Ricecels vs. Currycels battle royal

[Quarantined]

 

[Deleted member 31093]

Hindi Chini bhai bhai

 

[Deleted member 776]

India has some of its best soldiers up there now - the Indian army is battle hardened with ample experience of combat and its weapons are fairly reliable even if they are a bit dated in some regards. The PLA is a paper tiger, filled with "little emperors".

 

[Blackpill Rage]

India has some of its best soldiers up there now - the Indian army is battle hardened with ample experience of combat and its weapons are fairly reliable even if they are a bit dated in some regards. The PLA is a paper tiger, filled with "little emperors".

Shitskin hindu cope.

 

[Deleted member 29033]

indians mog hard

 

[Deleted member 776]

Shitskin hindu cope.

I'm white actually.

The Punjab regiment is in the mountains now, the Bihar regiment (who are uncultured savages) as well as Guhkas and the Ladakh scouts who are experts in mountain warfare are also in the region as well. The Indian army is a very professional organisation. I guarantee they would take the PLA apart if there was a war. The PLA is far less professional than even the Pakistan army.

 

[VindalooCell]

I'm white actually.

The Punjab regiment is in the mountains now, the Bihar regiment (who are uncultured savages) as well as Guhkas and the Ladakh scouts who are experts in mountain warfare are also in the region as well. The Indian army is a very professional organisation. I guarantee they would take the PLA apart if there was a war. The PLA is far less professional than even the Pakistan army.

I doubt it, PLA won against us in 1962 and the power differential between us was much narrower back then. China could smash us if they wanted to but they won't because they will still get a bloody nose from it and they don't want that. The Indian army is largely a joke now due to political neglect, iirc they only have enough stockpiled ammo for 10 days of full scale combat.

PLA is quite inexperienced though, last time they fought was in Korea 1950s, even the Chinese generals admit this. But I think tech and logistics will matter a lot more now as opposed to soldiering experience. Chinese might even have better logistics in remote Tibet than India does on its side of the LAC

 

[Deleted member 776]

I doubt it, PLA won against us in 1962 and the power differential between us was much narrower back then. China could smash us if they wanted to but they won't because they will still get a bloody nose from it and they don't want that. The Indian army is largely a joke now due to political neglect, iirc they only have enough stockpiled ammo for 10 days of full scale combat.

PLA is quite inexperienced though, last time they fought was in Korea 1950s, even the Chinese generals admit this. But I think tech and logistics will matter a lot more now as opposed to soldiering experience. Chinese might even have better logistics in remote Tibet than India does on its side of the LAC

The Indian army wasn't postured correctly for war with China in 1962 and the army was politically handicapped from doing what was necessary, most of the units deployed had little combat experience. The PLA also had some fairly recent combat experience back then from the civil war and Korea.

India has more friends internationally than China does and could probably get resupplied with ammunition fairly quickly. Ruthless Indian businessmen would be able to secure supplies or have guys work like dogs to make it in some dirty factory somewhere.

I'd bet on a lot of older more reliable equipment India got from Russia and Britain than what the Chinese have manufactured domestically. It's good for kabuki theatre and parading around on state TV but how good is it actually? What kind of quality control is there at the factories which make it? What about spare parts - the ability of soldiers to maintain it in the field.

In 1987 the South African Defence Forces engaged a far better equipped Cuban/Angolan army the Soviets had funded and armed at the Lomba river in Angola. The South Africans were massively outnumbered, they didn't have air superiority. They had old Centurion tanks they purchased from India and modified into the "Oliphant" and they had Ratel armoured fighting vehicles (glorified armoured personnel carriers) with 90mm canons on them - 90mm as an anti tank gun has been insufficient since the Korean war. The Soviets had supplied the Cubans with T55 and T62 main battle tanks. Their artillery wasn't exactly great. The South Africans took them apart, it wasn't even close. They killed thousands of Cubans and Angolans and destroyed hundreds of their vehicles.

In 1973 in the Yom Kippur war the Syrians rolled a relatively small Israeli force in the Golan with hundreds of modern main battle tanks. They had the latest night fighting equipment and had been hand picked and trained by the Soviets. The IDF were mostly conscripts with something like 100 modified Centurions and Shermans. They were at a significant disadvantage in terms of engagement ranges of their guns and equipment. It cost the IDF but they stopped the Syrians.

Look at Chinas last major military conflict - the 1979 invasion of Vietnam. Even after decades of war with the French and Americans the Vietnamese slaughtered the Chinese so bad the PLA had to retreat and declare victory.

I think India could take China.

I think economically and demographically India actually has a sounder base as a nation than China does. India learned its lesson with central planning after independence. The CCP is up to their eyeballs in the demographic and economic consequences of disastrous central planning.