Why is Indian army training for ANA was so bad?

[Rostr]

Ask Srilankans why were they Genociding Tamils in Sri Lanka, if they would not have been genociding Tamils, we would not have provided arms and training to them. I surely oppose LTTE’s creation, we should have had declared SL Army a terrorist organisation and should have had waged a war against them instead of funding rag tag militias.

First learn the meaning of genocide
Lol your miltitary couldn't defeat the ltte even after they gave you all there weapons to you and now trying to mess with Sri lanka directly lol

RAW created LTTE and helped it to become a very strong terrorist group in Sri Lanka. As the momentum picked up, Indian Tamils asprired to become a seperate nation threatening Indian unity. So, india forced SL (Operation Poomalai) to sign a "Peace Accord" to disarm the LTTE but the LTTE was not a party to this peace accord thinking they owned the group. So, when the IPKF came in trying to disarm the LTTE, they resisted and many battles took place which hardened the LTTE resolve. Because of the brutality India imposed on the LTTE, one of the tigers decided to blow Rajiv Ghandi sky high. That is when India disengaged from LTTE and stopped its funding and IPKF retreated failing in its mission and leaving SL to defend itself.

Many years later, Pakistan helped Sri Lanka to decisively defeat LTTE.

Looks like India has very different curriculum in regards to the Sri Lankan civil war in contrast to what the world knows.

Everyone and every country seems to turn the story in a way that benefits them

 

[Black Tornado]

First learn the meaning of genocide

Happy now?

 

[Rostr]

View attachment 770884
Happy now?

Yes something ipkf did to jaffna and ltte did to muslims and something they payed the price for

 

[PradoTLC]

Why Pakistan Army (that is more professional, skilled, displined and have a very good officer corps that takes cares of it's lower ranks) not able to take Kashmir from the Indian Army

if you read carefully you would understand.

An offensive force certain force multipliers ie overall combat power... ie you still out gun us.

simple enough?.

 

[White Lion]

The details are in and I believe I am ready to prove my hypothesis that Indian military training is terrible

1) India trained the TLM or Tamil Tiger terrorists in the 70s , they started losing then india had to go in and try to defeat them militarily the TLM then took on training from other sources and started defeating the Indian army

2) the indians then trained the Sri Lankan army and they kept losing against the TLM. finally Pakitan and China had to train their army resulting in complete military defeat of the Tamil tigers

3) the Indians then trained the therik e taliban Pakistan terrorists or TTP which the Pakistani army completely routed from Pakistan

4) now the recent indian training for Afghan national army (ANA) and Afghan national police were trained by the Indians and they were completely defeated by the Afghan emirate forces Allegedly trained by Pakistan according to the Indians. The only thing that put up some fight were western trained Afghan commandos but they were too few to matter.

why is Indian training so bad?

k

It all depends on the raining of the instructor and the curriculum they follow. Its simple if a teacher is not competent at teaching the subject the entire class fails.

 

[PradoTLC]

I'm sorry if you believe that.

I am sorry you are so ignorant....

BBC's Mark Tully " I cant find one here that wants to live with India"

 

[Kuru]

if you read carefully you would understand.

An offensive force certain force multipliers ie overall combat power... ie you still out gun us.

simple enough?.

So India has quantitative advantage and hence - despite having ineffective training or having weak soldiers - is able to hold Kashmir?

If this is true, then why question the 'training' in the first place? Because it has become irrelevant here, hasn't it?

I am sorry you are so ignorant....

BBC's Mark Tully " I cant find one here that wants to live with India"

Is that all you have for all the points I raised? Okay.

 

[PradoTLC]

How so? Mere training and a unit of MBRL.

plenty more.. such deployment of close combat controllers directing ground attack war planes...

Air Vice-Marshal Shehzad Aslam Chaudhry appointment to spear head Pakistan's help to sri lanka's COIN wasvery essential because of his experience in launching air strikes against the Baluch terrorist in Baluchistan. In the next phase, the Pakistani Air Force deployed 15-17 highly experienced officers in Colombo who had a deep understanding of air combat against insurgency. These corp of officers of the PAF would draw up plans for the SLAF and help them with air attack tactics for maximum damage.

you really dont know much do you?...

So India has quantitative advantage and hence - despite having ineffective training or having weak soldiers - is able to hold Kashmir?

India always had the quantative edge, the issue of them now in local tactical battles with PA or PLA, indian army is consistently doing a poor job.

If this is true, then why question the 'training' in the first place? Because they has become irrelevant here, hasn't it?

Training is important as it offset Pakistan other disadvantages in quantity and access to advance equipment.

It enables Pakistan to defend succesfully

s that all you have for all the points I raised? Okay.

It is the core issue.

india shamelessly stole land from a people who never wanted to live with india, denied UN resolution for plesbiste.

So india can call terror manga all it likes, but the truth is India is bad guy... clear and simple.

 

[Kuru]

India always had the quantative edge, the issue of them now in local tactical battles with PA or PLA, indian army is consistently doing a poor job.

Still holding Kashmir with India, I would not call it a poor job given that IA only has quantitative advantage but "very weak soldiers and ineffective training" (at least according to the thread and your own comments).

Training is important as it offset Pakistan other disadvantages in quantity and access to advance equipment.

It enables Pakistan to defend succesfully

That's for Pakistan's training. That was never been questioned in this thread.

If you are giving quantitative advantage to India, then let's not talk about India's training at all. The thread should've just said that India has quantitative advantage and hence it controls Kashmir (or is able to do a good job, whatever).

 

[PradoTLC]

The thread should've just said that India has quantitative advantage and hence it controls Kashmir (or is abl

by deploying over 500K men ...congrats!


pity what would happen of Pakistan China join pincer in desert and in the north..

hope you have reserves.

 

[Kuru]

by deploying over 500K men ...congrats!

Was it always the case?
Again, how come it changed overnight in the 90s. Why no major deployment from 40s to 90s?

Anyway, that's not the point of this thread. My objection is how come you just downplay a military when you yourself arent able to defeat it. I just find it illogical and funny. That's all.

 

[PradoTLC]

"very weak soldiers and ineffective training"

Indian army is an average army....


facing Pakistani soldiers who have been re-trained , re tooled, independent thinking tactics and battle experince ranging from very instensive and heavy combat in combined arms to small unit level combat constantly for last 10 years.


Good luck!

Why no major deployment from 40s to 90s?

bcos the whole population is up in arms.

You need this kind of numbers for population suppression.

 

[Kuru]

Indian army is an average army....


facing Pakistani soldiers who have been re-trained , re tooled, independent thinking tactics and battle experince ranging from very instensive and heavy combat in combined arms to small unit level combat constantly for last 10 years.


Good luck!

Thanks for the luck.

And again, I am happy with an army which is "average" and "lack independent thinking tactics and battle experince ranging from very instensive and heavy combat in combined arms to small unit level combat constantly for last 10 years" but still able to hold a territory that is claimed by a powerful military in all sense of the word.

 

[PradoTLC]

My objection is how come you just downplay a military when you yourself arent able to defeat it. I just find it illogical and funny. That's all.

We gave you an assessment of Indian military based on what independent military journals like Janes or IISS thinks.

the reason you think it is funny that bcos you have not studied history, being an indian i know your education sucks and limited to repeating information. No application no analysis ....


In WW2 elite Panzer divisions used to have an incredible kill ratio of 10:1 ... yet they still lost.

 

[Kuru]

bcos the whole population is up in arms.

You need this kind of numbers for population suppression.

So the whole population got up in arms only after the 90s? I'm trying to think why.