Indian kicked USAF a$$

[SherEPunjab]

this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

I'm sure part of the reason is because India is developing at a higher rate than China or Pakistan, and their government is much more open and friendly to us than China or Pakistan. I think the only reason Pakistan and Musharaff are cooperating is because they knew they were next if they didn't. Currently it is a mixture of what all you said. Our war on terror, balance Asian power, and to give us a key ally in that part of the world. Having Japan+South Korea+India is much better than having just one or none. We also are a large trade partner with India, and they are much better when it comes to human rights and political philosophy than China or Pakistan.

 

[Huma]

wow. I'm afraid to think of the badmouthing the canadian military (or country in general) would get from beer if I did something stupid like mention how canadian snipers are the best in the world and were hailed by US military commanders for saving american asses in afghanistan.

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

I'm sure part of the reason is because India is developing at a higher rate than China or Pakistan, and their government is much more open and friendly to us than China or Pakistan. I think the only reason Pakistan and Musharaff are cooperating is because they knew they were next if they didn't. Currently it is a mixture of what all you said. Our war on terror, balance Asian power, and to give us a key ally in that part of the world. Having Japan+South Korea+India is much better than having just one or none. We also are a large trade partner with India, and they are much better when it comes to human rights and political philosophy than China or Pakistan.

AFAIK, China is still ahead of India in overall development. In terms of Manafacturing, India is where China was 5 years ago. In terms of Service Sector, India is 15 years ahead of China. from that point of view it is developing faster, but in terms of GDP, China still has an edge. Couple of things going for it: smart, hard working people, democracy, cheap labor, good educational instituions, very fast growing middle class, and about 300 million that can spend equivalenty as much as Americans can, oh, and its #1 edge over China (IMO), they can speak English fluently.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Huma
wow. I'm afraid to think of the badmouthing the canadian military (or country in general) would get from beer if I did something stupid like mention how canadian snipers are the best in the world and were hailed by US military commanders for saving american asses in afghanistan.

It is accepted that canadian snipers can do extremely well in combat situations. That is proven. I am not disputing that, but to imply that the USAF < IAF, as the OP has done TWICE, because of one irrelevant exercise is ridiculous and inflammatory. It is an insult to USAF pilots and the companies that build combat aircraft to say such a thing. And since he's running on nationalist motives, I will do the same, even though I do not support our meddling in Iraq I will not let our air force get trashed by someone who obviously can't even speak basic english, much less know a damn thing about aircraft.

And for the record, yes, this is a personal topic for me, seeing as I have three near-immediate relatives in the USAF, of which one is a combat pilot and another an officer, have several friends in AFROTC training to be officers and have friends and neighbors working (or subcontracting) for Lockheed which is by far the biggest gov't contractor for aircraft systems.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

I'm sure part of the reason is because India is developing at a higher rate than China or Pakistan, and their government is much more open and friendly to us than China or Pakistan. I think the only reason Pakistan and Musharaff are cooperating is because they knew they were next if they didn't. Currently it is a mixture of what all you said. Our war on terror, balance Asian power, and to give us a key ally in that part of the world. Having Japan+South Korea+India is much better than having just one or none. We also are a large trade partner with India, and they are much better when it comes to human rights and political philosophy than China or Pakistan.

AFAIK, China is still ahead of India in overall development. In terms of Manafacturing, India is where China was 5 years ago. In terms of Service Sector, India is 15 years ahead of China. from that point of view it is developing faster, but in terms of GDP, China still has an edge. Couple of things going for it: smart, hard working people, democracy, cheap labor, good educational instituions, very fast growing middle class, and about 300 million that can spend equivalenty as much as Americans can, oh, and its #1 edge over China (IMO), they can speak English fluently.

You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Huma
wow. I'm afraid to think of the badmouthing the canadian military (or country in general) would get from beer if I did something stupid like mention how canadian snipers are the best in the world and were hailed by US military commanders for saving american asses in afghanistan.

It is accepted that canadian snipers can do extremely well in combat situations. That is proven. I am not disputing that, but to imply that the USAF < IAF, as the OP has done TWICE, because of one irrelevant exercise is ridiculous and inflammatory. It is an insult to USAF pilots and the companies that build combat aircraft to say such a thing. And since he's running on nationalist motives, I will do the same, even though I do not support our meddling in Iraq I will not let our air force get trashed by someone who obviously can't even speak basic english, much less know a damn thing about aircraft.

And for the record, yes, this is a personal topic for me, seeing as I have three near-immediate relatives in the USAF, of which one is a combat pilot and another an officer, have several friends in AFROTC training to be officers and have friends and neighbors working (or subcontracting) for Lockheed which is by far the biggest gov't contractor for aircraft systems.

he said Indian kicked USAF A$$. so what beer, as I posted earlier, there are tons of people who make ridiculous assertions "America is the greatest country in the world." why don't you go and tell them they are wrong? These people, whether they are indian, american, chinese, or from east timbuktu, are just proud. if we can tolerate pro american stances, surely we can tolerate others [as long as they aren't an enemy country like Iraqis coming on here talking trash]. ATOT may have its servers based in the U.S., may be owned and maintained by Americans, but it is still popular worldwide.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Mill


You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

But isn't it accepted that India is lacking vital infrastructure that China has invested in? I remember reading a WSJ article a few months back that detailed a lot of the infrastructure problems in Bangladore but that were also present in most of India's cities. And due to exploding population and employment it was proving hard to upgrade to adequete infrastrcture without destroying the hand that feeds them, per se (i.e upgrading roads without completely cutting off employees from their jobs).

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

I'm sure part of the reason is because India is developing at a higher rate than China or Pakistan, and their government is much more open and friendly to us than China or Pakistan. I think the only reason Pakistan and Musharaff are cooperating is because they knew they were next if they didn't. Currently it is a mixture of what all you said. Our war on terror, balance Asian power, and to give us a key ally in that part of the world. Having Japan+South Korea+India is much better than having just one or none. We also are a large trade partner with India, and they are much better when it comes to human rights and political philosophy than China or Pakistan.

AFAIK, China is still ahead of India in overall development. In terms of Manafacturing, India is where China was 5 years ago. In terms of Service Sector, India is 15 years ahead of China. from that point of view it is developing faster, but in terms of GDP, China still has an edge. Couple of things going for it: smart, hard working people, democracy, cheap labor, good educational instituions, very fast growing middle class, and about 300 million that can spend equivalenty as much as Americans can, oh, and its #1 edge over China (IMO), they can speak English fluently.

You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

yeah, democracy isn't all peachy though [for financial development]. this is one area where the Chinese have successfully used to their benefit [communism that is]. For example, just yesterday i believe, there was a protest of like 1 million Indian workers, who went on strike. can you imagine the negative affect that would have on industry? They can do that in India. In China, the police would come and force them back to work.

In India, you have 1,000 different ethnic groups, ranging from maybe 100 million in population to 1,000. You have to treat both parties 'equally.' You have an array of different races, languages, cultures, etc. Everyone likes to complain about everyone else, everyone is weary of the other. For such a vast array of different people I sometimes wonder if communism IS better. The former soviet union, from what i have heard, was more equitable for ppl under communism, and people had jobs. Now i hear the unemployment rates are very high, and many don't even have food to eat. The soviet union also had a lot of different people, tajiks, uzbeks, russians, chechens, etc. now they're all either poor or trying to rid each other off.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Mill


You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

But isn't it accepted that India is lacking vital infrastructure that China has invested in? I remember reading a WSJ article a few months back that detailed a lot of the infrastructure problems in Bangladore but that were also present in most of India's cities. And due to exploding population and employment it was proving hard to upgrade to adequete infrastrcture without destroying the hand that feeds them, per se (i.e upgrading roads without completely cutting off employees from their jobs).

I'd like to read that article if you can find a link. I totally believe you I just want to read it because this interests me. I know there is an issue with India having as many natural resources as China, but I also know China has been raping and polluting their own natural resources for years. I'd have to read the article to comment on the infrastructure part, but I do know that infrastructure problems are always an issue with fast developing countries with a growing population.

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Mill


You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

But isn't it accepted that India is lacking vital infrastructure that China has invested in? I remember reading a WSJ article a few months back that detailed a lot of the infrastructure problems in Bangladore but that were also present in most of India's cities. And due to exploding population and employment it was proving hard to upgrade to adequete infrastrcture without destroying the hand that feeds them, per se (i.e upgrading roads without completely cutting off employees from their jobs).

India has (new delhi at least) been making tons of highways and roads connecting the cities. the thing is, maintenance is poor if done by the govt, thats why a lot of private companies are coming in and making toll roads. if this trend continues, you'll have excellent roads allover, for a price. Again, another example of how two people of the same nation can live two completely separate lives. one is living in the 21st century, the other in the stone age. There is a city outside Delhi, called Noida that is one example. It has a really nice toll road that is, honestly, better than ours in Houston. the technology is similar, EZ tag lanes, cash lanes, etc., but its better maintained and staffed with professional people (they wear ties even . more on Noida's infrastructure

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
this topic has gotten so off... india pakistan, china... wtf. anyways, i guess thats what happens when there aint' anything else to write. Anyways, lets all just be happy india and the u.s. are cooperating militarily. now the question is why so much. Pakistan? or to balance the power in Asia? who knows.


beer: musharraf really didn't produce any results for us though. he is an opportunist, plain and simple. he has been proven to have links with terrorist outfits, and didn't mind the taliban pre 2001, or should i say, pre America going there and telling him he better cooperate. You really think he just joined our side cuz he's our buddy? Our country threatened to label Pakistan as a rogue nation, pull out our embassy and other western embassy's, and then the IMF would cut funds going into that country, making it even poorer than it already is. he was arm twisted. we went into af to get OBL. Do we have him yet? First he says OBL isn't in PK. Then when we lose interest and pull resources away, all of a sudden, yeah, he's in Pakistan. B.S. Wer'e just 200 billion down the drain [don't quote me on the figure, but a lot $$$].

I'm sure part of the reason is because India is developing at a higher rate than China or Pakistan, and their government is much more open and friendly to us than China or Pakistan. I think the only reason Pakistan and Musharaff are cooperating is because they knew they were next if they didn't. Currently it is a mixture of what all you said. Our war on terror, balance Asian power, and to give us a key ally in that part of the world. Having Japan+South Korea+India is much better than having just one or none. We also are a large trade partner with India, and they are much better when it comes to human rights and political philosophy than China or Pakistan.

AFAIK, China is still ahead of India in overall development. In terms of Manafacturing, India is where China was 5 years ago. In terms of Service Sector, India is 15 years ahead of China. from that point of view it is developing faster, but in terms of GDP, China still has an edge. Couple of things going for it: smart, hard working people, democracy, cheap labor, good educational instituions, very fast growing middle class, and about 300 million that can spend equivalenty as much as Americans can, oh, and its #1 edge over China (IMO), they can speak English fluently.

You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunities than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

yeah, democracy isn't all peachy though [for financial development]. this is one area where the Chinese have successfully used to their benefit [communism that is]. For example, just yesterday i believe, there was a protest of like 1 million Indian workers, who went on strike. can you imagine the negative affect that would have on industry? They can do that in India. In China, the police would come and force them back to work.

In India, you have 1,000 different ethnic groups, ranging from maybe 100 million in population to 1,000. You have to treat both parties 'equally.' You have an array of different races, languages, cultures, etc. Everyone likes to complain about everyone else, everyone is weary of the other. For such a vast array of different people I sometimes wonder if communism IS better. The former soviet union, from what i have heard, was more equitable for ppl under communism, and people had jobs. Now i hear the unemployment rates are very high, and many don't even have food to eat. The soviet union also had a lot of different people, tajiks, uzbeks, russians, chechens, etc. now they're all either poor or trying to rid each other off.

Well we can't forget how Moscow inflated numbers and lied during their experiment with communism. And like you said democracy isn't peachy, but I'd say the transition to democracy isn't peachy. I'd also say that in Casino Moscow and other books about the USSR during its transition from communism to democracy, that the Russian Mob and the total lack of ANY regulation was a massive problem for them. Someone recently posted a Forbes list of the wealthiest people. You will see that the average Russian Billionaire is very young when compared to the rest of the world. This is because they were able to steal the industry or company that made them wealthy, because Russia's transition was done in a haphazard manner, heavily influenced by organized crime, and was extremely corrupt with only laughable regulatory policies. I read a very interesting book by Fareed Zakaria that says that democracy isn't for every country. Sometimes they have social or political issues that have to be taken care of before they can become a democracy. A country has to be "setup" for democracy correctly and can't just become "free" and totally emulate the successful democracy that the US has. Sometimes religion or culture are an antithesis to Democracy, and it proves that country is not yet ready. So the idea that democracy is peachy is not true -- as you already pointed out. I'd like to post aneditorial about the book from Amazon. I had never heard of Zakaria before, but on a whim I ordered the book. My outlook on things are much much much different that they used to be.


"Democracy is not inherently good, Zakaria (From Wealth to Power) tells us in his thought-provoking and timely second book. It works in some situations and not others, and needs strong limits to function properly. The editor of Newsweek International and former managing editor of Foreign Affairs takes us on a tour of democracy's deficiencies, beginning with the reminder that in 1933 Germans elected the Nazis. While most Western governments are both democratic and liberal-i.e., characterized by the rule of law, a separation of powers, and the protection of basic rights-the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. Zakaria praises countries like Singapore, Chile and Mexico for liberalizing their economies first and then their political systems, and compares them to other Third World countries "that proclaimed themselves democracies immediately after their independence, while they were poor and unstable, [but] became dictatorships within a decade." But Zakaria contends that something has also gone wrong with democracy in America, which has descended into "a simple-minded populism that values popularity and openness." The solution, Zakaria says, is more appointed bodies, like the World Trade Organization and the U.S. Supreme Court, which are effective precisely because they are insulated from political pressures. Zakaria provides a much-needed intellectual framework for many current foreign policy dilemmas, arguing that the United States should support a liberalizing dictator like Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf, be wary of an elected "thug" like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and take care to remake Afghanistan and Iraq into societies that are not merely democratic but free."

 

[SherEPunjab]

Zakaria is a very intelligent guy. i've read his articles in newsweek.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Mill


You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

But isn't it accepted that India is lacking vital infrastructure that China has invested in? I remember reading a WSJ article a few months back that detailed a lot of the infrastructure problems in Bangladore but that were also present in most of India's cities. And due to exploding population and employment it was proving hard to upgrade to adequete infrastrcture without destroying the hand that feeds them, per se (i.e upgrading roads without completely cutting off employees from their jobs).

India has (new delhi at least) been making tons of highways and roads connecting the cities. the thing is, maintenance is poor if done by the govt, thats why a lot of private companies are coming in and making toll roads. if this trend continues, you'll have excellent roads allover, for a price. Again, another example of how two people of the same nation can live two completely separate lives. one is living in the 21st century, the other in the stone age. There is a city outside Delhi, called Noida that is one example. It has a really nice toll road that is, honestly, better than ours in Houston. the technology is similar, EZ tag lanes, cash lanes, etc., but its better maintained and staffed with professional people (they wear ties even . more on Noida's infrastructure

My dad handles contracts involving highways being built right now in Udiapur and Jaipur and that area.

The highway between Bombay and Pune is the best highway EVAR! Seriously. Its beautiful. Goes from 4 lanes each side to 6 at times. And its a nice and curvy highway that goes thru the mountains, and there's not much traffic on it. Very beautiful scenery. I have dreams of driving a sports car on it.

Mill, you'd have tearing it up in your beast of a Mustang.

To add to what SherEPunjab said about stark differences of people living in 21st century and stone age, you just have to walk thru major cities of India to notice that. In my eyes, its a beautiful thing. You can see high rise apartment and office towers and then next to it you'll see an old temple or building made in the 40s or 50s. And if you go just out of Bombay, you'll go by the Alora caves that houses beautiful carvings done way back when.
The Ajanta & Ellora Caves
More of the Caves
Even more of the caves
outside shot

When I get time, I'll try to somehow post pics of that I took back in the day when we went to the Himalayas.

 

[ndee]

you don't need skills for firing missiles. That is a battle between technologies. Dog fighting is a battle between pilots. Beer, your cousins suck.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Huma
wow. I'm afraid to think of the badmouthing the canadian military (or country in general) would get from beer if I did something stupid like mention how canadian snipers are the best in the world and were hailed by US military commanders for saving american asses in afghanistan.

It is accepted that canadian snipers can do extremely well in combat situations. That is proven. I am not disputing that, but to imply that the USAF < IAF, as the OP has done TWICE, because of one irrelevant exercise is ridiculous and inflammatory. It is an insult to USAF pilots and the companies that build combat aircraft to say such a thing. And since he's running on nationalist motives, I will do the same, even though I do not support our meddling in Iraq I will not let our air force get trashed by someone who obviously can't even speak basic english, much less know a damn thing about aircraft.

And for the record, yes, this is a personal topic for me, seeing as I have three near-immediate relatives in the USAF, of which one is a combat pilot and another an officer, have several friends in AFROTC training to be officers and have friends and neighbors working (or subcontracting) for Lockheed which is by far the biggest gov't contractor for aircraft systems.

dude stop it,

you are looking like a total ass in this thread

 

[thereds]

Originally posted by: ndee
you don't need no skills for firing missiles. That is a battle between technologies. Dog fighting is a battle between pilots. Beer, your cousins suck.

hahahah

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: MindStorm

Originally posted by: beer
So what? India is using old technology from the Soviet era and has spent 18 years and failed to build even a basic jet, with comparable armaments and electronics to the mirage 2000 (which is a 70s-era fighter) in-house. We have companies like Lockheed putting the final touches on F-22s. Plus, India lacks anywhere near the battlefield communications or AWACS technology we have. Their missiles are inferior to our AIM120C AMRAAMs in every single way.

And finally, Mirage 2000s and MIG-21s are absolutely, positively no match for the F-15s. The SU-30s MAYBE in a dogfight but not in avionics, and that's what matters. The mig-21s are from the 60s! The Mig-21s and Mirage 2000s are competitors to the F4 Phantom-era planes, and not F-15s, and especially not their replacement, F22s.

If you think for a second any modern air battle involving US forces would be less than 30 miles, you are kidding yourself. Who gives a sh!t about dogfighting abilities when F15s and F22s can fire an AMRAAM (the F22 under complete stealth by the way) and blow you out of the air before you knew you were targeted?

The indian air force is still a joke, regardless of the propoganda you are fed.

Damn you're taking this pretty personally.


Anyway, that's pretty embarrassing for the US, but I'm over it.

I have two cousins, one a combat pilot, and an uncle in the USAF. To compare the USAF and the IAF is insulting to them. Not to mention the contractors who build these planes.

so i figure, these indians fly these old planes pretty well. national pride, and patriotism aside, doesnt it makes sense that if you gave the indians our vastly superioir jet, avionics, logistics, etc that they would do a better job than our pilots.

this exercise, which it seems like the indians did at least some things better, hopefully will humble the US and allow us to have better pilots in the future after now knowing our weaknesses.

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
i'm not surprised. contrary to how most of American shows India, its a very progressing country, and the greatest resource is the people there. Intelligent, hard working, and they have a natural ability. Don't worry Beer, by me saying this i'm not taking anything away from our country... no reason to get so strung out.

Anyways, at the end of the day, Who cares who kicked who's ass. We're on the same team. Why do you think they're doing joint excercises so frequently? They've done a number of war games in the past 2 years, in Alaska, in India. The U.S. military states they do this with India so much in order to "understand each other and cooperate [on future missions]".

Somethings up, don't know what it is though.

india is really making a name for itself these days. but as ive been told by my indian friends, its a very large country and the parts you read about online are only small parts ot it. the entire mass of intelligent programmers taking all our jobs is probably a small fractiono f the whole country. granted i am impressed by how well managed they are. i've read articles on how the indian government is encouraging their new technological workers to not just do work for the US, but to form their own companies and try to create new software. they have good leader ship i'd say. but who cares, we are allies. wouldnt we rather have our allies be good at flying jets, than bad at it?

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: beer

Originally posted by: Mill


You are correct. I guess I should have specified in terms of development that the US currently needs while not sacrificing the conditions of their workers. I dare say the quality of products exported from China is worth a damn for the most part. I still don't understand the point of paying 5 dollars for a t-shirt that falls apart in 1 year, when you can pay 10 dollars for a t-shirt that will last 5 years. One was made under sweatshop conditions and the other was made in the US. Nothing wrong with countries using their labor, but I have a major issue with sweatshops and quality. China uses a lot of sweatshops, and their quality is lacking. Now, I am not saying India doesn't have its sweatshops, but it also has access to much better education and opportunties than the Chinese worker does. Communism is really holding that country back even though their GDP is exploding. It would be booming even more, but Communism is still holding a finger in the dike so to speak.

But isn't it accepted that India is lacking vital infrastructure that China has invested in? I remember reading a WSJ article a few months back that detailed a lot of the infrastructure problems in Bangladore but that were also present in most of India's cities. And due to exploding population and employment it was proving hard to upgrade to adequete infrastrcture without destroying the hand that feeds them, per se (i.e upgrading roads without completely cutting off employees from their jobs).

I'd like to read that article if you can find a link. I totally believe you I just want to read it because this interests me. I know there is an issue with India having as many natural resources as China, but I also know China has been raping and polluting their own natural resources for years. I'd have to read the article to comment on the infrastructure part, but I do know that infrastructure problems are always an issue with fast developing countries with a growing population.

I wish I could find it. I know the WSJ doesn't offer free access to their web site so I don't know any way to get it. And this was back in either Sept or Oct of 2003....

 

[skyking]

In an excercise like this one, the losers are clearly "The Winners". They'll go back to the classroom now with a vengeance, and the same strategy that worked against them this time won't work so well next time, if at all.
The winning team will get to cheer and celibrate............for about two minutes. Then they go back to work, and know that what did the trick this time will most likely get their ass handed to them, regardless of superior numbers.

All the chest beating on either side by "cheerleaders" is truly irrelevant, especially if you ask the pilots. They don't have the time to take insult to anything.
They are working their collective butts off to be the best in every situation next time.

 

[Red Dawn]

The IAF having superior skills could come in habdy for us if Pakistan every falls into the hands of Muslim Extremists as the Indians will definately be doing most of the fighting there.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: ndee
you don't need skills for firing missiles. That is a battle between technologies. Dog fighting is a battle between pilots. Beer, your cousins suck.

LOL

 

[Zombie]

I would like to point out that IAF had similar exercise with French Air Force last year and they got their ass handed to them.

6-8 months later they do better against USAF.

Does this mean french are better than US? No all it means is that IAF learned their lesson against french and came up with better strategy for the next time. I hope US does the same. I hope they learn their lesson and get better for next time.

Beer, you seem to be proud of your cousins but are they proud of you? I doubt it.

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: SONYFX

And when these pilots go to Alaska later this year for another joint exercise, the Americans will have to prepare well for India's special brand of low technology.

hahaha that was pretty good. this is definately a good sign for india but in no way should ppl take this to assume any kind of superiority of the IAF over the USAF. i certainly dont.