Does India really need an aircraft carrier or it is just to show the muscular bulge of our defense force? As the enemy countries are our neighbors, investing in such an expensive that too a deal strung with so many strings that we would be only dancing to the tunes of the selling country even though we might have the carrier with us. Even if we wanted to use the carrier to ward off danger, strings will be pulled by the selling nation and we would just whimper back, sit and watch things go against us. We have pretty good navy force without a carrier and air raids could be carried out from any place nearer to borders of our enemy nation. Forget the carrier, both from Russia and US, try to build your own and use the funds to become self-reliant in various areas of defense equipment and maintenance. Let countries like US, France, Britain, etc. keep begging us to purchase their wares but do not get hooked to their vested lies and smart talks. If they want India to stand out in Asia, let them kick the backs of our enemy nation. Let them give us a moral support. This, they will not do as it will not generate money for them. They need to divide and create arms race in Asia so that they can benefit by poking their noses and keep profiting from the situation. Let us just stop relying on them or at least let us also start playing games and try to get benefit out their desire to sell us their wares.
RE:Aircraft carrier?
by Rajeev on Feb 28, 2008 08:25 AM Permalink
Principally agreed that we should mfg our own stuff. But have you ever read about the reviews of our products. The DRDO after gulping billions came out with a Arjuna tank and in a battle exercise , Indian army found the tank to be useful so we had to import T-90 tanks as a priority. This is the story with most of the stuff mfd in India. With this fate, we cannot expect our soldiers to fight an enemy who has got the latest and greatest stuff..Secondly India is aspiring to become a naval super power, for controlling all the Indian ocean politics..For that we need an Aircraft carrier on each of our coasts. Thats the price to be paid for becoming big.
RE:Aircraft carrier?
by sudhanshu shilpi on Feb 28, 2008 08:33 AM Permalink
True. But as such does not India have very good vessels and newly acquired submarine enough to maintain current status of superior naval force within South Asian region? What is the need for an aircraft carrier? We are not going to take our vessels to far off lands/seas like the US does. Basically, we have threat only from our neighborhood. For this, I guess an aircraft carrier is not only quite expensive proposition but also highly strung with strings making the ownership of the carrier only a show piece, kind of muscular bulge to make wary the enemies.
RE:Aircraft carrier?
by Rajeev on Feb 28, 2008 08:38 AM Permalink
Submarines are usefull fighting machines.. But Aircraft carriers are not just fighting machines.. They are floating battlefields. They are a hugh deterrant. Just remember our aircraft carrier, vikrant.. That single ship screwed up pakistani defences.
RE:Aircraft carrier?
by sudhanshu shilpi on Feb 28, 2008 08:47 AM Permalink
Yes it did. But the current scenario is different in that we have developed precise and deadly long distance missiles, which we did not have in those times. At that time, Vikrant proved and played a vital role but now we have like said above, missiles to strike at any given time and precisely, we have airfields nearer to the borders and also satelites to get information regarding enemy activity.
