What's new

Is the Indian military incompetent?

.
You dodging my question. Quoted below for your reference.
I didn’t want to answer you, but someone did.
I think most have a fundamental misunderstanding of India. Yes I know, India is a democracy and all that. But this is a rather superficial understanding of the country. You might not have heard of India's territorial disputes in the news, but this doesn't mean India does not have them. In fact India (with the possible exception of Bangladesh, since I read that India and Bangladesh have reached an agreement to settle their borders this January) has not settled its borders with any of its neighbours. And worst, India has the dubious distinction of annexing every single of its neighbours land since it was created by the British in 1947. I know this may come as a shock to you, but here are the links you may want to check out:
1947 Annexation of Kashmir
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/06/indias-shame/
http://thediplomat.com/2015/08/kashmirs-young-rebels/
1949 Annexation of Manipur
http://www.tehelka.com/manipurs-merger-with-india-was-a-forced-annexation/
1949 Annexation of Tripura
http://www.crescent-online.net/2009...-in-india-zawahir-siddique-2316-articles.html
1951 Annexation of South Tibet:
http://kanglaonline.com/2011/06/khathing-the-taking-of-tawang/
http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article2582.html
1961 Annexation of Goa:
http://goa-invasion-1961.blogspot.in/2013/04/the-dirty-game-played-by-vk-krishna.html
1962 Annexation of Kalapani, Nepal:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/07032012-indian-hegemony-in-nepal-oped/
1962 Aggression against China:
http://gregoryclark.net/redif.html
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/news-events/podcasts/renewed-tension-indiachina-border-whos-blame
1971 Annexation of Turtuk, Pakistan:
http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/suddenly-indian
1972 Annexation of Tin Bigha, Bangladesh
http://www.dhakatribune.com/op-ed/2014/feb/20/killing-fields
1975 Annexation of Sikkim (the whole country):
http://nepalitimes.com/issue/35/Nation/9621#.UohjPHQo6LA
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...-was-not-legal-wangchuk-namgyal/1/391498.html
1983 (Aborted) Attempted invasion of Mauritius
http://thediplomat.com/2013/03/when-india-almost-invaded-mauritius/
1990 (Failed) Attempted annexation of Bhutan:
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/07/world/india-based-groups-seek-to-disrupt-bhutan.html
2006 Annexation of Duars, Bhutan:
http://wangchasangey.blogspot.in/2015/11/different-kind-of-anxieties-on.html#comment-form
2013 Annexation of Moreh, Myanmar
 
. . .
They have a long of manpower, but are the Indians just stupid and incompetent? The Australian Defense Forces are very small (tiny) with just 80,000 personnel but I am sure they aren't as stupid or as incompetent as the Indians.

We have just 80,000 active personnel and 21,694 active reservists, if India and Australia have a fight would Australia be able to hold the Indians off?

Indian soldiers are starving. They are not respected by India itself. Starving conscripts will run at the first sign of danger.

Its not the numbers that matter but the strategy and the efficient use of the weapons.

Also, how about the basics such as feeding and clothing the troops. Something India does not do.
 
.
North Korea, being many many times smaller than USA is still a big pain in the rear.
I do consider Indo-pak scenario to be similar.
So is US military incompetent that it has not wiped out North Korea in the last 70 years..? I don’t think so..!
Your analogy failed. If NK without China will collapse from day 1.
 
.
what about letter on ?
37,244 square kilometers of aksai chin in 1962
point5353 and many more peaks in 1999
Depsang Plains of 1962
Demchok 500 km of 1963
Trans-Karakoram Tract 5800km of 1962
Nehru the great pacifist , had virtually degraded the military's capability. If Nehru had continued to alive our military would have become a police force.

Nehru deliberately put down military fearing that they would indulge in coups and take over the country. End result was we have very strong institution which favors democracy.


Post Nehru's death there has been stalemates but we have not lost any war. As far point5353 is concerned can you tell us when had India occupied this point before kargil war?
 
.
Indians are generally stupid that is why they made a separate road out in South Africa for em so they won't get lost and end up in Lion's cage
 
. .
I think you are stupid even to open a thread like this one..!

Indian military is a war winning, successful defence force that has defended the motherland from external enemies and also added territory by force.
Looooooooool. I dont need to comment
 
.
if India and Australia have a fight would Australia be able to hold the Indians off?
1-they will never fight whites;
2-they will never find a country that is atleast 50% stronger than they are or more.
Hope this clarifies things.
Heck, some Israeli share said that (here)in an unlikely even to of conflict with Inida, Israel could defeat them. that's fucking embarrassing.
 
.
You have never won a war by yourself alone, despite being the second most populous country on earth. You have always had massive number advantage but the only time you succeeded in defeating a much smaller opponent, Pakistan was when you teamed up with Banglas to ambush the isolated Pakisatan Army in what is now Bangladesh. Without teaming up with Banglas your incompetent army cannot do anything. This infographic vividly show the huge number disparity [1 to 7] between Pakistan and India.


eFuIzVo.png



Despite the Maharajah giving all of Kashmir to India your army has failed to take the 1/3 portion that was occupied by Pakistan. Indeed instead of you taking the 1/3 as was given to you by the Maharajah [Instrument of Accession] it is Pakistan that is out to grab the 3/4 of Kashmir from you.

Any other large country would have mulched the smaller adversery, taken by force 1/3 Kashmir occupied by it in contravention of the Instrument of Accession and forever sobered and silenced the arrogant neighbour. Instead 70 years later this is what we see between the small Pakistan and giant India.


B17mxBC.png

Sir Chha Gaey Aap Thhaa kar kay :enjoy:

Nehru the great pacifist , had virtually degraded the military's capability. If Nehru had continued to alive our military would have become a police force.

Nehru deliberately put down military fearing that they would indulge in coups and take over the country. End result was we have very strong institution which favors democracy.


Post Nehru's death there has been stalemates but we have not lost any war. As far point5353 is concerned can you tell us when had India occupied this point before kargil war?

From "we have only added" to "Nehru was blah blah and post Nehru there has been stalemates". lolll man.. no wonder your media could only behave like how it is behaving nowadays with the only available people like you in India..
 
.
Naming skirmishes as wars is not an Indian thing to do.


After 1947 the territory of India has only increased and not decreased. Go look it up.

Have you forgotten aksai chin
 
.
They have a long of manpower, but are the Indians just stupid and incompetent? The Australian Defense Forces are very small (tiny) with just 80,000 personnel but I am sure they aren't as stupid or as incompetent as the Indians.
they literally waged war against Emus and lost.....
 
.
I think you are stupid even to open a thread like this one..!

Indian military is a war winning, successful defence force that has defended the motherland from external enemies and also added territory by force.
1962
 
.
Back
Top Bottom