Importance of Pakistan navy in CPEC
- Thread starter mzain
- Start date
AZADPAKISTAN2009
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 37,669
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
- Location
Since Japan polluted much of Pacific waters with Nuclear Leaked water the protection of remaining water is important
#1 Fish = Food source and vital revenue make , so each country has restricted area for it's claim
#2 For Pakistan 1971 is enough of reason to maintain a strong Navy
#3 Nuclear second strike capability
#4 Keep Supply route open to Oil
#5 Protect Pakistan's national interest at sea (Minerals, Gas, Oil) near our shoreline
#6 CPEC is one of the newer , reasons to put emphasis on Navy
#1 Fish = Food source and vital revenue make , so each country has restricted area for it's claim
#2 For Pakistan 1971 is enough of reason to maintain a strong Navy
#3 Nuclear second strike capability
#4 Keep Supply route open to Oil
#5 Protect Pakistan's national interest at sea (Minerals, Gas, Oil) near our shoreline
#6 CPEC is one of the newer , reasons to put emphasis on Navy
khansaheeb
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Messages
- 17,009
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
#7 Protect our friends
maverick1977
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2009
- Messages
- 4,477
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
It should be a regional power ...
Marines should have LDP Wasp class carriers for amphibious assault. 1 brigade size, 4 unit deployment of 4 thousand troops backed by 4 squardons. Mix of helis and VTOLs. 8 min DdGs and 16 frigates. 8 subs ... this will make you a regional power
Marines should have LDP Wasp class carriers for amphibious assault. 1 brigade size, 4 unit deployment of 4 thousand troops backed by 4 squardons. Mix of helis and VTOLs. 8 min DdGs and 16 frigates. 8 subs ... this will make you a regional power
Aamir Hussain
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,009
- Reaction score
- 33
- Country
- Location
To be a regional power.... one needs to be a regional economic hub! Once we get there then we can start dreaming of becoming a regional power.
Aamir Hussain
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,009
- Reaction score
- 33
- Country
- Location
This is not the 1700's. All trade routes have been expanded and done with and decolonization is wrapped up. Today, economic security is more important than military security. Examples of those countries that do not have massive military structures but are economic power houses....Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Switzerland, are some of the countries that have managed to focus on economic and social development with a balanced military expenditure.
Economic revival requires focus on it.....with a burden of huge military expenditure, it will take decades to do it. However, if real diplomacy and regional structure is leveraged properly, this can be done within a decade. This is exactly what China did. Kept everyone off its back and focused on economic revival for three decades and used its technical knowledge, garnered from the west on commercial projects, to develop a robust military industrial capability in the last decade.
Economic revival requires focus on it.....with a burden of huge military expenditure, it will take decades to do it. However, if real diplomacy and regional structure is leveraged properly, this can be done within a decade. This is exactly what China did. Kept everyone off its back and focused on economic revival for three decades and used its technical knowledge, garnered from the west on commercial projects, to develop a robust military industrial capability in the last decade.
AbuzarIlyas
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2017
- Messages
- 614
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Informative!
LKJ86
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2018
- Messages
- 24,704
- Reaction score
- 30
- Country
- Location
mzain
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2010
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Great Pics (Y)
Aamir Hussain
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,009
- Reaction score
- 33
- Country
- Location
They chose not to nurture enemies. Malaysia at one point was at loggerheads with Indonesia for fueling insurgency during the Malay Crisis. Same with Singapore. Switzerland choose not to take sides during 2nd WW and the cold war.
These choices were made by many nations to focus on their economic growth and social welfare.
Indeed hard choices to make when war drums are being beaten. But those countries that have their priorities straight do make those choices however hard it is to swallow ones national pride and the usual jingoistic rhetoric.
Yes Pakistan has its work cut out for it....maybe due to the peculiar geography, neighbors, and conflicting interests. But it takes great people and leadership to forge out great countries that lead the world, and think beyond today and the traditional roles.
Taking loans to fight a looming war just does not make sense to me for one. We need to equip ourselves with what we can afford and service from a long term perspective and do everything else (Diplomacy, trade, commerce, etc.) to stave off any adventure till such time when we can be ready to support our war effort on our own.
We have numerous examples, Egypt (Armed itself to the teeth through loans and went on to fight the 73' war and lost and could not service the loans taken from and ended up under USSR control for a long time until Uncle Sam after the Camp David Summit bailed them out and they went from one master to another). Iraq the most recent case (Fought with Iran, arming itself through loans taken from its Arab brethren and lost the war... we all know what happened after that)
These choices were made by many nations to focus on their economic growth and social welfare.
Indeed hard choices to make when war drums are being beaten. But those countries that have their priorities straight do make those choices however hard it is to swallow ones national pride and the usual jingoistic rhetoric.
Yes Pakistan has its work cut out for it....maybe due to the peculiar geography, neighbors, and conflicting interests. But it takes great people and leadership to forge out great countries that lead the world, and think beyond today and the traditional roles.
Taking loans to fight a looming war just does not make sense to me for one. We need to equip ourselves with what we can afford and service from a long term perspective and do everything else (Diplomacy, trade, commerce, etc.) to stave off any adventure till such time when we can be ready to support our war effort on our own.
We have numerous examples, Egypt (Armed itself to the teeth through loans and went on to fight the 73' war and lost and could not service the loans taken from and ended up under USSR control for a long time until Uncle Sam after the Camp David Summit bailed them out and they went from one master to another). Iraq the most recent case (Fought with Iran, arming itself through loans taken from its Arab brethren and lost the war... we all know what happened after that)
Last edited:
