Does pakistan have the ability to strike

[miroslav]

Originally posted by Kaiser@Nov 8 2005, 06:54 AM
Dude that is nothing but 100% propaganda..It states that India will dominate Pakistan in the ground and air.How is that possible when during wartime all Pakistan has to do is go into mass production of its AGUSTO'S,AL-KHALIDS,ARTILLERY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY JF-17 AND BABUR...but what will India start producing in wartime...your already failed LCA and limited Bhahmos.

[post=2480]Quoted post[/post]​

Mass production of Agosta's.

3 in 11 Years. That is what you call Mass Production?

Which artillary mass production you are talking about? How many Al-Khalid Pakistan produce per year?

Pakistan Army also had some decent tanks in 1965 and 1971 comparing to India.

That couldnt stop happening the disaster.

JF-17?? Ohhh please?

Who is scared of JF-17?

Flankers? Fulcrums? Vajra's? or the 126 MRCA's which IAF is gonna acquire?

Babur?

Again................................

Man please first do all kind of trials. (Air launched, Ship launched etc.).

Then we will talk about mass production.

Thanks,

Miro

P.S: - Whoever thinks negative about Brahmos, May God have mercy on him/her and the nation.

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by Ahsan F@Nov 8 2005, 01:27 AM
Dear Saad Farooq,

Forget the dreams of controlling other countries economy! India can't control Pakistan economy!

[post=2471]Quoted post[/post]​

Neither we are intended to do so. Besides PAK Government has a lot of Do's and Don'ts for Indian Traders.

But the country who can is your big daddy. China! Made in China, that what we find in almost every product on both countries. Sorry but i also heard a joke that even Indian gods are now being made in China.

So whats the point? That hasen't affected the Indian economy.

Take automobiles. Indian Automobiles are damn ahead of China. You will find all kinds of Indian Automobiles in the Middle-East, Europe and many asian and american countries.

China has a huge manpower and no labour laws as such so they can get the work done by a cheap labour. Also the labourers generally work for 12 hours. So one needs only 2 shifts to run that saves the additional third shift manpower.

Where as in India we have a talented man power also strict labour laws. They work for maxx 8 hours so one need 3 shifts.

The article also talks about that the country must control the trade routes of a country to be a super power of that region. Guess who is doing that? Again China for example Gawadar and same type of hub/base in Bangladesh in exchange of providing nuclear technology for energy purposes.

If you are saying that in case of Indo-China naval war China is going to be a saviour of Pakistan then you are making a big mistake.

May be in a separate thread I will explain you further regarding the Indo-China scenario.

Also China is securing or trying to secure it's trade routes after so many years, where as Americans and Russians are doing it from a long time.

America will sure support India, and will keep supporting it untill it gets strong enough to fight with China, if you see it americans are typically sparking an arms race in Asia (this of course excludes the deal of F-16.) China will then also compete to get an edge in military, and the cycle will go on, and suddenly nationalism will develop, both countries will think they are strong and war will errupt.

Who supported Pakistan in 1965 and 71.? Who is a major Non Nato Ally? Who got and will keep getting free arms and aids?


India don't want american arms. B'coz US is not reliable and their interests are in India are more China oriented.

We are just seeking US technology. Thats it.

War has to happen, and now what India needs to do is not fall in American support, stay with Russia,

Trust me thats what we will do.

keep minimum defences to at least counter Chinese threat in the near future,

There is no Chinese threat at all. Trust me.

I have my own theory for this.

be a strong ally of Russia (as it is going) expand trade, and build up its economy.

We are strong allies of Russia for decades and rise of Russia is in our favour.

Thanks,

Miro

 

[miroslav]

MoD's Please note this.

Originally posted by Kaiser@Nov 14 2005, 12:23 AM
Pakistan can Mass produce the Agusto during wartime.....

[post=2870]Quoted post[/post]​

Wake up son.

India Pakistan traditional war will end up in 15-25 days period. FOr Pakistan building a submarine is 2 years. You are not Germans or Russians.

were not really trying to produce more of them cause were modernizing our air force.....

Ya I can see the modernization of PAF. It has been 15 years PAF has not procured any main fighter.

during the cold war the Soviet Union was easily producing 50-100 subs per year.

LOL

Nobody has made 50-100 Subs per year after WWII.

The Soviet Submarine fleet was somewhere 100-150 at it's might and you are claiming that they mass produced 50-100 subs per year???

Even if you count their exports Soviets never produced 50-100 subs per year.

Besides there is a hugeeeeeeeee difference betweeen PN and Soviet shipbuildings

Still I give you a fair chance. Back your claims with some links.

Pakistan is now producing 100 Al-Khalids per year and during war time can maybe triple it.....The Al-khalids only cost 1.7 million per peice so you do the math.

Yawwwwnnnnnnn....................

Links/Sources about the producction rate????

Also what about your arty mass production claims??

I dont have to explain this one Thats like saying India wasnt scared when Pakistan got offered f-16 or when we tested Babur

"Babur?

Forget the explaination.

Don't even think about it.

Babur has a long way to go whereas we have started production of Brahmos.

Besides the range of Babur dosent scared us unless you build a good platfor for Babur to launch.

F-16.

Chod yaar.

Kise dara rahe ho tum?

Miro

 

[A.Rahman]

I am sorry kaiser, but miro is right.
I really dont think that Russia produced 100 subs a year.

can you please provide any link?

- no hard feelings? -

btw miro, are u in India? what plane you fly in IAF ?

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by A.Rahman@Nov 14 2005, 11:32 AM
what plane you fly in IAF ?

[post=2891]Quoted post[/post]​

Mirage-2000

Thanks,

Miro

 

[Kaiser]

"India Pakistan traditional war will end up in 15-25 days period. FOr Pakistan building a submarine is 2 years. You are not Germans or Russians."

Dude when will you Indians get that we are not the same nations anymore like we were during the other wars.This time its alot different.Now we (india and pakistan) have better tech.,much more numbers,stronger economy's,and most of all nukes.Its not the same anymore so a war would probaly last much,much longer.


"Ya I can see the modernization of PAF. It has been 15 years PAF has not procured any main fighter.
LOL "

Im talking about the upcoming fighters....you no the one where your HINDU media screams about(f-16's)....Not only that but we also have the upcoming JF-17 which will crush your LCA (Light Coffin Aircraft).

"The Soviet Submarine fleet was somewhere 100-150 at it's might and you are claiming that they mass produced 50-100 subs per year???"

Here you claim at its might that the Soviet Fleet at it MIGHT was 100-150...well once again let me prove you wrong.During 1985 the USSR in its sub. fleet had

- 83 Balistic subs.
-72 cruise missile subs.
- 71 attack nuclear subs.
- 5 other subs.
- 140 attack subs.
- 4 mine laying subs.
- 9 other subs. conventional
- 8 small conventional subs.
- 10 Special subs.

and much,much more midget subs. links.........http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/ship.htm

"Also what about your arty mass production claims??
Forget the explaination."

Also what about your media "SHIELD" claims?? http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/4273.asp

"Babur has a long way to go whereas we have started production of Brahmos."

oH REALLY I dont have to explain this one do I.

Once again Miro I have proven you wrong.....Im waiting for other excuses to start coming from you know.

 

[Jag]

"India Pakistan traditional war will end up in 15-25 days period. FOr Pakistan building a submarine is 2 years. You are not Germans or Russians."

Dude when will you Indians get that we are not the same nations anymore like we were during the other wars.This time its alot different.Now we (india and pakistan) have better tech.,much more numbers,stronger economy's,and most of all nukes.Its not the same anymore so a war would probaly last much,much longer.

Look I totally disagree with this, I don't think even with better economy India or Pakistan can sustain full scale war for more them a month, I agree modernisation, but it comes with high cost, for instance take the cost of Paton tank used in 1965 war or 1974 war, and consider the cost of Khalid, is it comparable? imagine the cost of 5 f-16, it will be bigger to total cost of all aircraft lost by Pakistan in war time.
War will take place in fast phase but the equipments used are also expensive, and I don't think Pakistan or India is ready for it yet.

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by Kaiser@Nov 15 2005, 07:05 AM
Dude when will you Indians get that we are not the same nations anymore like we were during the other wars.This time its alot different.Now we (india and pakistan) have better tech.,much more numbers,stronger economy's,and most of all nukes.Its not the same anymore so a war would probaly last much,much longer.

[post=2927]Quoted post[/post]​

Pakistan has a strong economy????

Really???

When India suffered with Tsunami we didnt took a single penny from rest of the world as aid. Infact our Government and Navy was helping the nations like Maldives and Lanka.

Despite of that it dosent affected our defence procurements.

While Pakistan is suffering from a disaster still it is in need of aid. F-16 procurements are delayed and you are talking a strong economy????

Its not the same anymore so a war would probaly last much,much longer.

Last time when we were fighting on two fronts it took us 13 days to capture Dhaka.

This time it willl take less than that for ISB provided we have political will.

Im talking about the upcoming fighters....you no the one where your HINDU media screams about(f-16's)....Not only that but we also have the upcoming JF-17 which will crush your LCA (Light Coffin Aircraft).

Nope our media dosent scream about PAF F-16's in fact we are having fun with that since the 90's.

To be or not to be game is still on after 15 years.

JF-17 may crush LCA on paper and in your dreams but in real war it will be shot down by Fulcrums/Flankers and new MRCA's even before it can see them on the radars.

Rest assured.

Here you claim at its might that the Soviet Fleet at it MIGHT was 100-150...well once again let me prove you wrong.During 1985 the USSR in its sub. fleet had

- 83 Balistic subs.
-72 cruise missile subs.
- 71 attack nuclear subs.
- 5 other subs.
- 140 attack subs.
- 4 mine laying subs.
- 9 other subs. conventional
- 8 small conventional subs.
- 10 Special subs.

and what about your claims of Soviets producing 50-100 subs per year ans relating it with PN??????

I dont have to explain this one do I.

Once again Miro I have proven you wrong.....Im waiting for other excuses to start coming from you know.

Naahhhhhhhhhhhhh you haven't proved anything. You have just shared your frustration.

Miro

 

[sigatoka]

Miroslav the fact that India didnt accept international aid after the tsunami reveals a large gulf between the situation on the ground and the delusions of the Indian leadership.

How can a Global Power, an Aspiring SuperPower, the Sare Jaha se Acha Des possibly accept International Aid. After all such aspirations are not consistent with begging, now is it?

Now the truth of the matter is that the average Indian is very poor and the people on the ground would have happily taken international aid, the difference between India and Pakistan is not that Pakistanis are richer than Indians, in fact Pakistanis may be slightly poorer. The difference lies in the fact that Pakistanis harbour no delusions of superpower status or even global power.

The acceptance by Pakistan of international aid is not of weakness but of humility and acceptance of rationality. The Indian decision to refuse international help is borne of false pride and a refusal to accept that even with a middle class of 300 million, no nation can without shame call itself a global power with the largest number of poverty striken people on the planet.

 

[EagleEyes]

Kaiser stop insulting, its ok that your discussing, but keep it easy. Also use Quote button its easy to read otherwise i can't tell which is a quote and which ones is your own words.

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by sigatoka@Nov 29 2005, 08:46 PM
Miroslav the fact that India didnt accept international aid after the tsunami reveals a large gulf between the situation on the ground and the delusions of the Indian leadership.

How can a Global Power, an Aspiring SuperPower, the Sare Jaha se Acha Des possibly accept International Aid. After all such aspirations are not consistent with begging, now is it?

[post=4040]Quoted post[/post]​

No.

Becaue we have such a strong economy. A huge infrastructure and ability to fight against any natural disaster since till date India has faced every kind of worst disaster except the Volcano since we dont have one.

Not to forget dispite of this tragedy Indian Navy was helping out Sri Lanka and Maldieves with all kind of medical aid and food supply.

Check the Global multimedia forum.

Now the truth of the matter is that the average Indian is very poor and the people on the ground would have happily taken international aid, the difference between India and Pakistan is not that Pakistanis are richer than Indians, in fact Pakistanis may be slightly poorer. The difference lies in the fact that Pakistanis harbour no delusions of superpower status or even global power.

Ya I saw that when the GOP refused IAF heli's (that includes Mi-26) but accepted more than 1500 tons of relief materia though.

The acceptance by Pakistan of international aid is not of weakness but of humility and acceptance of rationality. The Indian decision to refuse international help is borne of false pride and a refusal to accept that even with a middle class of 300 million, no nation can without shame call itself a global power with the largest number of poverty striken people on the planet.

Pleaseeeeeeee.
Check out BBC.com.

It has been more than 3 months now. People are still starving with many things.

Try to accept facts. Upto 2001 we accepted all kind of International aid in disasters.


But now after facing every kind of disaster India built it's infrastructure to fight any worst disaster. IAF and IN ha a huge fleet to mobilise any kind of relief which both PN and PAF lack.

Indian Economy is at it's high these days and with both money and infrastructure we are able to fight anything worst.

Miro

P.S: - Keep your personal anti-India or Anti-Hindu hatred aside while talking/debating to me.

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by WebMaster@Nov 30 2005, 09:32 AM
Kaiser stop insulting, its ok that your discussing, but keep it easy. Also use Quote button its easy to read otherwise i can't tell which is a quote and which ones is your own words.

[post=4073]Quoted post[/post]​

I was always being told that Pakistani's always hold each other even in worst times.

You proved it.

Miro

 

[EagleEyes]

Originally posted by miroslav@Dec 1 2005, 11:36 AM
I was always being told that Pakistani's always hold each other even in worst times.

You proved it.

Miro

[post=4170]Quoted post[/post]​

You said it all.

Regards,
Ahsan F.

 

[sigatoka]

Ok Miroslav I accept that making a parody of the Indian national anthem was not acceptable. But how does that make me anti-hindu??

And look i highlighted "Sare Jaha se Acha" coz i believe that India is not better than every other place in the world. I didnt bring up "Ye des Ogle Hira Mothi" because indeed India does extract lots of minerals from the Land. But even this I dont believe makes me Anti-Indian?? Or does it??

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by sigatoka@Dec 2 2005, 04:33 PM
Ok Miroslav I accept that making a parody of the Indian national anthem was not acceptable. But how does that make me anti-hindu??

And look i highlighted "Sare Jaha se Acha" coz i believe that India is not better than every other place in the world. I didnt bring up "Ye des Ogle Hira Mothi" because indeed India does extract lots of minerals from the Land. But even this I dont believe makes me Anti-Indian?? Or does it??

[post=4212]Quoted post[/post]​

Now you know why I call you a madarrssa educated???

There is nothing perosnal in it.

Sa re Jaha se accha is not the Indian National anthem.

This is a patriotic song written by Iqbal.

Indian National anthem is 'Jana Gana Mana' which is written by Nobel Price Winner RavindraNath Tagore.

Thank you.

Miro