FTS have you been to India? Well I lived there for 6 months and it was the last time (2003 approx) that India and Pakistan nearly came to nuclear war. I was on the India/Pakistan border at one point. I saw the massive military build up, the fighter planes returning and the funerals held for dead Indian soldiers. All consulates were telling their people to get out NOW as nuc war was imminent. I asked people on the street about nuclear war and they were all for it as in their minds India had more nukes than Pakistan so they will blow the country away. Just no idea of mutual destruction. There is deep seated hatred and suspicion on both sides and as a person who saw it with my own eyes I cannot see a peaceful end to this ongoing and very real conflict.
India Buys New Fighter Jets from Russia
by fulltimestudent 35 Replies latest social current
-
-
fulltimestudent
Nope, I have not been to either India or Pakistan, and think I'm unlikely to make it now before I kick the bucket (smile) but, yeah! I understand how you formed your opinion, doofdaddy. And, to be absolutely honest, when I started this degree, India was hardly a blip on my radar. But, I decided to do a study unit at SU on India - so glad I did - my teacher (indian- and now moved to a US university) helped us bring the civilisation to life. I think both India and Pakistan can rightly be called 'civilisational states,' as can China. Inidan civilisation stretched (in the past) as far as Indonesia (but ruins and Bali are all tha's left of that part) and Cambodia.
Both South Asia Muslims and Hindus can be volatile people, and maybe from an anglo perspective they may seem to go over the top. Nonetheless, believe that if US pressure on the region was removed, things could change quickly.
Consider this question, which nations are the largest Muslim populations in the world? Have a try?
-
james_woods
Indonesia is supposedly the largest Muslim population in the world - but FullTimeStudent has gone badly off topic. I have come to the conclusion that FullTimeStudent has become enamored of Muslim culture and is not seeing it in the cold analytical light of day - view the thread on Women's Rights.
The thread was about Indian Fighter Jets, and speculation on why they bought them - and who they might be used against.
I still say the credible opponent is China rather than Pakistan - simply because China has more weight of force in their own fighter jets.
-
jgnat
I say Pakistan because of history.
I ask you, which does the US see more as a threat; Mexico or Canada? Does it have more to do with history or with numbers?
-
james_woods
Mexico, Jgnat - but we do not keep reserves of fighter jets for use against the Mexicans...(for the simple reason that the Mexicans have no fighter jets themselves). Fighter jets are an air-superiority weapon useful only against other fighter jets. Note that this is a different role than bombers or ground attack aircraft.
But I think you are right in a sense - perhaps India fears that some other power will provide fighter jets and other aid to Pakistan - who knows?
-
doofdaddy
Sorry FTS, work intervened. Yes I spend LOT of time in Indonesia so of course am fully aware of their religious beliefs. Just a small point but East Java is also Hindu and has some amazing temples.
You say
"Both South Asia Muslims and Hindus can be volatile people, and maybe from an anglo perspectivethey may seem to go over the top.Nonetheless, believe that if US pressure on the region was removed, things could change quickly."
I would dare to say when that very real conflict was hot, it was more than Anglos who saw it as over the top. As I said in my earlier comment, all consulates were demanding their citizens leave India (I certainly did and so were droves at Delhi airport). As I recall China was helping with negotiations as I'm sure they would not have wanted a nuke war on their border.
-
fulltimestudent
Work comes first, Doof... I've got to steel my soul and complete a dwg this morning, so I'm completely understanding.
On the Paki-India conflict - not much else to say. Except that it reminds me of some tensions on a refurbishment project for which I had done some design/oversight work. The building foreman had a large belly, and so did the owner of one of subbies who had won a tender I controlled, and he also had a large belly. They had a falling out and tensions escalated - there was not going to be an all out fight (both were over 60) - but the posturing was a grand sight. Can you imagine them bouncing off each others belly as they argued and threatened. Bet the other tradies had great stories to tell at the pub that night.
It is also an interesting situation re fighter planes. India buys Russian and Pakistan buys Chinese, built in Pakistan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZfPmA8EaUQ
On the topic of Pakistan-India conflicts the BBC web-site has a handy summary at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeline/1996.stm
The conflicts have centred around the territory of Kashmir to the north of India. At the time of partition (as the British left India) there was a Muslim majority, here's a historians view of what happened.
Quote: ""Kashmir was neither as large nor as old an independent state as Hyderabad; it had been created rather off-handedly by the British after the first defeat of the Sikhs in 1846, as a reward to a former official who had sided with the British. The Himalayan kingdom was connected to India through a district of the Punjab, but its population was 77 per cent Muslim and it shared a boundary with Pakistan. Hence, it was anticipated that the maharaja would accede to Pakistan when the British paramountcy ended on 14-15 August. When he hesitated to do this, Pakistan launched a guerrilla onslaught meant to frighten its ruler into submission. Instead the Maharaja appealed to Mountbatten for assistance, and the governor-general agreed on the condition that the ruler accede to India. Indian soldiers entered Kashmir and drove the Pakistani-sponsored irregulars from all but a small section of the state. The United Nations was then invited to mediate the quarrel. The UN mission insisted that the opinion of Kashmiris must be ascertained, while India insisted that no referendum could occur until all of the state had been cleared of irregulars."
That referendum has never been held. The Indians have their view - and the Paki's have theirs, and the middle ground is rather barren.
Indian support of what is now Bangladash, (formerly East Pakistan) during the seccession war with Pakistan also inflamed the situation. As we see, the problems, as with most so-called hot-spots all over the world, are a result of 19th century imperialism by European powers, as the whities got pushed out of their former colonial possessions, there were quirkie bits that did not fit neatly into the new political boundaries.
Finally, what was I getting at in asking the question about large Muslim populations, was the point that India likely has the third largest Muslim population in the world.
Pew consulting counts a world population of Muslims adding up to 1.62 billion.*
As you say, Indonesia is the largest ( according to Pew it is 203 million). Pakistan is next at 178 million. But India weighs in next with 177 million and then Bangladash with 148 million. ( Egypt has 80 million, Nigeria has 75 million and Turkey, 74 million)- (China by the way has a Muslim population of 23 million, though some Muslims claim that it is greater than that). India has a population of 1000 million, so 20% are Muslim. How does the Muslim vote play out in an election, I wonder?
Some people think that the west should just confront Muslims - Sorry guys, that just will not work. Better to look at what positives may exist. I suggest as you examine the differences between all the Muslim nations above, that there is a difference in Muslim practise, Islam is not monolithic.
James thinks I am totally enamoured with Muslim thought. Sorry, to disappoint you mate, but I am not**. In point of fact, I dislike Islam. But, I want to approach the topic from an objective (a fair crack of the whip, mate, to use aussie talk) viewpoint. Another poster got the subject thoroughly mixed up by saying that early Islam destroyed earlier science and philosophy.
Crap!
Early Islam preserved and expanded the science and philosophy writings of the 8th to 11 th C. Without Islamic scholars we would have lost a lot or information from Greek and Roman times.
Finally, (as a general point to the discussion) we should not look out of our windows and think everyone else in the world is looking out of the same window. They are not - they are looking out of their own windows and usually see the world from a totally different perspective.
I lost too many years looking out of Yahweh's bloody window to go back and be a conformist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Time magazine ( http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/01/27/2-2-billion-worlds-muslim-population-doubles/ ) quotes Pew as forecasting that by 2030 Muslims will form 26.4 % of a world population of 8 billion. The Pakistan population could total moe that 256 million and Afghanistan may have 50 million.
** If I am enamoured with any 'thought' system, it is likely to be slightly Daoist in format, (The theoretical type, not temple daoism) with a dash of Buddhism (stirred, not shaken- grin)
-
Balaamsass
Curious...Does India manufacture ANY high tech equipment?
I have only seen crude machine tools, TATA wooden trucks, and some crude bikes. Much is to unsafe/crude to be imported to the USA.
Yet whenever I go to a University or a Medical Center I meet smart HIGHLY educated Indians. The individual people- vs- the entire Country has always struck me as odd. The Brits set up most of the government systems, and it is a democracy with public education..yet the country seems so dysfunctional.
This weeks stories in the NY Times about police corruption and and gang rapes...just incredible.
-
Bobcat
Here is another story about India's intention to acquire the SU T-50. The story dates from Aug, 2012.
-
Kensei01
Hamster bait: The most likely reason India has not developed it's own fighter weapons design and construction program instead of buying one from the Russians is that this purchase will come with a substantial fighter pilot training program. If this aircraft is truly mulit role then more than just "fighter tactics" are required. The Indians would have insisted on it and I should think the Russians would have offered it. In additon it is easier to adopt an already proven design than to come up with one; in the short term. We should also remember that Russia and China has signed military and energy agreements in the last few years and it is in India's interest to make sure they are with the other two most populous nations with interests in Asia. So Ignat is right about India just needs to be better militarily than Pakistan for the short term but also for the long term. What will be interesting is the U.S. response. They have been attempting to woo India ever since Russia and China signed their energy agreement, but it would seem on the surface that such attempts have not born much fruit. So much for the "foggy bottom " boys..