What's new

Pakistan and Germany cooking something up

Recently made?! APC?! That's the Marder mechanized infantry combat vehicle (MICV). The Marder MICV was introduced into German service from 1971 onwards, making this a 40 year old vehicle. After the Russian BMP-1, it was the second MICV to be produced and put into operational service in the world.

From 1976 the Marder was upgraded with Milan ATGW. Marder 1A1 with image intensification entered service in 1979 and by 1982 all were converted. The Marder 1A2 with thermal imaging entered service in 1984 and all were converted by 1989. In 1989 the first Marders were upgraded to 1A3 standard with improved armour and Milan 2.

Well, M113 is getting modification,upgrades and manufacturing. This APC has best small insurgency confrontation record. Much agile,better protective armor and extreme accuracy hitting the target.
 
.
I always liked the Wiesel.

wiesel_2.jpg


Airportable armored vehicle. You can move it around by helicopter and it comes in a bunch of different variants.
 
.
Well, M113 is getting modification,upgrades and manufacturing. This APC has best small insurgency confrontation record. Much agile,better protective armor and extreme accuracy hitting the target.

M113 is an APC. Marder a MICV - very significant difference

M113A3
max weight 14 tons
armament: HMG pintle
amphibious
Crew=2+11
protection against 14.5mm AP front, 7.62mm sides at few m.
no crew firing ports

Marder A3
Weight up to 35t
Armament 20mm cannon, 7.62 mg, Milan ATGW (stabilized turret)
Crew 3+7
wades 1.5m
protection up to 20 mm APDS DM43 from 0 m and 25 mm APDS from 200 m (220 yd).
crew firing ports
 
Last edited:
.
But the point is that pakistan has started pestering the germans over weapons and trying to unlock the deadlock before there was no action now there is a sign that diplomatic channels are being used to move things into ACTION state ...

U214 ...hmm would look like a great deal if it gets approved


Beside the subs what else could they possibly have that could interest Pakistan


Please explain how can U-214 help fight terrorists in the Frontier region?
 
.
In my point of view now Pakistan has to be active strengthening military relations with EU, we have to get out from this typical phrase “get military aid to gear up WOT” we will get nothing important items under this title. It is all depends over our diplomatic missions and government relations and efforts.
We have to realize Canada, EU about our regional strategic threats and safety with counterbalance.
Pakistan government has to struggle to make end of this double standard politics from EU, Canada & US.
 
.
In my point of view now Pakistan has to be active strengthening military relations with EU, we have to get out from this typical phrase “get military aid to gear up WOT” we will get nothing important items under this title. It is all depends over our diplomatic missions and government relations and efforts.
We have to realize Canada, EU about our regional strategic threats and safety with counterbalance.
Pakistan government has to struggle to make end of this double standard politics from EU, Canada & US.

Forget it.

As an Islamic country, and as a friend of China, Pakistan is on the wrong side of the equation for most Western countries.

Anything they give us, they will give ten times better package to India.

Pakistan's focus should be to get off our as$ and start developing indigenous capability -- with Chinese and Brazilian help.
 
.
In my point of view now Pakistan has to be active strengthening military relations with EU, we have to get out from this typical phrase “get military aid to gear up WOT” we will get nothing important items under this title. It is all depends over our diplomatic missions and government relations and efforts.
We have to realize Canada, EU about our regional strategic threats and safety with counterbalance.
Pakistan government has to struggle to make end of this double standard politics from EU, Canada & US.


Complaining about the splinter in someone else's eye while overlooking the beam in your own?

How about your own double standards?
"US sucks, China is our pal" "Oh and by the way, EU/US give us more weapons for free!" (and then you expect WEU to give ToT?)

tsktsk
 
.
I always liked the Wiesel.

wiesel_2.jpg


Airportable armored vehicle. You can move it around by helicopter and it comes in a bunch of different variants.

I'ld love to own one .... just for rush hour traffic ;-)
 
.
How about your own double standards?
"US sucks, China is our pal" "Oh and by the way, EU/US give us more weapons for free!" (and then you expect WEU to give ToT?)

Throughout the Soviet era, Pakistan always exended genuine friendship towards the West. It was only after the collapse of the USSR that the West focussed on China and switched alliances to dump Pakistan in favor of India.
 
.
Throughout the Soviet era, Pakistan always exended genuine friendship towards the West. It was only after the collapse of the USSR that the West focussed on China and switched alliances to dump Pakistan in favor of India.



So this point of your suggests ut - of course - had nothing to do with policy choices made by Pakistan's leadership. Life is simple: there are choices and choices have consequences. Don't make a choice if you can't or are unwilling to live with the consequences associated with it.

Besides, what is double standard about changing relationships?

India up to that point maintained close relations to Russia and had conflict with China. Pakistan had better relations with the US and conflict with India. With the demise of Russia and the rise of China, what is so strange about 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' being applied by both USA (towards India) and China (towards Pakistan) ....

Incidentally, India's relations with US and EU warming up iappears of a much more recent date then relations with Pakistan cooling down.

Do not forget that to 'the rest of the world' the confliced relationship of Pakistan and India may not be of as much interest as the global (or even regional) strategic balance i.e. a game at a different level with different players and interests.
 
.
So this point of your suggests ut - of course - had nothing to do with policy choices made by Pakistan's leadership. Life is simple: there are choices and choices have consequences. Don't make a choice if you can't or are unwilling to live with the consequences associated with it.

These so-called choices were made at America's behest and with their full cooperation to fight the 'evil empire'. It is only after the 9/11 blowback that the West got all high and mighty and put all the blame on Pakistan. Certainly Paksitan must take responsibility for its part; but the US seems to have developed amnesia about its role in the current development.

Besides, what is double standard about changing relationships?

There is no double standard. Pakistan has always known that the West is an unreliable and duplicitous partner. As far back as Ayub Khan when he wrote "Friends, not Masters" about the Pak-US relationship, we knew the West could not be trusted. That is when we started our all-weather relationship with China.

India up to that point maintained close relations to Russia and had conflict with China. Pakistan had better relations with the US and conflict with India. With the demise of Russia and the rise of China, what is so strange about 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' being applied by both USA (towards India) and China (towards Pakistan) ....

The West abandoned our so-called friendship over the decades and embraced our arch-enemy India. But, to be fair, saner minds in Pakistan never had any illusions about the depth of Western friendship in the first place.

Incidentally, India's relations with US and EU warming up iappears of a much more recent date then relations with Pakistan cooling down.

The timeline of India's closeness with the West is directly tied to China's rise.

Pakistan has offered friendship to the West but it was never fully returned. In 1965 and again in 1971, we saw exactly how useless our Western 'friends' were compared to India's frienship with Russia.

Do not forget that to 'the rest of the world' the confliced relationship of Pakistan and India may not be of as much interest as the global (or even regional) strategic balance i.e. a game at a different level with different players and interests.

Exactly my point. Pakistan's 'friendship' was expendable.
 
Last edited:
. .
These so-called choices were made at America's behest and with their full cooperation to fight the 'evil empire'. It is only after the 9/11 blowback that the West got all high and mighty and put all the blame on Pakistan. Certainly Paksitan must take responsibility for its part; but the US seems to have developed amnesia about its role in the current development.
At the behest of the USA Pakistan developed nukes, which lead to trouble relations with the US? I think you are not understanding my point. What if you insisted on doing something that p-sses of the Chinese (like, say, sell arms to Taiwan)?

There is no double standard. Pakistan has always known that the West is an unreliable and duplicitous partner. As far back as Ayub Khan when he wrote "Friends, not Masters" about the Pak-US relationship, we knew the West could not be trusted. That is when we started our all-weather relationship with China.
Clearly this conflicts with earlier claims above about the US/Pak relations.


The West abandoned our so-called friendship over the decades and embraced our arch-enemy India. But, to be fair, saner minds in Pakistan never had any illusions about the depth of Western friendship in the first place.
Balony. Don't for an instance fool yourself into thinking China is any less instrumental in its relations with other nations than any other major power. They just have a different take than e.g. US on what constitutes short and long term (different time horizons)
Try selling some arms to Taiwan, see what happens (e.g. some APCs, as if that would somehow affect the huge numerical advantages of mainland China. Or even small arms and ammunitions, for that matter. Or support a free Tibet).

The timeline of India's closeness with the West is directly tied to China's rise.
That is what I said (and to CCCPs demise) > it is not about Pakistan v India but about global balance of powers.

Pakistan has offered friendship to the West but it was never fully returned. In 1965 and again in 1971, we saw exactly how useless our Western 'friends' were compared to India's frienship with Russia.
Boohoohoo.
India was supposedly non-aligned. (NOT!)

I'm sorry but I agree to conclude we disagree in our reading of relations. And it btw is silly to talk about relations with ' the West' as if this is one unified, homogeneous block, like US slaves. E.g. relations with France over time.

Exactly my point. Pakistan's 'friendship' was expendable.
'Real politik' - such is the nature of the big game. Goes for all relations. If it comforts anyone, there even comes a point where this applies to e.g. US/UK relations.... As for US/NL relations, may I call into recollection the relatively recent so-called ' The Hague invasion act'
 
Last edited:
. .
'Real politik'

Agree.

Which was basically my point all along that, because of their anti-China concerns, the West will favor India over Pakistan.

Certainly, the landscape could change in the future, but this is where we are at the moment.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom