should burma use multi billions on self defence?

dear all.
according to the knowledge of burma millitary power via sinodefence forum.
Burma junta using billions of $ for upgrading military hardwares,unbelievable...
I had already known about china tanks (iron turtle)and flying coffin f-7and A5M and missfire,back fire shells and howitzers.
burma got 12mig29 (need to upgrade and negotiating with india airforce.)
anyhow...burmese land forces are experiences of battles and they can move without APCs,they can stay without food in the jungle.like vietcows....
for transport(land)china trucks atleast3000 are always to be repaired and not effective for longterm use.Soldiers saids that we abandom these truck if its have problem(do not try for repair)...walking and using house,donkeys is
better than china trucks on montaineous road(offroad).
in before 1988,burmese army got japan trucks(Hino),isuzu and toyota.
US made cargo and dodge trucks also used in Army...Now dongfan,etc....
According to the border countries military racing(Thai and bangladesh)...
Burma have to balance the power,for bangladesh..they getting tanks(free from islam country saudi and kuwait and submarine.I think that navy is more important to balance as offshore oiland gas explorations sites at bangla bay..
thai and burma had history for many wars,burmese king alongphya he occupied thailand and ruin Ayuttaya.So Thai have past feeling over burma.
thai have M60tanks,M113Apcs,stingray light tanks,f5e,f-16,gripens,c-130 and cobra helicopters,and us made many powerful arms and amunitions.
they have also mini aircraft carrier and fregates....
burma have to seek thai & bangladeshs power grown up...
Anyhow,War is not good for all human and solving the problem by negotiating via dipomatic ways...is the best without bloody war..
I like to know the asia military balance?
thanks and sorry and apologise for my poor english.

Well every country has a right to and need for a military. However the problem with Burma is that the country is very poor and simply cannot afford the amount of money spent - I think the real amount is far higher than officially admitted. SIPRI estimates it to be within the top 15 countries in the world by military expenditure. That is quite ridiculous.

well burma should use their to help theirs economic growth n not spend too much on defence.when junta in charge,they spend a lot in defence,yeah,they want to match thailand i think.
is thailand has gripen???

f2000 said:

well burma should use their to help theirs economic growth n not spend too much on defence.when junta in charge,they spend a lot in defence,yeah,they want to match thailand i think.
is thailand has gripen???

Click to expand...

As far as I know, Thailand has only expressed positive interest in buying the Gripen, but there haven't been any sales yet.




Then again, the statistics may be outdated. (First one only goes up to 2003, the second one from "Scramble" does not state year.) Articles noting that Thailand was talking about a deal with Saab that I found were generally from 2004... not sure if there has been any change since then. I recall that after the government changed the deal was frozen.

In addition, there is no mention of the Gripen (or photos) on the official Royal Thai Air Force website. I would imagine that if they had it they woudl display it proudly, so I can say with almost complete certainty that they... don't have them.

FuManChu said:

Well every country has a right to and need for a military. However the problem with Burma is that the country is very poor and simply cannot afford the amount of money spent - I think the real amount is far higher than officially admitted. SIPRI estimates it to be within the top 15 countries in the world by military expenditure. That is quite ridiculous.

Click to expand...

The junta does not have a long term view. Burma has lots of potential for growth, and if they invested in the economy their investment would be returned with plenty of interest and they would have a lot more to spend on the military. What they're doing now will just bankrupt them for no real gain.

Finn McCool said:

What they're doing now will just bankrupt them for no real gain.

Click to expand...

The junta isn't interested in Burma's future, else it wouldn't suppress the Opposition. It's only interested in its survival and having a huge army with loyal members is how it thinks it can keep control.

I mean, the very idea of stopping the gravy train to help ordinary citizens! Really, Finn, a Burmese general can never have enough Cuban cigars - you know that!!!

FuManChu said:

The junta isn't interested in Burma's future, else it wouldn't suppress the Opposition. It's only interested in its survival and having a huge army with loyal members is how it thinks it can keep control.

I mean, the very idea of stopping the gravy train to help ordinary citizens! Really, Finn, a Burmese general can never have enough Cuban cigars - you know that!!!

Click to expand...

Of course they're not interested in the benefit of ordinary people. I was saying that if they invested their money in attracting foreign investment and building the country's economy, they would have far more to invest in weapons purchases later. Long term economic investment would increase their power over their own people and would give them far more to spend on their military. That would allow them to make quality procurements, not just stop gap measures like what they are doing now. Besides, they would have a lot more money for cigars that way too...

The average general of the Myanmar Tatmadaw is certainly no humanitarian role model but he is simply grown up in a country where the military has ruled supreme for more than four decades (under a socialist party disgiuse as BSPP until 1988 and directly as a junta SLORC/SPDC thereafter). Myanmar was isolated, economically broke and torn by a narcotics fuelled civil war in 1990 when Aung San Su Kyi won ´democratic´elections but Tatmadaw decided to hold on to power and meanwhile 16 years later the junta has restablished control over almost (some areas along the Thai border excepted) the complete territory, has built up strong relationships with China and India (+ ASEAN membership 1997) and has revived the economy against heavy odds (US + EU embargos).

Although very much has still to be improved (economics, social) the question remains whether a government led by Mrs. ´westminster democracy´Aung would have achieved better results. Of course some comparative speculation is always tempting: since 1986 the Philippines have been governed also by some Mrs. democracies (Aquino, Arroyo) and the lives of ordinary people have only marginally improved in twenty years but the number of millionaires in Manila has certainly exploded. Arguably human rights and personal freedom are better protected in Manila than in Yangon (although Manila´s slums are undoubtedly nastier tha Yangon´s) but only if Mrs. Aung would not have been shoved aside after a couple of years by a gang of ruthless and wealthy narco tycoons from the ´golden triangle´ who would have indeed turned ´Burma´ into the drug producer/exporter No.1, a position really currently held by their already US ´liberated´ Afghan rivals.

Interestingly the two juntas in Myanmar and Thailand are quite inimical towards each other and historically deep rooted rivalry with the Thais seems to be the main reason for Tatmadaw´s recent military build up. Some experts are even maintaining that the ´putsch´against former Thai PM Thaksin was condoned and encouraged by Washington since Bangkok plays a pivotal role in future US designs in South East Asia for limiting and eventually backrolling currently steady advancing chinese influence. Accordingly Myanmar´s military strategy is dependent on her main ally (China) and the generals are currently deepening their strategic relationship with India for counterbalancing. :coffee:

Violet Oboe is certainly right. I can't imagine a democratic government getting much done in Myanmar. In a country like that command and control dictatorship might be the only way to get things done.

The junta has also done a good job of keeping themselves independent. They are not beholden to any of the major powers in the reigion: The US, China or India. You can see this in weapons purchases, they guy from China and India and even Russia.

Honestly though, I don't think that the junta has much to fear from Thailand. The only possible conflict I can see there is the Thais getting extremely pissed about Burmese drugs flooding their country and invading to stop the flow.

Finn McCool said:

Violet Oboe is certainly right. I can't imagine a democratic government getting much done in Myanmar.

Click to expand...

If that was the case that would probably be due to the junta's decades of corrupt and inefficient rule. You can't mistreat a child for its early childhood and then throw a broken, basket-base of a teenager at someone and say "hey, you try to raise her better".

Given the junta is the main cause of Burma's ills, I would say that it would be worth letting ASK having a go ruling the place. After all she couldn't do much worse!!!!