PAF IN 2015

[jastreb]

PAF fleet till 2015 should be like this...

60- Mirage 2000-9 (FRANCE)
40- Rafale (FRANCE)
40- JAS-39 Grippen (SWEDEN)
80- SU-27 ubk (UKRAIN) used
120- J10 (CHINA)
50- F/A-18 Hornet (USA)
50 pls F 15 Eagle (KSA or USA) used
60- Panavia Tornado IDV (KSA or DUETCHLAND) used
150-180 F 16 A/B Blk 30/40 (USA) used with MLU
200- JF-17 Armed with better avionics and SD-10 (CHINA-PAK)
120- Mirage F1 for PN (FRANCE) used
40- JH-7A (CHINA)
300-plus F 7-PG with SD-10 (CHINA)
4-5- EMB-145 AWACS (BRAZIL)
4-5- Airbus A-330 Tankers (FRANCE)
30- C-130J (USA)
10- C-17 trooper (USA)
60- K-8 Trnr (CHINA)

I think the Pakistan Air Force would be in condition to "KICK" Indian Air Force. :sniper :vamp
and sorry if I m missing anything here !

[Oqaab]

Oh my God ...........

Firstly, Our defence budget is 3 billion. Not 300 billion.
Secondly, US, Ukraine and most probably, Sweden will not sell fighters to Pakistan.
And lastly, plzzz start something sencible.

[corsair7772]

OH MY GOD!!!!!
Even the soviets didnt have such a variation of fighters!
And even if they did thats wat made them from superpower 2 third world country.;-)

Try makin a LESS expensive list

[Mujahid]

of you remove all the western aircrafts then it would be more realistic.......


And where the hell is FC-1?

[Red aRRow]

of you remove all the western aircrafts then it would be more realistic.......


And where the hell is FC-1?

Mujahid dude he did put 200 JF-17s in the list.

Jastreb nice list man....it's like any airforce's dream to have all of those planes. But its a little out of touch with reality :)

[shamsi]

I think I should call your list just sheer optimism, or maybe dreams.


[ Admin edit: The list may be a dream but no military brass posted nor proposed it so do not introduce off topic BS - Thank you! ]

[Mujahid]

lol yaar FC-1 has so many names that i have lost count. :D


wasalam,

Mujahid :cop

[jastreb]

lol yaar FC-1 has so many names that i have lost count. :D


wasalam,

Mujahid :cop

No No No ! my dera bro Mujahid....

Acctually you need some :help
Super 7 = FC-1 FC-1 = JF-17
and JF-17 = Thunder.. do you understand NOW ?
if you 're not going to understand again
than really you need HELP !!!

Ne znam hoce li iko tebe pomoći oko toga,
Zato sto nista ne rezumijes prijatelje !

[Oqaab]

Forget Super-7. "JF-17 Thunder" is for Pakistan and "FC-1" is for China.

[corsair7772]

Yea cuz pakistan cant have an aircraft named after china cuz pride matters. So joint-fighter is better also cuz it shows technological co-op and all that

[umair]

OK guys the $ 15 billion budget for the PAF over the next 5 years is areality not a spoof as some other forums allege.
Keeping this in mind,I propose the following structure(u gyus can calculate the totals u'r self):

1)240 J-F 17s @ $ 15 mill a pop
2)96 SU 27(UKR) @ $ 10-12 mill a pop
3)160 J 10s @ $ 25 mill a pop
4)96 F 16 A/B (second hand) should be about $18-20 mill a pop
What do u guys have to say about this :?: :sniper

[Mujahid]

lol yaar FC-1 has so many names that i have lost count. :D


wasalam,

Mujahid :cop

No No No ! my dera bro Mujahid....

Acctually you need some :help
Super 7 = FC-1 FC-1 = JF-17
and JF-17 = Thunder.. do you understand NOW ?
if you 're not going to understand again
than really you need HELP !!!

Ne znam hoce li iko tebe pomoći oko toga,
Zato sto nista ne rezumijes prijatelje !


huh?


:D I was joking I just didnt know it was also called JF-17


Admin: English in here thanks. Read the rules.

[ullu]

Whoa!!! Jas you really like to dream, don't you???

Heres my dreamlist:


JF-17 - 150-200
Mirage2000-5 - 60
J10 - 50-75
F-16c/d - 30-50




F16 because at somepoint down the road pakistan will get those birds as US will be looking for clients to get rid of its f16 fleet and make room for jsf.

[Londo Molari]

no no no

its like this

9999999999999 F-22s
9999999999999 PAK-FA
9999999999999 JSF
9999999999999 XXJ/J-12
9999999999999 Eurofighter
9999999999999 Rafale

yeah!!!

......................... :roll

[corsair7772]

i want all russian and chinese!!!! nuthin esle

[Mujahid]

chinese and russian .........are we becoming communists? :eek

just joking....

[corsair7772]

I dunno..i never liked Western Birds ever since i was a kid. Ive been droolin over Sino Russon all the time.

[Bilal_Khan]

Well, at the current rate of economic growth in Pakistan, from 2010 the Annual Defence Budget will likely be 6bn US Dollars.

A more realistic PAF by 2015 will look like this;

60 Mirage 2000-5 (3bn US Dollars)
60 F-16A/B MLU (300mn US Dollars)
200 JF-17 (4bn US Dollars)
80 Mirage ROSE II (200mn US Dollars)

4 EMB-145 AWACS (1.4bn US Dollars)
8 KC-135 Air-to-Air Refueling Aircraft (400mn US Dollars)

75 K-8
18 C-130
4 CN-235
1 Boeing 777 V.I.P
(Total 600mn US Dollars)

Strong Air Defence, 8 High Level Radars, 8 Low-Level Radars, 24 Mobile Radars, 6 FT-2000 SAM Batteries and 18 Crotale-4000 SAM Batteries. (Total 1.4bn US Dollars)

[Aussie Digger]

Forgeting the acquisitions costs, can you imagine the cost of attempting to support so many different types of aircraft? It would be astronomical... You'd be better off capability wise with 3 or 4 max different combat aircraft types cause other wise half your fleet would be grounded at anyone time due to maintenance issues. Even having the F-22 won't do you much good if the whole fleet's grounded due to a lack of spare parts...

[joker]

Umair where did you get $15 billion for the PAf as an acquisition budget for the next 5 yrs?

The figure of $15 billion is for all three services and not just the PAF.

Lastly, the PAF ACM has time and time again ruled out the Su 27!!! Its never going to happen... there are even doubts as to whether the J10 will be inducted provided we get our hands on the rafale or the EF. M2K has been ruled out as well.

The outlook for the PAF will be as follows:

150 JF 17
40 Mirage Rose
40 F16 (Possibly MLU)
40 F7PG
32 4th gen fighter


4-6 Cn235
18-20 C130s (some possibly converted to conduct elint/sigint duties)
4 Il78
10-12 An32
4 Y 12s

2 Falcon 20 (ELINT/SIGINT)
4-6 Erieye AEW&C
4-6 Refuel tankers (yet to be selected).

[Aussie Digger]

Why would Pakistan require 5 different types of generally short range fighters? It doesn't make sense to me. Greater numbers of fighters of the same type would provide greater capability in that more money could be spent on them. All these different fighters require completely different logistical support and maintenance regimes. Given that acquisition of the JF-10 won't present any political problem it makes sense (to me at least) to base your force on this aircraft and have 1 or 2 at the most other aircraft as the "silver bullet" force. I think the ideal (fighter) aircraft mix for the PAF would be the JF-10, Eurofighter and possibly the F-16 MLU variants. The JF-10 could be used for the interceptor/air defence role. The Eurofighter for air defence and strike/reconnaissance tasks and the F-16 for air defence and strike/SEAD tasks. This would provide excellent capabilities in all facets of air combat and would have the benefit of being much less expensive to maintain than 5+ fighter types, especially considering the age of some of the PAF current types. The cost savings then generated could be plowed back into capability upgrades for other areas of Pakistan's defences.

[joker]

True Aussie but the Mirage Rose and F7PGs arent going anywhere until 2015. They may be prematurely retired and stored if we manage to get 11 F16 attrition replacements plus a further 40 Dutch/Belgian examples all with a MLU. If not then the Mirage Rose at the very least will remain in service. I also suspect that the PAF top brass are reluctant to phase them out so soon as the only project that to date has is a definate is the JF 17. The issue of F16s is not definate although they will be able to be inducted fairly quickly after the MLU due to the existing infrastructure.

Then onto the issue of J10, Rafale or EF. Im not entirely sure but I suspect that delivery dates for the PAF of any one of the above will be around 2010. Say another few yrs to deliver the last unit thats fast approaching 2015.

The JF 17 is to replace all the 'antiques' currently in service but I doubt the PAF would be too willing to get start slashing operational fighters and place all our eggs in the JF 17 basket without any guarantees in place that we will be getting F16 MLUs and a 4th gen.

[Bilal_Khan]

The PAF should be able to spend roughly 8bn US Dollars over the next 10 years (like I pointed out in my last post on this thread). Thats around 800mn US Dollars a year, but 3bn US Dollars would be paid off right now, and the remainder over the next 10 years at 500mn US Dollars a year out of the 1bn USD PAF annual budget.

[P.A.F]

If you really wanna be realistic, then PAF should look like this in 2015.

JF-17 150
Mirage 2000-5 60
Rafale 20
F-16 15
j-10 30
F-7PG 120
Mirage II 80
Eurofighter 20 (Highly impossible)

What y think?

[WebMaster]

Rafale AND Eurofighter? :no On top of that F-16s and J-10s? You know how much cost it would be to keep that fleet running smoothly?

[Roger Smith]

If you really wanna be realistic, then PAF should look like this in 2015.

JF-17 150
Mirage 2000-5 60
Rafale 20
F-16 15
j-10 30
F-7PG 120
Mirage II 80
Eurofighter 20 (Highly impossible)

What y think?

Anything is possible, the above figures are realistic. :smokingc:

[mysterious]

My reaction to the list; listed by P.A.F. here is that its quite pessimistic and probably off the track as you cannot maintain soo many different types of aircrafts at one time. You have to balance between the quality and the quantity as well as variety to function properly with the little resources that Pakistan Airforce has and the political problems that Pakistan faces.

[umair]

I agree with mysterious.Oh and PAF get this straight Rafale is a second or third choice for a new PAF silver bullet force,The Typhoon is still on top and Britian's defence minister talking of the Typhoon being a failure is nothing but tonnes of typical politician bollocks.Also there is a strong tilt almost cent % in the force towards the Typhoon.

[Aussie Digger]

Being realistic, the PAF will maintain it's current type unless it can obtain new aircraft. IF they can obtain additional F-16's and an upgrade package then I would expect these to replace another aircraft possibly the F-7 due to it's extremely dated design and limited combat capability. In addition if sufficient F-16's were obtained then the Mirage 2 might be replaced with this aircraft as well. Pakistan in my opinion is maintaining a diverse fleet of aircraft only because it is having difficulty in obtaining sufficient numbers of and spare parts/weapons for it's front line fighter aircraft. In my view PAF efforts should be directed at increasing it's F-16 fleet and upgrading same to a common standard, ie: Block 50 or Block 52. A new fighter such as the JF-10 should be obtained to provide the backbone of the force and a new "high tech" 4th generation fighter should be obtained to maintain a qualitative edge over most potential enemies. PAF would simply be wasting resources by attempting to maintain a fleet of aircraft of more than 3 separate types of fighter aircraft. These resources could be better used for upgrades to weapons and systems of the aircraft I have mentioned, acquisition of a modern integtrated air defence system, including mobile and long range fixed ground based air surveillance radars, an AWACS system, an overlapping air defence missile system (comprising short and longe range SAM's), a command control and communications system to "network" the Air defence system together and air to air refuellers to support the AWACS and fighter aircraft. This type of system would provide Pakistan with the capabilities necessary to ensure they can adequately protect their airspace and support their land and naval forces as necessary. Attempting to acquire anything other than this is simply ludicrous. Cheers.

[The Watcher]

Agree with AD.

JF-10? Its JF-17 / Fc1 thats Pakistan and china are making jointly. China is also working on J-10 which is similar to Lavi.

[Aussie Digger]

Sorry JF-17 is what I meant...

[mysterious]

JF-17 will certainly form the backbone of PAF but it isnt a bad idea to get Chinese J-10s once the Chinese put them up for export. And even if China doesnt market J-10 internationally (which it will be using as its own front-line fighter) then given the warm relations between China and Pakistan, I am optimistic that the Chinese would atlest agree on selling J-10s to Pakistan as the Chinese have to ensure that India's western plank is not left unchecked (where Pakistan sits). This is why I think Chinese will try its best to support PAF to a great extent with its technology and as we have seen in the past; its always been China who has come to Pakistan's help when it needed it the most. (Even though China is warming up relations with India; bottom line is, China is not going to let India be a regional hegemon around so all this warming up is just strategic planning and nothing else. China's main interests lie in Pakistan as a counter to India as alwayz) :smokingc:

[corsair7772]

How abt this?
by 2015 the paf shud be sumthing like..
50 Ef-2000
70 J-10s
90-J-11s
150 JF-17s

The J-11s go into the high-tech stop gap measure with the Ef n J-10 being the high tech muscle suplemented by upgraded JF-17s .

[umair]

Good news! heard it at u know where and confirmed it after some forcefull questioning of my uncle :D :D
We're getting SAAB ERIEYS(?) :smokingc:
The deal was signed in Feb this year but still has not been made public, but leaked out on pakdef.info's forums from where it went to that place.(looks like June's good news came out early :D )
He told me that the model we're getting is JSTARS and AWACS rolled into one(like the Phalcon) He also told me that contrary to popular myth NESCOM(Pak's missile dev centre) played a key part in the design and development of the SD-10's seeker head and it will be in service by June or at latest.Plus that the pace of the development of the ramjet SD-10 is being stepped up.Sniff! tears of joy atlast :cry :D :P

[corsair7772]

HOLY MACKAREL!!!!

HELLEUJA!!!
THIS IS GR8!!!!

Do u have a source or sumthin? or just tell me the forum from where u got this.

[gf0012-aust]

Good news! heard it at u know where and confirmed it after some forcefull questioning of my uncle :D :D
We're getting SAAB ERIEYS(?) :smokingc:
The deal was signed in Feb this year but still has not been made public, but leaked out on pakdef.info's forums from where it went to that place.(looks like June's good news came out early :D )
He told me that the model we're getting is JSTARS and AWACS rolled into one(like the Phalcon) He also told me that contrary to popular myth NESCOM(Pak's missile dev centre) played a key part in the design and development of the SD-10's seeker head and it will be in service by June or at latest.Plus that the pace of the development of the ramjet SD-10 is being stepped up.Sniff! tears of joy atlast :cry :D :P

Congrats! They are a very capable little unit. Do you know what platform you will be mounting them on?

Hopefully you'll get them datalinked to your naval assets as well.

[Aussie Digger]

I don't recall ever seeing this radar on anything but the Embraer 145. If Sweden is willing to sell this to PAF, the why not the Gripen? The Gripen would be good for Pakistan given it's high level of technology (and capability) and relatively affordable price. Plus it's networking capablity with the Erieye AWACS system is supposedly the world's best at present. Sweden as I understand it, has a fantastic network centric warfare capability. Such an advanced capability would greatly enhance Pakistans overall combat capability and possibly allow them to overmatch any potential enemies in some areas.

[umair]

Well AD just wait till the final product Thunder comes out.From what info I have this bird is not a 3rd gen plane but it's in the 4.2-4.305 range same as the Grippen.It's also equipped with a multi channel data link.And from what the PAF is putting in this bird I feel that the $15 mill a pop price tag is just for public fodder and the real deal will be somewhere about $20-25 mill a pop.
Well I've seen some pics of it.In one it's on a turboprop,ona jet with twin rear mounted jets and one with two under wing jets

[joker]

AD i think the Gripen was discounted due to the 15-20%(?) American components of the aircraft. But no doubt about it the Gripen is one of the best out there.

I pretty much agree with your assessment but we have to remember that any deal for the F16s will be subject to Congress approval. We couldnt even get Congress to approve the sale of Block 15s let alone Block 50/52s. Any surplus F16s from US stocks is not going to happen. I think the PAF is trying to seek US approval for ex Belgian/ex Dutch F16s. In addition to those the PAF wants 11 attrition replacements to bring our current fleet back upto 40 units. Theyre even trying for a MLU to standardise the PAF fleet if ex Belgian/ex Dutch examples are acquired. Although I believe that the Dutch examples are C/D and not A/B. The PAF is looking at increasing the current 32 strength to 80 (the figure they had originally planned to induct before sanctions were slapped on.)

What is pretty much definate is the 150 JF17s and 32-40 4th gen.

However as long as there is nothing definate on the F16 front then the Mirage Rose and F7 will have slog on.

I think right now the J10 is just an option to the PAF in case the F16 falls through and a 4th gen fighter can not be acquired for whatever reason.

[joker]

Umair can you provide a full spec for the JF 17s sub systems?

[umair]

List of Sub-systems I know of:
1)A datalink(probably French origin)
2)RC-400-4 Radar by THALES
3)Sextant Avionique glass Cockpit
4)Increased % of composites in structure
5)SAGEM navigation and EW suite including internal airborne multiband infrared and ECM active jammers
6)New cockpit outlay with 5 mfds(3 large:one colored, 2 small showing RWR and fuel flow readings),25 degree fieldof view smart HUD
7)HMD&S system
8)landing gear tyres by Genera Tyre co Pakistan(joking lol) :D

[Bilal_Khan]

The most realistic figure would be the PAF spending 12bn USD over the next 12 years modernizing, hence over the long term. By 2016 it's looking to accomplish "minimum deterrance".

This is a much more realistic figure by 2016...

60 Mirage 2000-5 (2.4bn USD)
60 JAS-39C (2.4bn USD)
200 JF-17 (3bn USD)
80 Mirage ROSE II (200mn USD)
20 L-15 (200mn USD)
60 K-8 (100mn USD)
6 SAAB-2000 AWACS (1.2bn USD)
8 E-310 (used) Air-to-Air Refueling Tankers (500mn USD)
4 SAAB-2000 V.I.P (200mn USD)
12 A-400 Medium Lift Transport (700mn USD)
6 CN-235 Light Lift Transport (100mn USD)

[Roger Smith]

The most realistic figure would be the PAF spending 12bn USD over the next 12 years modernizing, hence over the long term. By 2016 it's looking to accomplish "minimum deterrance".

This is a much more realistic figure by 2016...

60 Mirage 2000-5 (2.4bn USD)
60 JAS-39C (2.4bn USD)
200 JF-17 (3bn USD)
80 Mirage ROSE II (200mn USD)
20 L-15 (200mn USD)
60 K-8 (100mn USD)
6 SAAB-2000 AWACS (1.2bn USD)
8 E-310 (used) Air-to-Air Refueling Tankers (500mn USD)
4 SAAB-2000 V.I.P (200mn USD)
12 A-400 Medium Lift Transport (700mn USD)
6 CN-235 Light Lift Transport (100mn USD)



With 12 years period to go till 2016, you forgot to add the inflaton factor which would be minimum 5 to 8% making almost double the cost and PAF requires $24 billion to purchase the aforementioned hardware and equipments. :?

[moinanwer]

Last year in Jang, when JF-17 made it first flight , it was wrriten in a number of articles that if number of prduction units exceed 300, the per unit cost will be 10 million if less than 300 the price will be 15 million. If it is any thing to go by, 150 JF-17 * 15 million = 2.25 bn but if more than 300 are produced then we can get 225 aircraft for the same amount of money :help

btw can any one tell me which stand off missile are offered with Rafale & Euro Fighter :?:

[Aussie Digger]

Mr Moianwar, I have seen pictures of Eurofighters armed with Storm Shadow stand off precision attack missiles and Tauras missiles. I have read that Rafale will be equipped with the Scalp EG stand off attack missile. I guess other missiles such as JASSAM or SLAM-ER or any of these missiles could be fairly easily integrated into either aircraft. Cheers.

[Aussie Digger]

People, the actual acquisition cost of an aircraft is fairly inconsequential. No-one buys 1 aircraft (even Indonesia bought 2...) What you need to look at is the overall cost. The logisitcs support systems, training programs, simulators etc cost far more than the actual aircraft. Don't assume that because Pakistan has $2 Billion (for instance) and wants to (and is allowed to...) Purchase aircraft X at $20 million a pop, that they will be able to acquire 100 aircraft. The most they could probably acquire under these circumstances is 70-80. There's not much point having 100 aircraft sitting on an airfield unable to fly...

[Roger Smith]

Last year in Jang, when JF-17 made it first flight , it was wrriten in a number of articles that if number of prduction units exceed 300, the per unit cost will be 10 million if less than 300 the price will be 15 million. If it is any thing to go by, 150 JF-17 * 15 million = 2.25 bn but if more than 300 are produced then we can get 225 aircraft for the same amount of money :help

btw can any one tell me which stand off missile are offered with Rafale & Euro Fighter :?:

Once the production of FC-1/JF-17 would commence, the Chinese will inflate the cost to $25 million upwards a unit. The Chinese are very smart business people. :D

[Paxter]

Dream on if pakistan gets all that planes they will either rot or fall down from the sky the 15 billion isnt a "huge thing" considering the fact its on a long term span of spending and also all 3 navy,air,land are using that money ... btw who the hell said pakistan is in the top 10 best airforce in the world he better get his list right ... they are more in the top 20 .....

[Paxter]

Malaysia defence budget for the same span of 12 years is 20 billion and even them are having a realistic figure.... you dont spend 18 billion on hardware cause the maintainance and the extra cost will kill you....

Btw on the topic of Malaysia anyone has a picture of how the SU 30 MKM will look like? apperently since they dont aknowladge the existance of Israel they took out all the systems made by them and replace them with french and german ones... :?

[mysterious]

Dream on if pakistan gets all that planes they will either rot or fall down from the sky the 15 billion isnt a "huge thing" considering the fact its on a long term span of spending and also all 3 navy,air,land are using that money ... btw who the hell said pakistan is in the top 10 best airforce in the world he better get his list right ... they are more in the top 20 .....

Its true that Pakistan Airforce does not have the required advanced airpower at the moment to project its high standards but you cannot discount it from the top 10 list. I'd suggest you go and read up some recent articles and issues in relation to the top airforces of the world. :smokingc:

[gf0012-aust]

Malaysia defence budget for the same span of 12 years is 20 billion and even them are having a realistic figure.... you dont spend 18 billion on hardware cause the maintainance and the extra cost will kill you....

Btw on the topic of Malaysia anyone has a picture of how the SU 30 MKM will look like? apperently since they dont aknowladge the existance of Israel they took out all the systems made by them and replace them with french and german ones... :?

The reasons for Malaysia not having Israeli kit are due to a religious disconnect.

On this issue of power, top 10 lists etc leave me cold. They usually have minimal basis in fact and tend to be biased towards the cultural or philosophical nature of the forum where the question appears.

"Top" lists are more useful when applied to a regional measurement process.

Most boards I have seen focus on the obvious issues of weapons platforms and financial issues (cap growth, federal reserves etc) - which immediately hilights the fact the the questioner has minimal knowledge of what involves military projection and military analysis. From that point on anyone who questions the ranking ends up struggling to explain the obvious.

There is one hyperpower, a group of superpowers and a number of regional powers. ;)

[mysterious]

I agree with gf completely. And yes, Islamic countries dont want anything to do with the Zionist state (atleast at the official level) so lets just keep it that way until the Israeli & Palestinian conflict is resolved. :smokingc:

[Roger Smith]

I agree with gf completely. And yes, Islamic countries dont want anything to do with the Zionist state (atleast at the official level) so lets just keep it that way until the Israeli & Palestinian conflict is resolved. :smokingc:

That will be just a number of many and many years prior Israeli & Palestinian conflict could be resolved, till then there will be no military transaction and technology exchange will take place between Israel and Muslim countries that is the lose of Malaysia.

Turkey and India with huge Muslim population has diplomatic ties with Israel and it is taking advantage from Israeli advance technology. ;)

[mysterious]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:

[gf0012-aust]

I agree with gf completely. And yes, Islamic countries dont want anything to do with the Zionist state (atleast at the official level) so lets just keep it that way until the Israeli & Palestinian conflict is resolved. :smokingc:

That will be just a number of many and many years prior Israeli & Palestinian conflict could be resolved, till then there will be no military transaction and technology exchange will take place between Israel and Muslim countries that is the lose of Malaysia.

Turkey and India with huge Muslim population has diplomatic ties with Israel and it is taking advantage from Israeli advance technology. ;)

The Israelis are without a doubt some of the best systems integrators in the world. Their electronic warfare capability really makes some of the French gear look a little pedestrian. Their missiles typically outperform European and US "equivalents",

If I had to design an ORBAT from scratch, they would have a substantial amount of gear in the list.

I've dealt with a few Israeli inventors and they were of extraordinary intellect.

One of the follies of unrelenting hate is that it can cause you to underestimate an entire people and see their worth.

[Roger Smith]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:


Mys..... You may be right with your theory on religion, it is all crap and we are not living in the middle ages. Religion and state should be separate for improvement and betterment of people economy and the country infrastructure. ;)

[mysterious]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:


Mys..... You may be right with your theory on religion, it is all crap and we are not living in the middle ages. Religion and state should be separate for improvement and betterment of people economy and the country infrastructure. ;)

Thats the problem Roger, you're not a Muslim. If you were one, you wouldn't have posted this post of yours. You see, for Muslims, state and religion cannot be two different things; they go together. Thats the way Islam is. For Muslims, the betterment and improvement of people lies more with the spiritual and holy ways rather then western materialism. When you separate state and religion, you have countries like America, where crime rate is the highest in the world, where raping a woman accurs every 30 minutes or even much less, where sexual immorality is not an issue, where money and material well-being is all what people want (because that is how capitalism works - money is your new religion), etc. Then you have countries like France, where people are allowed to roam around naked but not wear headscarves just because it shows a sign of some religious affiliation. You see this whole idea of state and religion going together is what lies at the roots of Islam and that is why the Muslim world is lagging behind these days because they haven't found the right way to make the state & religion work together and so they are trying their best to do so. I am a proud Muslim and currently am taking up courses to dig deep in to the roots of Islam and believe me! the more I find out the more I love my religion.

In my view, the west has succeeded in prosperity and material welfare because it decided to forgo religion and accept secularism. Tell me, are the people in the west going to take their prosperity and material welfare (and wealth) to their graves? What are they going to do when asked in the afterlife about how religious they were? Are they going to answer, "Oh! We were so busy making money and gaining material advancements that we didnt get the time to pray or do at least something religious"?

The point I am trying to make here is that, once again, Islamic countries need to figure out a way to make the state and religion go hand in hand or it just wont work as a vast majority in the Muslim world is NOT ready to give up religion for the material well being and economic development at the hands of Capitalism (as far as what I have found out from my study and research).

[Roger Smith]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:


Mys..... You may be right with your theory on religion, it is all crap and we are not living in the middle ages. Religion and state should be separate for improvement and betterment of people economy and the country infrastructure. ;)

Thats the problem Roger, you're not a Muslim. If you were one, you wouldn't have posted this post of yours. You see, for Muslims, state and religion cannot be two different things; they go together. Thats the way Islam is. For Muslims, the betterment and improvement of people lies more with the spiritual and holy ways rather then western materialism. When you separate state and religion, you have countries like America, where crime rate is the highest in the world, where raping a woman accurs every 30 minutes or even much less, where sexual immorality is not an issue, where money and material well-being is all what people want (because that is how capitalism works - money is your new religion), etc. Then you have countries like France, where people are allowed to roam around naked but not wear headscarves just because it shows a sign of some religious affiliation. You see this whole idea of state and religion going together is what lies at the roots of Islam and that is why the Muslim world is lagging behind these days because they haven't found the right way to make the state & religion work together and so they are trying their best to do so. I am a proud Muslim and currently am taking up courses to dig deep in to the roots of Islam and believe me! the more I find out the more I love my religion.

In my view, the west has succeeded in prosperity and material welfare because it decided to forgo religion and accept secularism. Tell me, are the people in the west going to take their prosperity and material welfare (and wealth) to their graves? What are they going to do when asked in the afterlife about how religious they were? Are they going to answer, "Oh! We were so busy making money and gaining material advancements that we didnt get the time to pray or do at least something religious"?

The point I am trying to make here is that, once again, Islamic countries need to figure out a way to make the state and religion go hand in hand or it just wont work as a vast majority in the Muslim world is NOT ready to give up religion for the material well being and economic development at the hands of Capitalism (as far as what I have found out from my study and research).

I disagree with you, religion and state can function separately like in Muslim countries in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia and Eygpt.........which has elected democratic government. ;)

Basically, the Muslim population has been suppressed and oppressed by their rulers and religious leaders for too long and there is no independent or individual power to function or think. :)

[gf0012-aust]

Myst, the confusing thing for me is the different messages of Muslim followers.

There is no issue of "faith" for me. I find it a complex issue when people such as yourself will talk about Islam being a complete way of life, service to the disadvantaged, service to community, abandonment of visible wealth etc...

You only have to look at the Arab League and you can see contradictions already.

So, what do I use as a benchmark to judge a faith by? Is it the extremists? Is it those who somewhat gleefully wish to drive the Jews into the sea? Is it the moderates, the mature business people and military people that I interact with day to day, is it those who worship their faith and yet will have a jew and a christian in their house for a meal, is it the muslim who seeks to destroy anything that smells of western beliefs and values.

How am I supposed to know who is the true muslim out of all those people?
And its the same for Jews I know, is it the moderate who abhors violence and wants to co-exist with the Palestinians? or is it the fundamentalist orthodox jew?

I suspect that i've lived a little longer than most of the people who frequent this forum, and yet what I can tell you is that having been around the world, having lived in a few countries, the most dangerous people I meet are those whose faith blinds them enough to stop being decent to others.
In it's most raw form, a fundamentalist conviction is just as frightening as the individual who wields a gun.

[mysterious]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:


Mys..... You may be right with your theory on religion, it is all crap and we are not living in the middle ages. Religion and state should be separate for improvement and betterment of people economy and the country infrastructure. ;)

Thats the problem Roger, you're not a Muslim. If you were one, you wouldn't have posted this post of yours. You see, for Muslims, state and religion cannot be two different things; they go together. Thats the way Islam is. For Muslims, the betterment and improvement of people lies more with the spiritual and holy ways rather then western materialism. When you separate state and religion, you have countries like America, where crime rate is the highest in the world, where raping a woman accurs every 30 minutes or even much less, where sexual immorality is not an issue, where money and material well-being is all what people want (because that is how capitalism works - money is your new religion), etc. Then you have countries like France, where people are allowed to roam around naked but not wear headscarves just because it shows a sign of some religious affiliation. You see this whole idea of state and religion going together is what lies at the roots of Islam and that is why the Muslim world is lagging behind these days because they haven't found the right way to make the state & religion work together and so they are trying their best to do so. I am a proud Muslim and currently am taking up courses to dig deep in to the roots of Islam and believe me! the more I find out the more I love my religion.

In my view, the west has succeeded in prosperity and material welfare because it decided to forgo religion and accept secularism. Tell me, are the people in the west going to take their prosperity and material welfare (and wealth) to their graves? What are they going to do when asked in the afterlife about how religious they were? Are they going to answer, "Oh! We were so busy making money and gaining material advancements that we didnt get the time to pray or do at least something religious"?

The point I am trying to make here is that, once again, Islamic countries need to figure out a way to make the state and religion go hand in hand or it just wont work as a vast majority in the Muslim world is NOT ready to give up religion for the material well being and economic development at the hands of Capitalism (as far as what I have found out from my study and research).

I disagree with you, religion and state can function separately like in Muslim countries in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia and Eygpt.........which has elected democratic government. ;)

Basically, the Muslim population has been suppressed and oppressed by their rulers and religious leaders for too long and there is no independent or individual power to function or think. :)

So your point is that Democracy and Islam are two different things? Now that is ONE pro-western B.S. that I've been getting a lot recently. If you have the time and interest, please look up some Islamic books and even the Qur'an itself; true Islamic society is based on democratic style. I do agree to one thing though that it is unfortunate that most of the Islamic countries have in a way swayed away from the true Islamic teachings and have rather continued to follow their "traditional" paths. And there's a good point here, every now and then, specially when Islam is mentioned, half the world confuses "Religion" with "Tradition". There is a very fine line between the two actually.

[Aussie Digger]

Well Mysterious the fact that you're a Muslim doesn't make your belief's any more valid than mine. You believe certain things because of what you have read in the Koran and because of what others have told you. That doesn't necessarily make these things so. I don't mean to belittle your religion, but the inescapable fact is that the majority of people in "Western" countries enjoy a better standard of living than most of those of Middle Eastern Countries. Muslim Countries exist which have achieved better living standards for their people and yet are every bit as pious and devout muslims as you obviously are. It seems to me therefore that countries whcih try to justify their lack of attention to these basic humans rights on the basis of their faith are in fact simply using there faith as an excuse. Surely it wasn't originally designed for that purpose? Religions, (of any type) as I understand them, were originally designed to comfort and support people, not oppress them. Cheers.

[mysterious]

Well for gf, all I can think of to say is that religiously I dont think you're much of an involved person. Answer to your questions is that you dont judge a faith by its followers; you judge a faith by its teachings and its guidance. Yes you are right about the Arabs, they have certainly deviated away from the true teachings of Islam. Pick up a copy of the translation of the Qur'an and you will see that women have equal rights as men in Islam but in most of the Islamic countries that is NOT the case; the true Islamic society should be based on democratic principles which is NOT the case in most of the Islamic countries. The fact that they are not following their religion (in this case, Islam) properly doesnt mean that Islam should be judged by 'their' actions. Similarly, when I critisized America and France, I did not criticize these states' main religion, Christianity; I criticized the society, the state, the people.

[gf0012-aust]

Well for gf, all I can think of to say is that religiously I dont think you're much of an involved person

You assume again, what you can accurately say is that my comprehension of your faith is limited, That is why I interact with different people to see if they are representative of their faith, and I ask questions to see whether the answers are consistent.

you judge a faith by its teachings and its guidance

Religion shouldn't be judged by it's followers, but it sure will influence people. They can be a reflection of the teachings if you don't see others within the faith.

Hence my earlier questions about Islam in another thread on the forum. To find similarities, to make a connection with anyone you need to find common ground - hence why I ask questions.

[mysterious]

And as for Aussie, I'd say he is not following my posts correctly or rather he doesnt want to. I have said it again and again; yet I'll say it again, the problem with most of the Islamic countries is that they havent figured out the 'perfect' way of making the state and religion work together which is very important in the Muslim world. Yes, I agree that Islamic countries have functioned badly and not delivered in the sense that an Islamic state is suppose to according to the teaching of the Qur'an; that is because they have deviated away from the true teachings. But on the other hand, they have not deviated enough so as to be catagorized as disfunctional on a "moral" level as most of the western societies. You have Saudi Arabia as an example, they have their goods and their bads. The bads include, not granting women equal rights and stuff like that. The good though, tell us that the society in Saudi Arabia is much more richer in moral welfare than any other place on this planet!! Please tell me if Saudi Arabia's crime rate is anywhere near the US rate. Please tell me that in Saudi Arabia, rape is a problem. Please tell me Saudi Arabia has the rate of disfunctional marraiges anywhere near that of the US. So, as gf said in an other post, at the end of the day; you will believe in what you think is right and I will believe in what I think is right. Its all about agreeing to be disagreeable. :smokingc:

[mysterious]

Yes religion does influence people in a way but it all comes down to people again as religion will influence people in the way that they have studied it and took it to be. You cant make the religion teach itself to the people, its the people who study it and then do things accordingly. For instance, JIHAD is something that is much known around the western world these days and as soon as someone mentions it, people think it means HOLY WAR when it DOES NOT mean that! It means "struggle" in the way of God!! Military aspect of JIHAD is just ONE part of it and that is also highly regulated by the rules laid down in the Qur'an and the Hadith. It is these organizations like al-qaeda that have made out their own meaning out of Jihad as for them it only means Holy War. So you see, in this way you cannot say religion has influenced people. Its more about what influence people have taken up on themselves and bent the religious teachings to further their own personal interests.

[Roger Smith]

It is NOT about having larger/largest Muslim populations Roger my friend, its about the Religion of the STATE!!! India is a Hindu state no matter how secular of a democracy it clammers about being and it will remain so. Turkey, much like rest of the Europe is on the path to "secularism" and its only an Islamic state for the name's sake I'd say! All other Islamic states are quite "Islamic" when you compare them to Turkey. So my point is that no true Islamic state would keep relations with a Zionist state because we Muslims know we have to show our faces to God and stand trial of our deeds when we die; and its better to keep one's honour and dignity rather than join forces (or shake hands) with Zionists who are killing Muslims each day! So Roger, like it or not, it all comes down to "religion" in the end! And lastly, I dont believe in secularism as a secular life is meaningless. :smokingc:


Mys..... You may be right with your theory on religion, it is all crap and we are not living in the middle ages. Religion and state should be separate for improvement and betterment of people economy and the country infrastructure. ;)

Thats the problem Roger, you're not a Muslim. If you were one, you wouldn't have posted this post of yours. You see, for Muslims, state and religion cannot be two different things; they go together. Thats the way Islam is. For Muslims, the betterment and improvement of people lies more with the spiritual and holy ways rather then western materialism. When you separate state and religion, you have countries like America, where crime rate is the highest in the world, where raping a woman accurs every 30 minutes or even much less, where sexual immorality is not an issue, where money and material well-being is all what people want (because that is how capitalism works - money is your new religion), etc. Then you have countries like France, where people are allowed to roam around naked but not wear headscarves just because it shows a sign of some religious affiliation. You see this whole idea of state and religion going together is what lies at the roots of Islam and that is why the Muslim world is lagging behind these days because they haven't found the right way to make the state & religion work together and so they are trying their best to do so. I am a proud Muslim and currently am taking up courses to dig deep in to the roots of Islam and believe me! the more I find out the more I love my religion.

In my view, the west has succeeded in prosperity and material welfare because it decided to forgo religion and accept secularism. Tell me, are the people in the west going to take their prosperity and material welfare (and wealth) to their graves? What are they going to do when asked in the afterlife about how religious they were? Are they going to answer, "Oh! We were so busy making money and gaining material advancements that we didnt get the time to pray or do at least something religious"?

The point I am trying to make here is that, once again, Islamic countries need to figure out a way to make the state and religion go hand in hand or it just wont work as a vast majority in the Muslim world is NOT ready to give up religion for the material well being and economic development at the hands of Capitalism (as far as what I have found out from my study and research).

I disagree with you, religion and state can function separately like in Muslim countries in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia and Eygpt.........which has elected democratic government. ;)

Basically, the Muslim population has been suppressed and oppressed by their rulers and religious leaders for too long and there is no independent or individual power to function or think. :)

So your point is that Democracy and Islam are two different things? Now that is ONE pro-western B.S. that I've been getting a lot recently. If you have the time and interest, please look up some Islamic books and even the Qur'an itself; true Islamic society is based on democratic style. I do agree to one thing though that it is unfortunate that most of the Islamic countries have in a way swayed away from the true Islamic teachings and have rather continued to follow their "traditional" paths. And there's a good point here, every now and then, specially when Islam is mentioned, half the world confuses "Religion" with "Tradition". There is a very fine line between the two actually.

It is all self imposed by the rulers and religious leaders of the Muslim world to oppressed the mass population for financial benefit and control of power.

Just few example;
1) During Taliban's era in Afghanistan human rights were suppressed.
2) Sadam Hussuein in Iraq had no opposition, if any entity raises their voice they simply disappear.
3) Pervez Musharraf is afraid of his opposition candidates like Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, send them to exile.
4) Saudi Arabia & GCC rulers have complete/absolute rule over the kingdom.
5) Iran run by religious leaders.
6) Sudan and other African Muslim countries are having civil wars.
7) Checyna & Kashmir civil unrest.

Well, I rest my case! ;)

[gf0012-aust]

Yes religion does influence people in a way but it all comes down to people again as religion will influence people in the way that they have studied it and took it to be. You cant make the religion teach itself to the people, its the people who study it and then do things accordingly. For instance, JIHAD is something that is much known around the western world these days and as soon as someone mentions it, people think it means HOLY WAR when it DOES NOT mean that! It means "struggle" in the way of God!! Military aspect of JIHAD is just ONE part of it and that is also highly regulated by the rules laid down in the Qur'an and the Hadith. It is these organizations like al-qaeda that have made out their own meaning out of Jihad as for them it only means Holy War. So you see, in this way you cannot say religion has influenced people. Its more about what influence people have taken up on themselves and bent the religious teachings to further their own personal interests.

Without sounding patronising, when you post like this it is actually much easier to engage with you as you don't become aggressive.

Keep it up.

[mysterious]

I agree with you over the point that rulers of such Islamic countries at times do many things for personal benefits and objectives. But I wouldn't agree with you over Pervez Musharraf. I dont think he's afraid of the opposition at all. Nawaz Sharif was a traitor, went to Saudi Arabia of his own choice and deal with the authorities in Islamabad. Benazir, is corrupt as hell and a bad name for her father who was a great man! She faces charges which she is afraid to face and thats why she roams around all over the world blabbing without having the courage to come home and face the realities (why doesnt she come? what fear has she got if she's so innocent?). :smokingc:

[WebMaster]

Stick to the damn topic, kids.

[Revival_786]

I agree with Mysterious. What many Islamic countries are doing today is not necessarily Islamic. And, for example, in Islam people elect a leader. Know this... The Western countries are much more "older" in their existance since their countries were established long before Muslim countries were fully established. The Muslim world was either occupied by the British, etc. and subject to constant territorial fragmentation to ensure fighting across people. The Muslim countries are still "new" - they are evolving and are developing. The Muslim world didn't go through the industrial revolution (which was more of a western phenomenon), the state of Israel creating problems, fast population growth rates (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) and corruption are some of the reasons Muslims are lagging behind. :)

These are just temporary problems which might take (25-50 years or even less to solve). The Muslims brought the world out of the dark age with modern and advanced ideas. It won't be "long" before the Muslims are back to the post of being part of the leaders of the world today :)

Muslims are among the best societies in the world, if not the best because their morals will not change even if secular societies vote that raping is legal, etc. (gay and lesbian marriages are starting to become common over there)...

[Winter]

You eminent members have just delivered me a bloody ridiculous demonstration of a train derailing.

In a pathetic and consequently useless attempt to bear this thread back to at least a shadow of it's former self as to hold back the tide with a tea towel, I will predict from my lack of knowledge and what I have seen and read, Pakistan will have no more than 100-120 JF-17s by 2015.

From now on, I will cross my fingers in the future knowing that at least half the threads on this forum do have the potential and scope to 'develop' into this...

[gf0012-aust]

You eminent members have just delivered me a bloody ridiculous demonstration of a train derailing.



welcome to the frustration zone.. ;)

[mysterious]

I dont get it! Bloody ridiculous demonstration of a train derailing? Where did that come from?

[saraab]

guys , we arent here to discuss what is Islamic and whats not.
This aint going anywhere like this.

i agrree with u winter.

[umair]

I dont get it! Bloody ridiculous demonstration of a train derailing? Where did that come from?


It means the "BLOODY STUPID MANNER" in which u guys have gone off topic and ruined a perfectly good thread.
Mysterious buddy,I agree with what u say bout us muslims,but there is a way of putting one's arguments accross without making others and u'r self feel defensive about u'r beliefs.I've seen the whole thread and in my opinion trouble started from Paxter's posts.
Mysterious,Roger,Paxter and other such members"Stop acting and bickering like 14 year old hormone driven kids.It's this behaviour of u'rs due to which senior and sensible members (cept gf)are'nt posting regularly anymore.Rectify u'r attitudes AND LEARN TO DISCUSS POLITICS IN POLITICAL FORUMS.Also keep cool heads on issues sensitive to u'r self before responding.Believe me restraining one self is difficult but by doing it, not only would u be able to produce answers which make others think, but in a form acceptable to the addressed member/s"
ThankYou

[WebMaster]

I dont get it! Bloody ridiculous demonstration of a train derailing? Where did that come from?

If you don't understand such simple sentences, what are you doing debating on Islam and what islam is? Are you some type of contractor on Islam that you have to bring it in every thread and somehow make it Islam vs the nonislam ?

Your lack of defence knowledge just doesn't help so its best not to reply and ruin the thread. Read, learn and shut up if still you can't comment on the topic accordingly.

[Roger Smith]

Pakistan will have no more than 100-120 JF-17s by 2015.

I feel by 2015 the situation on the Indian sub-continent would much better than now and peace, prosperity, progress will prevail in every sector between Pakistan and India for betterment of both countries.

I assume building armed forces and wars would in the past as bad memory and a part of history.
;)

[The Watcher]

Roger that does not mean pakistan or any other country involved will stop spending on defence and security of the nation. Good days and good relations are welcomed but a country should be prepared to face any aggression from any side. Pakistan's airforce will be stronger and better in years to come.

[Roger Smith]

Roger that does not mean pakistan or any other country involved will stop spending on defence and security of the nation. Good days and good relations are welcomed but a country should be prepared to face any aggression from any side. Pakistan's airforce will be stronger and better in years to come.

Let us pray and hope for the best for Pakistan in the coming future. :smokingc:

[mysterious]

Hats off to you Umair. I agree with you and sorry I got a little carried away. But I thought you said (except gf) all senior members were quite sensible, so when did Webs join in? And as for Webs, not knowing what a particular sentence doesnt mean that you dont know stuff about other things. I bet you dont know about the great big world other than your military obsession but that doesnt give me any right to diss you out here. And if you think I'm a contractor working for Islam, then you my friend need some counselling about what one should do when its hard times for your religion at the hands of a few individuals. It is my duty by faith to correct the misconceptions about Islam and on this forum I only do so when something related to that comes up, not otherwise!!

[gf0012-aust]

Myst

But I thought you said (except gf) all senior members were quite sensible

I think Umair is referring to my posting habits - not as to whether I am sensible. ;)

[mysterious]

Myst

But I thought you said (except gf) all senior members were quite sensible

I think Umair is referring to my posting habits - not as to whether I am sensible. ;)

I know gf bro. No hard feelings! Just used Umair's comments to give a reality check to Webs. Peace out! :smokingc:

[Winter]

Hats off to you Umair. I agree with you and sorry I got a little carried away. But I thought you said (except gf) all senior members were quite sensible, so when did Webs join in? And as for Webs, not knowing what a particular sentence doesnt mean that you dont know stuff about other things. I bet you dont know about the great big world other than your military obsession but that doesnt give me any right to diss you out here. And if you think I'm a contractor working for Islam, then you my friend need some counselling about what one should do when its hard times for your religion at the hands of a few individuals. It is my duty by faith to correct the misconceptions about Islam and on this forum I only do so when something related to that comes up, not otherwise!!

Military obsession? Webbie needs counselling? :roll

Hmm...Myst, you have missed the point of my last post by a good degree somewhat. :ohwell

I must say I concur in principle (of hope) with Roger Smith's post to a future of peace and prosperity for India and Pakistan by 2015...

I believe by 2015 the PAF will be in essence essentially the same as today (in size, etc), with minor touches, unless there are a few as-yet unforeseen big changes or reforms...Of course as well with new and upgraded aircraft acquired by the time, including as I said earlier in the region of 100 JF-17s.

[Aussie Digger]

Me too, massive changes on the scale some have predicted here deosn't seem very likely. Massive expenditure would be required to achieve some of the forces some of the posters here are recommending and that could only have a seriously detrimental effect on Pakistan's army and naval forces, not to mention other Government priorities. PAF may introduce one or 2 new capabilities such as AWACS and air - air refuelling aircraft, and perhaps introduce one or 2 new types of aircraft into it's ORBAT, but I cannot see significant wholesale changes occurring. At best one or 2 types of older aircraft may be replaced with larger numbers of newer aircaft and that will be about it I'm afraid. Cheers.

[saraab]

one question

does pakistan need the air to air refuliing system ??
i dont think so

[Paxter]

urm We are all off topic here and like i ask about a damn SU 30 MKM not the whole 9 yards about Religion btw i am from malaysia and yes state and religion is seperate but it also depends which state are you in... some states choose to be under the influence of religion in the matters of state. so my point is just because you live in canada and believe in the seperation of state and religion that does not mean the whole world agrees with you.

i believe in the seperation of state but like awang who is also a malaysian believes not. thats y we have democracy so now shut the hell up about religion and get back to the planes......

[mysterious]

Well obviously there wont be major changes apart from bringing in newer aircraft to replace the older ones and AWACS and possibly an air-to-air refuelling aircraft because all PAF has to do is keep a credible deterrance force as compared to the Indian Airforce. I dont see PAF having any aggressive designs over anyone.

[Paxter]

WHAT DID I DO? i aska bout a su30 diffrences since they took the israel parts out i didnt ask about the whole religion thing READ THE THREAD FIRST!

[mysterious]

Yes Paxter, I took a look at that thing and I think it was Roger who started off with the lack of Israeli and Malaysian diplomatic contact and stuff. His post was kind of aggravating and I got carried away. Dont worry, things like these happen all the time.

[Winter]

one question

does pakistan need the air to air refuliing system ??
i dont think so

I believe we threw the idea around a bit in 'Which Aircraft Should PAF opt for ????' (http://defencetalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=443)

[Aussie Digger]

Some people around here seem to believe that the PAF's money should be spent wholly and solely on combat aircraft alone and no other supporting capabilities with the possible exception of AWACS. Apparently the PAF can support their fleet on a quick reaction alert level indefinitely and as such do not require air to air refuelling or the ability to maintain any real sort of combat persistence. In addition any strike missions the PAF may undertake will be of such a short range and duration that again no air to air refuelling will be required. In addition to this, the PAF apparently sees no value in the tactics used lately by most modern airforces, namely the "time critical targeting" approach which allows aircraft to deploy their weapons in the most effective and time critical manner. The downside of this tactic being of course that the aircraft require a considerable period of loitering over the battlefield. The upside, besides the combat effectiveness is that during this time they can also be employed in air defence, recon, battle damage assessment tasks etc until required for the strike role... Some people I think need to lose their fixation on combat aircraft numbers and types and realise that balanced capabilities are required. Not distorted numbers of a particular breed of aircraft. Cheers.

[gf0012-aust]

Some people around here seem to believe that the PAF's money should be spent wholly and solely on combat aircraft alone and no other supporting capabilities with the possible exception of AWACS. .... Some people I think need to lose their fixation on combat aircraft numbers and types and realise that balanced capabilities are required. Not distorted numbers of a particular breed of aircraft. Cheers.

To paraphrase an expression:

amateurs talk about weapons, tacticians talk about logistics

[Aussie Digger]

Very true gf. I often forget that I'm discussing defence issues with people who not only have no actual military experience, but don't even real-life experience in defence related matters, as you obviously do. Cheers.

[gf0012-aust]

Very true gf. I often forget that I'm discussing defence issues with people who not only have no actual military experience, but don't even real-life experience in defence related matters, as you obviously do. Cheers.

there are some smart cookies in here though, but the obsession with weapons and weapons systems is kind of to be expected. ;)

[amit21mech]

Well obviously there wont be major changes apart from bringing in newer aircraft to replace the older ones and AWACS and possibly an air-to-air refuelling aircraft because all PAF has to do is keep a credible deterrance force as compared to the Indian Airforce. I dont see PAF having any aggressive designs over anyone.

And I think PAF can not even think of aggressive designs over anyone by looking at her present pathetic situation :)

Admin Edit: Words like "pathetic" are inappropriate as a descriptor.. Please replace it with a suitable less inflammatory adjective.

[corsair7772]

Guess i have to agree on the fact that the Pafs paying little attention to its logistics. An aerial refuelling capability and SAM batteries would be another ACE for the PAF. But what can an airforce do when it cant even manage to obtain decent aircraft in both quality and quantity? :(

[gf0012-aust]

Guess i have to agree on the fact that the Pafs paying little attention to its logistics. An aerial refuelling capability and SAM batteries would be another ACE for the PAF. But what can an airforce do when it cant even manage to obtain decent aircraft in both quality and quantity? :(

I guess I'd look at it in a contrarian manner. The bottom line is that Pakistan does not have the same robust financial base as India does. Thats not meant to offend anyone, it is the reality of RealPolitik. On the basis that Pakistan cannot hope to meet India platform for platform, then it needs to counter what it sees as Indias strengths with a robust defence system.

The day that you start considering nukes as the solution is the day that you might as well tell your army to start shooting your own countrymen - because the use of nukes as a response mechanism will lead to the same endgame.

[mysterious]

I dont think Pakistan has considered nukes being a solution at all. It only has a first-use policy in face of extreme situations in which the soveriegnity of the country might be at stake and stuff like that; otherwise Pakistan seems to be bent on facing India 'conventionally'. Yes it lacks the financial base but given the right deals, it could muster up excellent defences! Lets wait and see what the 'major non-NATO ally (MNNA)' brings for Pakistan. Already India has broken down in sweat after hearing this news!

[gf0012-aust]

I dont think Pakistan has considered nukes being a solution at all. It only has a first-use policy in face of extreme situations in which the soveriegnity of the country might be at stake and stuff like that; otherwise Pakistan seems to be bent on facing India 'conventionally'. Yes it lacks the financial base but given the right deals, it could muster up excellent defences! Lets wait and see what the 'major non-NATO ally (MNNA)' brings for Pakistan. Already India has broken down in sweat after hearing this news!

The issue of association with NATO has got nothing to do with sending India a message. The statement is one of recognition by the US for Musharaffs stand against radicalism and terrorism.

India wouldn't be quaking in its boots as its mature enough to recognise the issue of symbolism. It's a variation of the old CENTO agreement. You need to look beyond the issue of seeing it as a buffering statement to India - it is clearly NOT.

Politics is a little more complicated than often presented.

[mysterious]

Yes I know what you mean gf, thats why I said that we have to WAIT and see what benefits MNNA status brings for Pakistan as clearly you cannot take that statement by Colin Powell at its face-value unless you see something happening as a result of that statement that is benefitting to Pakistan other than just 'praise'! :smokingc: