Yeah man, let’s go to Yemen!

[wiseone2]

Your knowledge of history must be weak if you don't know that.

India began purchasing T-72s directly from the USSR at a considerably low cost and acquired its first few T-72s in 1978. This was followed by another 700 T-72s a few years later.

In response to India looking to purchase the Jaguars from the UK and Mirage from France in 1979, The Soviets offered India MiGs at low prices with very favourable terms. The Soviets then sent their Air Chief to Delhi and by 1981 India had signed a deal worth a few Billion USD with a concessionary repayment rate, spread out over 17 years. It included MiG 23s and 25s.

And don't forget small-arms, BTRs,BMPs, T-55s, Mi8s and many, many more. All this is available on the internet, Wikipedia is a good place to start but SIPRI Trade Registers is even better.

Let us start with Wikipedia
List of historical aircraft of the Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only acquisition of combat aircraft during the 1970s was the Jaguars.

By 1981 Pakistan had acquired F-16s. Indian acquisition of MiGs was in response to PAF acquisition of F-16s.

Your knowledge of history must be weak if you don't know that.

India began purchasing T-72s directly from the USSR at a considerably low cost and acquired its first few T-72s in 1978. This was followed by another 700 T-72s a few years later.

In response to India looking to purchase the Jaguars from the UK and Mirage from France in 1979, The Soviets offered India MiGs at low prices with very favourable terms. The Soviets then sent their Air Chief to Delhi and by 1981 India had signed a deal worth a few Billion USD with a concessionary repayment rate, spread out over 17 years. It included MiG 23s and 25s.

And don't forget small-arms, BTRs,BMPs, T-55s, Mi8s and many, many more. All this is available on the internet, Wikipedia is a good place to start but SIPRI Trade Registers is even better.

Nice try at revisionist history
India-Soviet alliance was dormant after 1974

Check Wiki
List of historical aircraft of the Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

India did not acquire MiGs from Soviet Union until 1981
that was in response to PAF plans to induct the F-16

 

[TankMan]

Let us start with Wikipedia
List of historical aircraft of the Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only acquisition of combat aircraft during the 1970s was the Jaguars.

By 1981 Pakistan had acquired F-16s. Indian acquisition of MiGs was in response to PAF acquisition of F-16s.


Nice try at revisionist history
India-Soviet alliance was dormant after 1974

Check Wiki
List of historical aircraft of the Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

India did not acquire MiGs from Soviet Union until 1981
that was in response to PAF plans to induct the F-16

My friend, SIPRI is infinitely more reliable than Wikipedia.

 

[wiseone2]

My friend, SIPRI is infinitely more reliable than Wikipedia.

If there is specific piece of information wrong in the Wikipedia link say so

 

[TankMan]

List of historical aircraft of the Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only acquisition of combat aircraft during the 1970s was the Jaguars.

By 1981 Pakistan had acquired F-16s. Indian acquisition of MiGs was in response to PAF acquisition of F-16s.

MiGs aren't the only thing I mentioned.

If there is specific piece of information wrong in the Wikipedia link say so

Wikipedia says the MiG-23s were received in 1981. The first shipments of Floggers actually arrived in 1980, the Wikipedia article confused them for the Foxbats that were received later.

India did not acquire MiGs from Soviet Union until 1981

Actually, your own Wikipedia link says that India acquired MiG 21s back in 1964.

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21FL fighter 1964–2013 332

If you meant MiG 23s, those were received from 1980 to 1983.

But since there's no point arguing over an year's difference, I'll just tackle your main point:

India-Soviet alliance was dormant after 1974

It wasn't. That was when most of the negotiations for the weapons received later took place, that was when the Soviets launched Indian satellites from their launchpads in their own rockets (multiple satellites), that was when they provided ToT and licensed production for small-arms and major weapon systems, and the period from 1976 to 1980 was when 85% of India's weapon imports came from the USSR.

Figure 3: Percentage of Indian Arms Imported from the Soviet Union/Russia

Not dormant at all.

 

[Sage]

Why to take a flop satirist serious ?

 

[wiseone2]

MiGs aren't the only thing I mentioned.


Wikipedia says the MiG-23s were received in 1981. The first shipments of Floggers actually arrived in 1980, the Wikipedia article confused them for the Foxbats that were received later.


Actually, your own Wikipedia link says that India acquired MiG 21s back in 1964.

If you meant MiG 23s, those were received from 1980 to 1983.

But since there's no point arguing over an year's difference, I'll just tackle your main point:

It wasn't. That was when most of the negotiations for the weapons received later took place, that was when the Soviets launched Indian satellites from their launchpads in their own rockets (multiple satellites), that was when they provided ToT and licensed production for small-arms and major weapon systems, and the period from 1976 to 1980 was when 85% of India's weapon imports came from the USSR.
View attachment 218619
Figure 3: Percentage of Indian Arms Imported from the Soviet Union/Russia

Not dormant at all.

Name the weapon systems for which India received ToT from Soviet Union in the time frame 1972-1980. Indian army purchased T-72 tanks. The only combat aircraft deal was the Jaguars.

India acquired MiG-23s in 1981. The deal was signed in 1980. Multiple links across the web confirm it.

What is strategic about having 3rd country launching your satellite ? Unless the satellite has a military purpose. India has more satellites built by USA & Europe and launched by European Space agency.

Indian acquired early model MiG-21s after the India-China war.

 

[TankMan]

Indian army purchased T-72 tanks.

T-72 Tanks are a major weapons system.

The only combat aircraft deal was the Jaguars.

India acquired MiG-23s in 1981. The deal was signed in 1980.

You're contradicting yourself - how could the Jaguars be the only combat aircraft deal if the MiG-23 deal was signed too?

What is strategic about having 3rd country launching your satellite ? Unless the satellite has a military purpose. India has more satellites built by USA & Europe and launched by European Space agency.

I never said it was ''strategic''. I said it was co-operation, which it is. The satellites launched by the Soviets are what started India's space program in the first place, and the Soviets helped because of a deal signed in '72, which included many things.

My point here is that the Indo-Soviet alliance was not dormant in the 1970s or 80s. The fact that dependence on Soviet weapon imports was at its peak from 1976-1980 is more than enough to prove that.

Anyways, what point are you trying to make by saying that the Indo-Soviet alliance was ''dormant'' in such a specific time frame? You seem as if you don't know what your own point is.

 

[wiseone2]

T-72 Tanks are a major weapons system.


You're contradicting yourself - how could the Jaguars be the only combat aircraft deal if the MiG-23 deal was signed too?

I never said it was ''strategic''. I said it was co-operation, which it is. The satellites launched by the Soviets are what started India's space program in the first place, and the Soviets helped because of a deal signed in '72, which included many things.

My point here is that the Indo-Soviet alliance was not dormant in the 1970s or 80s. The fact that dependence on Soviet weapon imports was at its peak from 1976-1980 is more than enough to prove that.

Anyways, what point are you trying to make by saying that the Indo-Soviet alliance was ''dormant'' in such a specific time frame? You seem as if you don't know what your own point is.

Why would Indo-Soviet alliance be active if there is no threat to be dealt with ?

India was under emergency 1975-1977. All the energy was diverted to internal security. Janata government was quite pro-Western as you could have. Carter made one of the few visits for an American President in 1978. You do not get those kind of visits if you are actively allied to the Soviet Union.

There is a huge difference between signing an aircraft deal and actual delivery of aircraft - look no further than the Rafale fiasco

 

[TankMan]

Why would Indo-Soviet alliance be active if there is no threat to be dealt with ?

Do you seriously believe the Soviets stopped considering the West a threat? Even if you do, there are plenty of other reasons.

They needed an ally, and one with a growing economy and large market along with a common enemy (Pakistan) and some shared interests was a very good option. The alliance with the Soviets also gave India some support in case of further Chinese aggression.

You may think that hostilities with Pakistan or China were ''dormant'', but for most generals and politicians ''dormant'' means the calm before the storm - i.e they plan ahead.

India was under emergency 1975-1977. All the energy was diverted to internal security. Janata government was quite pro-Western as you could have. Carter made one of the few visits for an American President in 1978. You do not get those kind of visits if you are actively allied to the Soviet Union.

You've got it the other way around. You DO get those kinds of visits if you're actively allied to the Soviet Union. You actually get more of them since US strategy was to isolate and wrestle influence away from the Soviets. This same strategy was applied in the case of India. The Soviets then tried to counter that by providing weapons, offering deals and sending high-profile delegations e.g the Soviet Air Chief.

There is a huge difference between signing an aircraft deal and actual delivery of aircraft - look no further than the Rafale fiasco

We were talking about deals, not deliveries. And anyhow the MiGs were delivered shortly after the deal was signed, therefore this point of yours is irrelevant.

 

[wiseone2]

Do you seriously believe the Soviets stopped considering the West a threat? Even if you do, there are plenty of other reasons.

They needed an ally, and one with a growing economy and large market along with a common enemy (Pakistan) and some shared interests was a very good option. The alliance with the Soviets also gave India some support in case of further Chinese aggression.

You may think that hostilities with Pakistan or China were ''dormant'', but for most generals and politicians ''dormant'' means the calm before the storm - i.e they plan ahead.

You've got it the other way around. You DO get those kinds of visits if you're actively allied to the Soviet Union. You actually get more of them since US strategy was to isolate and wrestle influence away from the Soviets. This same strategy was applied in the case of India. The Soviets then tried to counter that by providing weapons, offering deals and sending high-profile delegations e.g the Soviet Air Chief.


We were talking about deals, not deliveries. And anyhow the MiGs were delivered shortly after the deal was signed, therefore this point of yours is irrelevant.

You do not get a trip from the American President when you are actively allied to the Soviet Union. May be from Secretary of State. How many trips did Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, Libya get from an American President ?

Do you seriously believe the Soviets stopped considering the West a threat? Even if you do, there are plenty of other reasons.

In which of the cold war battlegrounds did India participate ?
Cambodia, Angola, Ethiopia, Middle East, Afghanistan.

 

[TankMan]

You do not get a trip from the American President when you are actively allied to the Soviet Union. May be from Secretary of State. How many trips did Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, Libya get from an American President ?

Having relations with the Soviet Union is a completely different thing than being practically controlled by them. The countries you mentioned were communist nations completely under Soviet influence. India was a non-communist and relatively independent nation that had good relations with the Soviets. This meant the Americans could try to defeat Soviet influence diplomatically.

In which of the cold war battlegrounds did India participate ?

Economics.

 

[wiseone2]

Having relations with the Soviet Union is a completely different thing than being practically controlled by them. The countries you mentioned were communist nations completely under Soviet influence. India was a non-communist and relatively independent nation that had good relations with the Soviets. This meant the Americans could try to defeat Soviet influence diplomatically.

Economics.

US does not send their Presidents to rogue countries with whom they cannot do business. They do not risk the prestige of the Presidency.

" countries you mentioned were communist nations completely under Soviet influence"
East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria would be good examples. Cuba might fall in the category

Vietnam was communist, quite independent of the Soviet Union. Iraq was under Saddam's Baathist regime who executed communists. Syria was Assad's fiefdom who executed communists. North Korea was a hardline communist state. They were quite independent since played China and USSR against each other. In Libya Qadaffi was his own man

The regimes in Vietnam, Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, North Korea, Iraq, Syria and Libya would have loved the legitmacy, attention and prestige that an American President's visit would bring. They do not get the visits because they are insignificant, brutal and incompetent. Their relationships with Soviet Union would be shelved if they got a better deal from Uncle Sam.

Egypt and China switched their alleigances during the Cold War when the price was right

 

[TankMan]

US does not send their Presidents to rogue countries with whom they cannot do business. They do not risk the prestige of the Presidency

India was not a rogue country and the US knew they could do business with them. That is not mutually exclusive with good relations with the Soviet Union.

You can argue the sun doesn't exist but it is a well known fact, much like India's relations with the Soviets, that it does exist.