India to open first military base on non-Indian territory

[GePap]

Originally posted by Zulu Elephant
By extending the Indian-Pakistan conflict into central Asia, isnt it possible that Russia, China and America could be dragged in? Is this what India wants? Does it make it less likely that Pakistan would try anything? What would happen if Pakistan crossed the border to attack Indian bases?

Well, besides committing an act of war against a third party (very bad form), it would get its ass handed to it by India, given Pakistan's serious conventional disdavantage vs. India.

[pchang]

Gepap has good reasons for why China will rise, but none for why India won't rise just as much.

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Give us a bit of time . . . .

The latest crop of movies is better than the last , though . Just you wait .

I really enjoyed "Monsoon Wedding." Indian women are hot! Some anyhow.

[GePap]

Originally posted by pchang
Gepap has good reasons for why China will rise, but none for why India won't rise just as much.

I answered why people look at China and not India- I said nothing about the future at all.

[Ramo]

Central Asia has long been a playground for Indian-Pakistani conflicts. The Taleban itself arose from rivalry between the two states.

[Ramo]

And Bollywood is a blight on civilization.

[Giancarlo]

Re: Re: Re: don't forget the caste system

Originally posted by aneeshm


This is something I just cannot pass up .

THERE IS NO CONSCRIPTION IN THE INDIAN ARMED FORCES .

My grandfather's brother was in the army till he retired ( as a Major General ) . Even during the recent Kargil war , there was no conscription . And people don't join the Armed forces just to get themselves through higher education , as happens in some places .

Then I'll take that correction. But you must face the reality, the Pakistani Airforce is far better trained then the Indian Airforce.

The Mig-21s are being phased out by indigenously built aircraft soon ( within the next eight to ten years ) . And you trust a Pakistani article about India ? I'd not trust a Indian source about Pakistan , nor a Paki source about India .

It is not just MiG-21s, there are other MiG variants. And I heard that many of the projects like the LCA and MCA have been put on hold.

Not to be insulting or anything , but still , you speak as one whose image of India is based more on the prevailing cultural perceptions than first-hand experience .

Apparently you do not know what you are talking about. I'm talking strictly on military and economic grounds, not on the culture. The GDP per capita has been stagnant for the past ten years.

Yes , Indian troops will be there in addition to Russian troops . They will serve two purposes - one , of protecting the interests of Tajikistan , if necessary . And secondly , of allowing us overflight and refuelling capacity on the other side of Pakistan ( in times of crisis ) .

Great spark another conflict with Pakistan.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by el freako


Yes it is, but then again it was in many countries at similar stages in their development (like China, Japan and the US and UK)

It is also falling fast - just under 50% of the population lived on under $1 a day (in 1985 dollars) in the mid 1980's today the figure is around a third.

Also since then India's GDP per head has risen from 5% of the US in 1984 (a level at which it had been stuck for generations) to 8% now - the same relative level that China achieved in 1991, and it's total GDP has gone from 16% of the US level (slightly bigger than Britian's) to 29% (slightly smaller Britian and France combined)

ok

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo
And Bollywood is a blight on civilization.

I agree with the anarchist.

[Sandman]

India does not have a 'good education system'. It has a very, very unbalanced education system whereby primary education is badly ignored in favour of an enormous university system. This can be seen in the low levels of literacy (only 60%) and the huge numbers of graduates.

China is at 90% literacy. And mass literacy is a lot better than loads of graduates for a rapidly-developing power. Mass university enrolment is really more of a developed economy trait; China is starting to look in this direction now, IIRC - after they've got literacy sorted out.

[el freako]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Apparently you do not know what you are talking about... ...GDP per capita has been stagnant for the past ten years.

Giancarlo again proves his total ignorance of economic matters,

According to the IMF GDP per head in India has risen by 57% in the period 1994-2004 (compared to the US's 23% rise).

It looks like you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about Giancarlo!

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by el freako


Giancarlo again proves his total ignorance of economic matters,

According to the IMF GDP per head in India has risen by 57% in the period 1994-2004 (compared to the US's 23% rise).

It looks like you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about Giancarlo!

You are the one who IS VERY HIGHLY IGNORANT. I have a chart that shows India's GDP per head has not risen substantitally. YOU DON'T KNOW A THING YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.. OMFG NOT AGAIN!

[Giancarlo]

What about some facts highlighting India's real problems.. like the non-existent state of infrastructure that is apparent in much of the country...

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/casi/reports/Aiyerpaper042299.html

India, alas, dos not a have a majority of these attributes. Literacy is below 60 per cent. Infrastructure is in a terrible mess. Corruption and bureaucratic sloth are widespread. The financial sector has serious weaknesses. Laws governing factors of the production (land, labor and capital) are rigid. A legal system exists and in some respects works well (as Enron will testify), but legal enforcement is poor because of incompetent police and enormous legal delays. Politicians have neither the guts nor inclination to take on powerful sectional interests like trade unions and farmers. So transactions costs are high, infrastructure is costly and unreliable, and here can be no speedy redeployment of land, labor and capital to meet changing conditions.

This explains why, after eight years of reform, few multinational companies see much promise in shifting factories from other countries to India. India can indeed occupy a few small labor-intensive niches. Sundaram Fasteners, for instance, has become a successful exporter of radiator caps for the global operations of General Motors. But this is a tiny operation. In general, multinationals do not regard India as a cost-effective production center for the global market, and are interested mainly in its domestic, protected market. Hewlett Packard considered using India as an export base but ultimately decided that the infrastructure was neither rapid nor reliable enough.

India’s merchandise exports have indeed grown in the last 15 years. From a low of 4.5 per cent of GDP in the mid-1980s, they now amount to roughly 10 per cent of GDP. However, the composition of merchandise exports has changed surprisingly little. The Economic Survey 1998-99 shows that between 1980-81 and 1997-98, the share of agricultural exports moved from 18.7 per cent to 18.8 per cent, of textiles and garments from 23.7 per cent to 20.7 per cent, of gems and jewelry from 15.1 per cent to 15.1 per cent (no change). Exports of electronic goods are new items that have taken some market share from chemicals and machinery. The remarkably limited compositional change suggests that much of the increase in exports since 1980 has come more from a realistic exchange rate than strident improvements in manufacturing productivity.

[Nubclear]

Wait a minute...Fez, just a few weeks ago weren't you arguing that capitalism was making the Indian economy "leap" (I believe that was the word you used) to a technology-based economy?
Now your arguing for just the opposite!

[el freako]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Wait a minute...Fez, just a few weeks ago weren't you arguing that capitalism was making the Indian economy "leap" (I believe that was the word you used) to a technology-based economy?
Now your arguing for just the opposite!

Of course he is,

Fez only ever takes notice of facts that prove his point - if he had lived under either regime he would have done well 'proving' that Hitler was a saviour or that Stalin's purges were good for Russia as a whole.
He is ultimately anti-scientific in his outlook - if a fact goes against his beliefs then the fact's must be wrong

Originally posted by Comrade Giancarlo
You are the one who IS VERY HIGHLY IGNORANT. I have a chart that shows India's GDP per head has not risen substantitally. YOU DON'T KNOW A THING YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.. OMFG NOT AGAIN!

So, you have a chart do you?
Congratulations! you can draw!
Now try looking at the facts - or are you claiming that the IMF, the World Bank and many others are wrong and you're right (it wouldn't surprise me if you did )

Even if you looked at GDP per head when converted using exchange rates (which only someone who is fairly ignorant of economic comparison would do) India has still seen growth from $343 in 1984 to $603 today.