Posted on 04/30/2007 8:19:44 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Tigers exploit flaws in Lankan air defence
PK Balachandran, Hindustan Times Colombo, April 30, 2007
They are like David and Goliath. The Sri Lankan Air Force (SLAF) has a fair sized fleet of Kfir, MIG 27 and Y-8 bombers, MI-17 and MI-24 choppers, and AN-32 transport aircraft. In contrast, the LTTE's air arm, christened Tamileelam Air Force (TUF), is a puny, single digit fleet of propeller-driven and locally assembled Zlin Z-142s of Czech design.
And yet, the fledgling Flying Tigers have been able to infiltrate hundreds of kilometres of government-held territory, attack key military and strategic targets, and get back to base unscathed. This has happened three times in a row so far, clearly suggesting that Sri Lanka's air defence system is totally unsuited to the task before it.
This should cause concern in New Delhi and Washington also, since India and the US had taken the initiative in alerting the Sri Lankans about the potential threat from the skies. India had even provided, free of cost, a radar system for the defence of Colombo, the nerve centre of the Sri Lankan military, and the site of the island's only international harbour.
Defence experts say that the SLAF lacks night operational capability and air to air fighting capability. The SLAF had never planned for a day when its planes would face opposition from enemy aircraft, although there had been a warning about such a threat by an US Pacific Command team in 2002, and by Iqbal Athas, the defence correspondent of Sunday Times since 2005.
The SLAF has fast jet aircraft like Kfirs and MIG-27s which are basically used as bombers to take on static targets on the ground. Air-to-air combat was never envisaged, and suitable equipment was not acquired.
"MIGs and Kfirs are too fast and fly too high to take on the slow moving LTTE aircraft. What the SLAF needs is to envisage a World War II type of situation in which aircraft would go behind the enemy and shoot him down," said a foreign diplomat.
Prasun Sengupta, contributing editor of the Malaysian security affairs magazine Tempur says that Kfirs and MIG-27 can take to the air in less than 2 minutes, but only if they are on Quick Reaction Alert (QRA). But for the kind of threat faced by Sri Lanka QRA may be too expensive. At any rate, using aircraft of the kind SLAF has, in the context of the current threat, does not make sense.
The SLAF's Chinese-built K-8 bombers are ideal for the kind of air operations required, but there are so few of them. "It might be sensible to buy aircraft like Zlin-Z-142 The fly is best swatted by a simple fly swatter and not a sledge hammer!" an expert said.
The lack of night operational capability is glaring. Only the K-8s have it. But SLAF pilots don't have Night Vision Goggles (NVG). "On Sunday, K-8s took to the air to intercept the LTTE's aircraft, but the intruders could not be found because it was too dark!" the expert pointed out.
The LTTE is aware of this and has staged all its air attacks at night. Apparently, its aircraft and pilots have night operational capability.
Sengupta suggests the use of low-level air defence radars and shoulder-held missiles like the Russian IGLA-8. But the Indians say that the 2D radars given by them are adequate. "No ground radar can be totally accurate. In addition, aircraft must have their own radars to pin point the enemy," said an Indian defence expert. SLAF aircraft don't have this capability.
US Pacific Command had said in 2002, that the SLAF should stop purchasing expensive new aircraft. On the other hand, it should upgrade the existing fleet suitably and spend a lot on spare parts to keep it fighting fit. A large fleet is useless if much of it is grounded for want of spares.
I remember the period very well. I have actually met some of the Contra leaders. They covered a wide range of viewpoints. Many were prisoners under the Somoza regime (which, bad as it was, was vastly better than the Sandinistas.)
They were basically people who helped rid the country of one tyranny only to find themselves under an even worse one.
Were they violent? Yes, in many cases, because they were fighting a foreign-driven (though locally-managed) tyrannical regime and its army. They had to fight a civil war. Did bad things happen to civilians? Yes, from both sides. That happens in war. At least, unlike the Sandinistas, they didn’t target the civilian population.
There is no evidence of acts orf terrorism. It was the Sandinistas who were the massive abusers of human rights. They routinely tortured, murdered, and otherwise tyrannized innocent people simply for disagreeing with them. As in any war, there were isolated abuses on the Contra side. But they were fighting a civil war to overthrow a totalitarian regime.
The things the Catholic Institute for International Relations (an organization I’ve never heard of before, and which I suspect of being more socialist than Catholic) accuses the Contras of doing, the Sandinistas did on a daily basis.
The only people who think the Contras were terrorists are the friends of the Sandinista regime.
The very fact that they are allowed to do so is enough to say they have been allowed their share of freedom, which is complete. If you are so intent on the country breaking up, pray, what of the American Civil War? Couldn't the Union settle the matter with a mere vote? Based on your lines, I'm sure you'll be jumping in with the thugs who want the south-western parts of the US joined with Mexico. They are a majority in most populated places there, presently. Your idiocy is so juvenile, it's looking cute now!
To give themselves an excuse to cover the bloodshed that was being inflicted day after day.
One phrase: cognitive dissonance.
They do have the right.
No, they don't.
Kashmir was promised a plebiscite on its status, which has never occurred.
Demographics were altered by Pakistan. Besides, the promise was made by the UN. The very same UN which admitted recently that a plebiscite was irrelevent to the Kashmir of today.
Punjab was to become independent at the tim of independence, but stuck with India on false promises from Nehru and Patel.
Oh, so since Texas and other states in the Union were won through force from Mexico, you'd want them gone back to Mexico, I'd reckon. Khalistan is dead. Deal with it.
Now that Z 137T that you show does have a turboprop engine according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zlin_Z-37_Cmelak . A cropduster like that would be much more suited to conversion to a strike role due to having a bigger useful load and more power. Also it could run on “diesel” if JP-series fuels were unavailable. Is it possible that this aircraft is what was really meant in the article?
You know better than that. The fact that they were arrested merely for making speeches in support of Khalistan and raising a flag says that in fact, regardless of what is written, tehy do not hav eth efreedom to do that.
If you are so intent on the country breaking up, pray, what of the American Civil War?
Glad you asked. (The War Between the States, BTW.) If the South wanted to secede, I see no reason why they shouldn't hve been sent on their way peacefully. As Senator (later Confederate President) Jefferson Davis said, "All we ask is to be left alone."
When the government consistently overrides all the limits on its power set by the Constitution and impinges greatly on powers that belong to the states and to individuals, the ultimate enforcement mechanism (when all else fails) is to withdraw, to secede. That should be a last resort, but it cannot be prohibited in a free society.
Based on your lines, I'm sure you'll be jumping in with the thugs who want the south-western parts of the US joined with Mexico.
Absolutely a different thing, as you well know. Mexico attacked Texas to suppress a legitimate freedom movement (you should be on their side) and we intervened to support the Texans. We beat them so convincingly that we held 2/3 of their country, a large chunk of which we gave back to them.
Furthermore, the Aztlan movement is a Communist-inspired (you know, India's long-time allies), racist movement designed to take from America states that show no desier to leave.
They are a majority in most populated places there, presently.
Well, in parts, but not in any of the states involved. But it's not solely ethnic differences. In Punjab, for example, they are ethnically, culturally, religiously, linguistically different. It's a somewhat different culture and nationality. Thus, they should be able to exercise the right to be independent if they so choose, not have it violently suppressed.
When acts of violence are committed or when you catch them being planned, then punish those, but that is not an excuse to suppress an entire people by force.
Kashmir was promised a plebiscite on its status, which has never occurred. Demographics were altered by Pakistan.
So it's Pakistan's fault that India can't keep its democratic promises? Riiiiiiiight, that makes a whole lot of sense . Come on, the fact is that Kashmir was given to India by its Hindu maharajah despite a Muslim majority population and promised a vote that has never occurred. But Hyderabad, with a majority Hindu population and a Muslim maharajah, was brought into India when the Indian army moved in. Real commitment to democracy there.
The people were promised a vote. They never got it and now any effort to have one is forcibly suppressed. In a country that so loudly proclaims its commitment to democracy, what would be wrong with a vote?
Or are you worried that L.K. Advani was right when he said, "If Kashmir goes, India goes"?
Punjab was to become independent at the tim of independence, but stuck with India on false promises from Nehru and Patel. Oh, so since Texas and other states in the Union were won through force from Mexico, you'd want them gone back to Mexico, I'd reckon.
As I said before, entirely different issue. They asked to be part of the United States. It was Mexico that initiated force. We annexed the Kingdom of Hawaii too. They asked, we accepted. The people of Punjab have never been asekd if they want to be independent. Neither have hte people of Kashmir, nor the people of Nagaland, nor teh others who have freedom movements. If India is the democracy it claimsto be, what would be the problem with a free and fair vote on the matter?
We gie Puerto Rico periodic votes on statehood. The Canadians have had periodic votes on Quebec independence. That is how democratc, free countries do it. But India refuses to allow the people to vote, claiming that "it woudl confuse them," then arrests the leaders of teh independence movement for making speeches, while all the time bleating loudly about how democratic they are.
I guess that is why there are tens of thousands of political prisoners there, right?
As opposed to the complete homogeneity of the other states in India! [SARC. ALERT!]
Puhleeze... your BS has been too tiring to reply to. I hope others do, though.
The fact that Punjab has a massive Sikh majority, as opposed to the Hindu majority in most other states, makes it a different entity from Hindustan, linguistically, religiously, culturally, socially.
India is a multinational state; it is several distinct nations thrown together by the British colonialists for tehir administrative convenience. To invoke the "territorial integrity of India" is to invoke the legacy of colonialims (which, BTW, was better for the Christians, Sikhs, Muslims, and other minorities than the current Brahminocracy is.)
As Steve Forbes showed us in an excellent article a few years ago, such states fall apart. Austria-Hungary is a prime example. The Soviet Union is another. India is several nations thrown together into one state, just as those countries were.
The least they could do is ask the people of the minority nations whether they want to stay in the partnership. That would be the democratic thing to do.
No, I don't believe they are. The Tamils are an ethnic minority group within Sri Lanka and also live in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu.
If only the ones in charge of the world listened to idiots! [Backslash Sarcasm]
The article you linked has nothing to do with my point.
However, it does show how the police (who are under Delhi’s control) let violence occur and often encourage it so that more of the minorities will kill each other. Very nice.
The fact remains that Punjab, Khalistan, is a distinct entity. It is culturally, linguistically, religiously distinct from Hindustan. There would be fewer of these incidents were India bnnot occupying the state, which declared itself independent in 1987.
Bzzzt! Wrong! It does! It illustrates how future members of the imaginary Khalistan might end up forming factions and fighting amongst each other. Oops, it already happened, lol!
However, it does show how the police (who are under Delhi’s control) let violence occur and often encourage it so that more of the minorities will kill each other. Very nice.
BWAAHAHAHAHA! You mean, the Indian Army, with its huge and powerful Sikh contingent, never intervened? Lol!
The fact remains that Punjab, Khalistan (insert your favourite Sikh sect here), is a distinct entity. It is culturally, linguistically, religiously distinct from Hindustan Punjab.
Look, now it's fixed to suit your view! [Backslash Sarcasm]
To any true-blue Sikh reading this, I'm sure you're getting a laugh out of TBP's Pakistani propaganda towards turning Sikhs into hostile pro-Pakistan, pro-Islamic little terrorist robots, much like themselves.
Violence spreads to other parts in Punjab
Satinder Bains | Chandigarh
Dera followers go on rampage in Bathinda
The clashes between the followers of Dera Sacha Sauda of Sirsa and Sikh organisations, that began in Bathinda on Monday, spread to other parts of the State on Tuesday, even as violent mobs burnt one car and damaged over a dozen vehicles, including an ambulance in Bathinda.
At least 30 persons, including two Punjab Police SIs, were injured in Bathinda, where over 10,000 followers of Dera Sacha Sauda attacked the police forcing them to run for shelter. The police had to fire in the air and throw tear gas shells in self-defence. The situation is still volatile as Dera followers called ‘premis’ are not ready to give up till their demands are met.
The police have sealed all incoming roads to prevent entry of members of Sikh organisations into the city, to avert any major clash. Two photographers covering the protests were also injured in stone-pelting by Dera followers.
Reports of protests and burning of effigies are coming from all over the State, but the situation is still tense in Patiala and Amritsar. One person was injured in Patiala when members of Dera attacked Sikhs trying to burn an effigy near the bus stand. Later Sikh activists forced all markets in the city to close down. Police force has been deployed in large numbers, police officials said.
In Amritsar, members of the Damdami Taksal once headed by radical Sikh leader Jarnail Singh Bhindrawala held a protest march with naked swords and burnt the effigy of the head of Dera Sacha Sauda, Baba Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh. The also served an ultimatum for the arrest of Baba.
Reports of protests were also received from Ludhiana, Jalndhar and Fatehgarh Sahib. The protests may take an ugly turn if the State Government fails to contain the violence.
It is learnt that Punjab Chief Minister and president of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) Parkash Singh Badal has asked the police and partymen to use restraint and not to react to protesting Dera activists.
Punjab Additional Director General of Police (ADGP), Law and Order Chander Shekhar said that followers of Dera Sacha Sauda had dispersed by evening and things were returning to normal. He however said that the next two three days were crucial. He added that the number of Sect followers was very large in Bathinda, but the situation had been controlled due to the restraint shown by the police.
Meanwhile, accusing the Dera Sacha Saudha chief of playing with Sikh sentiments, the Dal Khalsa has asked the Punjab Chief Minister to rein in his activities, lest it could spell disaster for the State. Party spokesman Kanwar Pal Singh said that the Congress was patronising the sect in the same manner as it did in the case of the Nirankaris in the mid-70s. He said the activities of Dera chief were provocative and had hurt the religious sentiments of the Sikhs. He said it reminded him of the violence in 1978 when Nirankaris under the patronage of the Congress had created problems for the Akalis. Incidentally at that time also Parkash Singh Badal was the Chief Minister.
He accused Badal of adopting dilly-dallying tactics, while dealing with such elements that were responsible for making mockery of the Sikh ethos and principles. He said the Congress Government at the Centre was manoeuvring the CBI to save Baba from its clutches in a murder case.
The organisation lambasted the State administration for preventing the Sikhs from lodging their protest democratically against the sect’s blasphemous acts. He said an advertisement issued by the Dera chief published in a Punjabi paper was highly derogatory.
Baba Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh, however in a press statement denied that he had tried to copy Sikh Gurus in any way. He said that was his aim to bring peace and brotherhood in the world. The Sikhs are objecting to Dera chief Baba Gurmit Ram Rahim portraying himself in the attire of the 10th Sikh Guru Gobind Singh and inserting advertisements in newspapers saying that he would give nectar to his disciples.
Takht callsSikh conclave
PNS | Amritsar: The five Sikh high priests who held an emergency meeting at Akal Takht, the highest temporal seat of Sikhs here on Tuesday have condemned the blasphemous advertisement issued by the Dera Sacha Sauda chief and called a Sikh conclave at Takht Damdama Sahib near Bathinda on May 17, to decide the further course of action.
Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti, Jathedar, Akal Takht, said that all Sikh religious organisations and Nihang groups would participate in the meeting to chalk out the next course of action. He said that the Sikh priests had condemned the violence by the followers of Dera Sacha Sauda.
The Sikh high priests sought arrest of Dera Sacha Sauda head Sant Gurmit Ram Rahim Singh for showing up in advertisement dressed like the 10th Sikh master Guru Gobind Singh.
It illustrates how future members of the imaginary Khalistan might end up forming factions and fighting amongst each other.
Of course there are factions. There are factions in this country: Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, etc. The isolated incident of violence, especially in an atmosphere which encourages such violence, is irrelevant to the point, as you well know.
BWAAHAHAHAHA! You mean, the Indian Army, with its huge and powerful Sikh contingent, never intervened?
Most of the Sikh soldiers, as you know, are sent to other minority states, such as Kashmir, Nagaland, Tamil Nadu, etc., while the armies sent to Punjab (half a million strong, on top of 700,000 in Kashmir) are mostly comprised of non-Sikhs. This is how India hopes to get the minorities fighting each other to keep them all under control. Unfortunately for your pals the Hinducrats, the minorities have realized this.
The fact remains that Punjab, Khalistan, is a distinct entity. It is culturally, linguistically, religiously distinct from Hindustan. As I have said numeous times. You steadfastly refuse to address any of my points.
I'm sure you're getting a laugh out of TBP's Pakistani propaganda towards turning Sikhs into hostile pro-Pakistan, pro-Islamic little terrorist robots, much like themselves.
Typical of your argument style. LIke your Hinducrat bosses, you have no argument, so you substitute broad name-calling and insist that you're winning.
You know very well that what you said there is absolutely false. And your upcoming denial that you know that is also absolutely false, just like the liberals' protestations of sympathies for Rev. Falwell's family. You know it and I know it.
The fact is that Khalistan is a declared state with a democratic and secular constitution. The leading organizations working for its freedom are publicly dedicated to achieving this by peaceful, democratic, nonviolent means. That is the fact of the matter. Unfortunately, your definition of "terrorist" seems to be the same as the Indian regime's: Anyone who peacefully seeks freedom from Indian oppression.
I will ask again: If you're so certain that the Sikhs in Punjab are on your side, then why not just hold a vote and prove it? Wouldn't that be the democratic thing to do?
Or maybe India defines "democracy" differently.
Again, utterly irrelevant to the point I am making, as you know.
BTW, how come I never see you and your India Lobby friends post on any threads other than to post articles glorifyiing India? Don’t you care about any ohter issues?
Check again. And nice try, BTW.
I hope you read the article I posted. Minor confrontation, my @ss. If there was no common government both factions could approach, or be approached, different sections of Punjab would tear each other down.
As for there being no Sikh troops in Punjab, get your facts right again. Or quit it, it’s too hard for your types to digest. And tell that to KPS Gill and his Sikh troops too.
And for that nonsense about giving plebiscites to individual states of the Indian Union, dude, get real. That’s not the way nations are built. If it were the way, the then-government of the United States would have settled the Southern Question by a plebiscite. But it didn’t. And wisely so. Otherwise, there would be two power blocs fighting each other off, to the detriment of both, like you envisage, for the INDIAN STATE of Punjab, and for the rest of the country on the whole.
Hell, no! And you know it! 
"Utterly irrelevant... utterly irrelevant... "
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.