 |
| Poll |
 |
|
| Should Kaveri engine project be scrapped ?? |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
India : Chinese Made Anti-Tank Gun Seized in Kashmir |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
| Author: idrw team | 17 November 2007 | Views: 537 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
| |
BY :NewsBlaze
The Indian army reports a Chinese made anti-tank gun was recovered from militants in violence-hit Kashmir. This is the first time that this kind of weapon has been recovered from militants fighting the Indian army in Kashmir.
An Indian army spokesman, Col A K Mathur claimed that army personnel conducted combing and search operations in the dense Hafruda forests in the border district of Kupwara. "After a thorough search of the suspected area, one 82mm smooth bore breech-loaded, tripod-mounted, anti-tank recoilless gun of Chinese make with optical sight was unearthed", he said.
The spokesman said that in terms of lethality, this is probably the most powerful weapon recovered by the Army in recent times. "The weapon is in a serviceable condition. It is assumed that the weapon has been procured to target Army Convoys and Armed vehicles", he said.
"Along with this lethal weapon, an assortment of 700 PIKA rounds, 300 AK 47 rounds, 29 Under Barrel Grenade Launcher grenades, 04 Remote Control IED boxes, ten AK-47 magazines and two Sniper magazines were also recovered", he added. |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Dear Visitor You have Not Logged In Please Register And Then Login.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Indian Army to Use Laser Light to Fight Militants in KashmirDRDO develops 'laser power' for Indian troopsIndia deploys Naval commondos in Kashmir villageIsraeli Army Delegation to Visit Kashmir in OctoberIndian Army to induct portable laser weapons |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Registered: 30 August 2007 | ICQ: -- |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
have you got yhe gutsd to teach america who has armd pakistan to the teeth agasint india for last 60yrs?
no. niether have you got tyhe balls to see eye to eye with china either-get reality check about your real status int he world and not be laughing stock just because someanglosaxon bastards are making fool of you-which you are anyway.
yes and go on repeatring the real "lagan"!
idiot indians will never learn despite the warnings even from the americans about the anglosaxon plot to control india and the world through proxy sttoges like harami manmohan singh and his cronies in the media and businesclass,
read this--
http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=11931
" Invading Washington
by John Brown and Tom Engelhardt
TomDispatch
Over the last seven years, it's often been said that George W. Bush exists in a bubble. When it comes to the cast of characters in his administration – and the Washington Consensus generally – it turns out he isn't alone. The other night I watched Harvard academic Joseph Nye and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage discuss the crisis in Pakistan with talk-show host Charlie Rose. The two of them had just finished co-chairing a Center for Strategic and International Studies commission that produced a report, clearly meant for the next administration, on wielding American "smart power" in the world.
Nye is an exceedingly conventional American internationalist; Armitage is a former "Vulcan" who, in the first years of the Bush administration, though Colin Powell's deputy at the State Department, was close to the neocons of the Pentagon, but may now be repositioning himself for a Democratic administration. They could be said to represent the heartland of the present Washington Consensus.
Yet when they talked of Pakistani autocrat Pervez Musharraf ("I mean, Musharraf has been our boy, but we've not been able to do much with it…"), of the Pakistani situation more generally ("I mean, after Musharraf, there are other secular generals…"), and of the American role there ("Well, we have to be working with both Benazir Bhutto and also with our contacts in the army to make sure this doesn't turn into chaos…," "If you do anything to help Benazir, it has to be done very quietly and behind the scenes…"), they might as well have been discussing deploying federal "smart power" to Maryland, or more appropriately, to the U.S. Territory of Guam. Conceptually, they remain deep inside Washington's Pakistan, Washington's dream of a controllable world. -----" |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Registered: 30 August 2007 | ICQ: -- |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
so some indian pimps working for america are pushing for old kitty hwak-what bnext? thse bastards know that their mother have nio value otherwise they would have sold her as well.
#
BA system must be banned from india-itis a n enemy organisation as far as india is concerend.
british are the number one enmy of india and of the rest of the world.
see this--
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lohdi.php?articleid=12019
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lohdi.php?articleid=12019
quote--"
December 8, 2007
Britain's Neo-Imperial Dreams in Afghanistan
by Bahlol Lohdi
Dean Acheson, the distinguished American statesman, famously opined in a speech at West Point in 1962, "that Great Britain has lost an empire and has not yet found a role." Forty years later, in 2002, Tony Blair and fellow dreamers thought the tragedy of 9/11 provided them with the opportunity once again to play a determining role on the world stage. The notion that Britain was to America as Greece had been to Rome – implying that Britain was going to be the "brain" and America the "brawn" – became a fashionable topic of discourse in the British media.
No matter how deluded this may have been when viewed objectively, Blair and his acolytes clung to the idea. They hoped to use the Anglo-American "special relationship" as the vehicle for achieving Britain's neo-imperial dreams.
However, the United States continued to view the relationship differently, and Blair's efforts to shape American policy through close ties to Washington failed, as has now been revealed by numerous retired senior British officials.
Nevertheless, still hoping to gain a place at the top table of decision making, and thereby try and shape future events, Blair committed Britain's forces to fight battles in two countries where Britain had a colonial past: Afghanistan and Iraq.
London thought that its colonial era experience in both countries would enable it to claim superior knowledge and expertise, thus giving British policy proposals inordinate weight, thereby influencing the political and economic shape of the post-conflict era in both countries to British advantage. However, this ambition has already been thwarted in Iraq and is at the point of being thwarted in Afghanistan.-------"
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments (5)