FM is saying "amra mara mari te nai, amader oniha ase ei sheei"...so yeah..its very very confusing what Bangladesh actually wants.
That idiot said the same thing during Turkey tour. Our procurement doesn't match with his statement. I guess he is trying to say we will not be too aggressive or part of any rivalry. Probably an eyewash while continuing to purchase arms. Anyway even if we don't buy any major weapon systems it shouldn't be a problem, like it never did before contrary what some other people saying here. At the end it's up to the military what we buy while FM, PM handles the rest.
The money for paying the Chinese comes from textile exports to USA, Japan & Europe.
At some point expect USA, Japan and European countries are going to tell you to buy their products and stop subsidizing China or lose access to their textile markets.
Now who's being dirty? Show us an example where the west actually did it.
You need to decide what is important for you - Rohaniyas or China.
Both are greatly important beside the west block. Both need to agree to solve the Rohingya issue. If you are thinking weapon and Rohingya issue is everything here then you are mistaken.