deckingraj
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Not aid at all. Our own money.
Thanks for the correction...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not aid at all. Our own money.
Ur brainless,
Reply with responsibilitiy and logicaly
! five refurbished SH-2I Super Seasprite maritime helicopters granted under EDA ($67 million);
EDA not accepted!
Well i have not heard on any restrictions on India.....The only restrictions are on sharing it with others or reverse copying...Though Mastan Khan has explained it beautifully but $10 Billion(and more) have lot of power....Not to forget these block 52 are part of US Aid to Pakistan....So hard cash vs Aid and no surprise parameters are different....but in the end if there is any conflict then these birds will fly to defeat the enemy...Post war scenarios will not hinder operations during war....
Dear,
I beg to differ. The EUM restrictions on INS Jalashwa have made many in India quite furious with its acquisition. The EUM states that it cannot be used for offensive purposes. Its an amphibious attack ship for God's sake. For further reference, read this
CPM fires at Centre with CAG ammo on INS Jalashwa...- Hindustan Times
Same kind of EUM exist for P8I, and C130J acquisition. Please don't force me to re-post the links i have already posted earlier in the thread. Go back a couple of pages and read them ... carefully, so it does not elude you.
Btw, i am pretty sure INS Jalashwa was not US aid.
Regards,
Sapper
Hi Sapper....Regarding the AID part i have already stated that i stand corrected....Though thanks for the informed post however in India politics works in a very different fashion...Opposition is quite strong and keep the govt on its toes....There was hell lot of hue and cry over End User Agreement that was done with US and hell lot of discussion/talk shows/aticles and finally statement in Parliament by our defence minister who clearly states what was signed as far as end user agreement is concerned....I am sure you already know but just in case would like to say that EUA is a general term....however terms and conditions vary from country to country....In the EUA that we have signed let me highlight few bullet points
- It is India who will decide where US engineers can monitor the said equipments...
- The place not necessarily be a military establishment...
- India cannot reverse engineer it nor can modify it without US approval...
- India cannot sell it to any third country without US approval...
In case you have more information then please let me know...I would love to read about it....Now let me dwell more into AID part...You got additional F-16's due to your role in WOT...I confused it with AID however it was friendly gesture from US for your role....Now the problem is that you have a dependency on US and we don't and thus the clauses will vary....I think people just picked my AID part and ignored that i was refering to power of billions of $$$$...There is a reason why atleast on paper it has been conveyed to pakistan unequivocally that these weapons cannot be used against India.... I hope i clarified to your satisfaction.....
P.S : I think i have highjacked the thread so will refrain from talking more about it....please so share if you have more information about India's EUA and i will PM you my thoughts on it...
Hi Sapper....Regarding the AID part i have already stated that i stand corrected....Though thanks for the informed post however in India politics works in a very different fashion...Opposition is quite strong and keep the govt on its toes....There was hell lot of hue and cry over End User Agreement that was done with US and hell lot of discussion/talk shows/aticles and finally statement in Parliament by our defence minister who clearly states what was signed as far as end user agreement is concerned....I am sure you already know but just in case would like to say that EUA is a general term....however terms and conditions vary from country to country....In the EUA that we have signed let me highlight few bullet points
- It is India who will decide where US engineers can monitor the said equipments...
- The place not necessarily be a military establishment...
- India cannot reverse engineer it nor can modify it without US approval...
- India cannot sell it to any third country without US approval...
In case you have more information then please let me know...I would love to read about it....Now let me dwell more into AID part...You got additional F-16's due to your role in WOT...I confused it with AID however it was friendly gesture from US for your role....Now the problem is that you have a dependency on US and we don't and thus the clauses will vary....I think people just picked my AID part and ignored that i was refering to power of billions of $$$$...There is a reason why atleast on paper it has been conveyed to pakistan unequivocally that these weapons cannot be used against India.... I hope i clarified to your satisfaction.....
P.S : I think i have highjacked the thread so will refrain from talking more about it....please so share if you have more information about India's EUA and i will PM you my thoughts on it...
I don't think i am wrong however would love to get corrected....The arms that we have got has no binding(even on paper) of where to use them and against whom...In other words if we use these against China or Pakistan in any war scenario then there is no legal reason for putting arms embargo on India...where as on paper the same can be put on our pakistani counterparts...Do you agree or not???IF you are under the impression that the EUA for Pakistan is ANY different then you are sorely mistaken,
Yes because that was an alleged violation...Eye-brows were raised on it and were categorically denied by Pak...However i am not getting the point...Do you want them to raise an objection on something which has not happened(i.e. Used against India) or are you telling me that Pak can break EUM?? because i am in agreement with both...Moreover as of not US needs Pak in WOT so standards will vary....If you look at the AcTual Objections raised by the Americans; such as mounting nukes on the F-16's, or the hype about modified harpoons they violate the same clauses that you have stated.
The whole hulla baloo about the F-16's not being used for India is a congressional politik and has nothing to do with the Actual EUA which states the same as above.
Case in point, when Pakistan sold its T-37B's from 70's it asked for congressional permission to do so. And Yes Pakistan has violated its EUA on the F-16's more than once.
The worry in congress has less to do with the 18 aircraft being used against India then with those aircraft being equipped with nukes and then used since its a fair chance that with all that EW equipment most will get through.
If the actual debate in congress was about the jets then they would have raised objections immediately about the jets at the moment the LOI was issued. The details of the purchases made by Pakistan go to every house and senate member and especially that Ackerman fellow. So unless they are really stupid they would have brought the house down there and then since it would be very clear that the Taliban don't possess anything in term of SAMs dangerous enough to warrant the very very advanced EW suite that comes with our jets.
I don't think i am wrong however would love to get corrected....The arms that we have got has no binding(even on paper) of where to use them and against whom...In other words if we use these against China or Pakistan in any war scenario then there is no legal reason for putting arms embargo on India...where as on paper the same can be put on our pakistani counterparts...Do you agree or not???
Yes because that was an alleged violation...Eye-brows were raised on it and were categorically denied by Pak...However i am not getting the point...Do you want them to raise an objection on something which has not happened(i.e. Used against India) or are you telling me that Pak can break EUM?? because i am in agreement with both...Moreover as of not US needs Pak in WOT so standards will vary....
Oh...COmon Sapper...from post#1 i am saying that in case of war weapons will be used and consequences will be dealt later...Who is arguing that you have not broken EUA in the past??? Who is arguing that you don't need F-16 block 52 with Sidewinder Arms for TTP??? However just to satisfy indians it has been unequivocally said that you cannot use these against India...Do you see the difference???
As far as nukes is concerned then you have enough missiles in your possession that can deliver nukes to all parts of India...If this was the concern then you are right about stupidness of congressmen...However you and I both know that they are not....I am not sure if you missed it but Obama right from election days was very categorically saying that all the help that US has given to Pakistan is being used in preparing war against India and hence strategy needs to be changed...Kerry Lugar bill is a direct outcome of that mindset so honestly i am not sure what are we debating here....
Let me repeat i have no doubt in my mind that Pak will use whatever they get from US against India in case of war...How much US will do against it depends on the geo-politics of that time...However one thing is clear US is far more tough then what it was in 70's(when US-India relations were down the hill)
Oh...COmon Sapper...from post#1 i am saying that in case of war weapons will be used and consequences will be dealt later...Who is arguing that you have not broken EUA in the past??? Who is arguing that you don't need F-16 block 52 with Sidewinder Arms for TTP??? However just to satisfy indians it has been unequivocally said that you cannot use these against India...Do you see the difference???