should burma use multi billions on self defence?

Finn McCool · Feb 4, 2007

SteelBird said:
It seems you know a lot about Myanmar (Burma)? Where are you from, my friend? I've heard something about the situation in Myanmar, but not as clear as yours. Do you know that I am from Cambodia, one of the poor SE Asia like Myanmar too, surprise? I can understand the situation that you describe, 'coz things are similar here. Junta? The name of the Myanmar leader? If so, here is a different version of Junta in Cambodia, Hun Sen!

The worse thing in Cambodia compare to Myanmar is that there isn't much natural resource as in Myanmar. The better thing is that Cambodia is now a so-called democracy country. People here enjoy more freedom than you do in Myanmar. But then, the whole situation isn't anything better, there are full of corruption and bureaucracy. The whole economy of Cambodia survives by foreign aid, as the King (Norodom Sihanuk, The previous king of Cambodia) used to say "beggar government". (of course Hun Sen was furious at that time, he responsed by saying "don't forget you're also survive by the beggar money").

Well, I don't know what more I can say about Cambodia, a poor country, very poor. There are some MiG-21s in its airforce, but they are all grounded now due to no spare part and no FUEL!!!

Man, I feel a lot of sympathy for you and Davidka. Every country has so much potential. Some countries just have a hard time using it because of their rulers, or because of foreigners or whatever. But remember that every country on this planet has the raw ingredients at least necessary to join the first world. Of course some countries like to stay the way they are; Costa Rica keeps itself underdeveloped so it can stay enviromentally pure. It has a tiny population so revenues from tourism can provide for everyone. Myanmar and Cambodia are both in dynamic areas and if you removed the junta in Myanmar and gave Cambodia a responsible government, they would both easily join the ranks of the countries around them that are reaching for prosperity like Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam.

Cambodia had the war. That is something that takes decades to recover from.

SteelBird · Feb 4, 2007

Finn McCool said:
Man, I feel a lot of sympathy for you and Davidka. Every country has so much potential. Some countries just have a hard time using it because of their rulers, or because of foreigners or whatever. But remember that every country on this planet has the raw ingredients at least necessary to join the first world. Of course some countries like to stay the way they are; Costa Rica keeps itself underdeveloped so it can stay enviromentally pure. It has a tiny population so revenues from tourism can provide for everyone. Myanmar and Cambodia are both in dynamic areas and if you removed the junta in Myanmar and gave Cambodia a responsible government, they would both easily join the ranks of the countries around them that are reaching for prosperity like Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam.

Cambodia had the war. That is something that takes decades to recover from.

I hope this will not go into polictical discussion and I myself will not get warned by the mods.

In 1991 the UN spent 2 billions USD for a peace mission in Cambodia that led to a new elected multi parties government in 1993. There were around 20 parties joint the election and one party withdrew (the Khmer Rouge party) from it. But there were only three main parties: the Cambodian People's Party led by Hun Sen who was the Prime Minister at that time, the Buddhism party led by Seun San who was the government of the Republic Khmer during 1970 ~ 1975. the FUNCINPEC (hope that I have correct spelling) party led by Prince Norodom Ranarith (the son of King Norodom Sihanuk who is named as the National Father). The Funcinpec won the election, but Hun Sen 耍赖 (I don't know how to say this in English, but my dictionary translates to "act shamelessly") and created a self-ruled region north to Mekong river 100km from Vietnam border. Under the consoliation of the National Father, the winner of the election shared half of the government with the People's Party and Prince Ranarith became the Main Prime Minister, Hun Sen was the Co-Prime Minister. This is what the Khmer Rouge called the Two-Heads-Three-Eyes prime minister (two prime ministers with three eyes, Hun Sen is single eye). Cambodia became a democracy country from this day on, and the people believed that it would get well-developed soon and surpass its neighbor countries, Vietnam and Thailand, some days. Our dreams never come true.

OK, the story is still long, I'll continue tomorrow if the mods will have no problem with this.

bakapa · Mar 26, 2007

Finn McCool said:
I wouldn't say that it is the most powerful in Southeast Asia. That title probably goes to Thailand with Singapore close behind. However the junta has beefed up the military to the point where any nation in the area would probably consider it unwise to invade the country for whatever reason.

The real shame of all this (aside from what FuManChu pointed out above) is that if the junta invested the same amount of money in the economy in a short matter of time they would be able to invest twice as much money in the military and by default would have improved the lives of the people of Myanmar.

This would be a wrong assumption. Thailand is not powerful enough in South East Asia at all. If you study closely, you will find that most of Thailand's tank fleet are M-48 and M-60 tanks, both of them can be knocked out with standard HEAT round from RPG or 84mm Curl Gustuvs. As for the airforce, Thailand only has a handful of F16A, the rest of the force comprises mainly F5A and Bs, that again are easy target for anyone with HN5A or SA-7 MANPADS. Especially the F5A with their twin after burner makes them easy picking even for untrained soldier with his eyes closed.

As for the man power and experience of the troops, Thailand's troops doesnt have any real combat experience apart from their yearly "Cobra Gold" training exercise with US, most thai soldiers have not seen any real combats. As for Myanmar soldiers, despite their human right records (debateable), they are battle hardened due to constant fighting with insurgents. The best training soldiers can have is a real war and being shot at with real bullets, thats why many special forces around the world train with real bullets. Myanmar also have the upper hand in man power compared to Thailand. Many opposition groups and exiled politicians tend to spread news that Myanmar army units are inexperienced, under equipped and undermanned, in order to discredit the regime. However, any insurgents who have fought with the government troops knows that these news are far from correct. That is the reasons why many insurgent groups are signing peace deal with the regime.

Myanmar is a country rich with resources, and recent finding of GAS reserves are just one of the many example of the country's richness. Although the country's economy is not as strong as it should be due to political instability and sanctions, it still managed to procure many state of the art equipments from Russia, Ukraine, China and India. With the modernisation programme, the capability and power projection of Myanmar armed forces have grown in the recent years.

adeptitus · Apr 2, 2007

bakapa said:
This would be a wrong assumption. Thailand is not powerful enough in South East Asia at all. If you study closely, you will find that most of Thailand's tank fleet are M-48 and M-60 tanks, both of them can be knocked out with standard HEAT round from RPG or 84mm Curl Gustuvs. As for the airforce, Thailand only has a handful of F16A, the rest of the force comprises mainly F5A and Bs, that again are easy target for anyone with HN5A or SA-7 MANPADS. Especially the F5A with their twin after burner makes them easy picking even for untrained soldier with his eyes closed.

I think the Royal Thai AF has more F-16's (59) than F-5's (46).

Thailand purchased 52 F-16A/B's + 2 hulks from the US, and Singapore gave them 7 F-16A/B's for free, probably in exchange for using their air space for training.

The majority of their F-16A/B's are block 15OCU, except for 16 ADF variant that are ex-US ANG. They're armed with AIM-9, Python-3, AIM-120, AGM-65, and Atlas II targetting pods for precision strike.

Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Royal Thai AF also paticipates in multinational training/exercise events, such as the annual "Cope Tiger" event held at Korat Royal Thai AFB, with aircraft from USAF, USMC, Singapore, and Japan attending for air-to-air and air-to-ground training missions.

I can't speak for the Thai military's combat experience, but it does seem that they're better equipped than their counterparts in Myanmar.

On side note, I find it interesting that Israel is selling to both sides. Israeli companies are known to have upgraded F-7M's in Myanmar's service, as well as the F-16A/B's and L-39's in Royal Thai AF's service.

bomber · Apr 7, 2007

bakapa said:
This would be a wrong assumption. Thailand is not powerful enough in South East Asia at all. If you study closely, you will find that most of Thailand's tank fleet are M-48 and M-60 tanks, both of them can
As for the man power and experience of the troops, Thailand's troops doesnt have any real combat experience apart from their yearly "Cobra Gold" training exercise with US, most thai soldiers have not seen any real combats. As for Myanmar soldiers, despite their human right records (debateable), they are battle hardened due to constant fighting with insurgents. The best training soldiers can have is a real war and being shot at with real bullets, thats why many special forces around the world train with real bullets. Myanmar also have the upper hand in man power compared to Thailand. Many opposition groups and exiled politicians tend to spread news that Myanmar army units are inexperienced, under equipped and undermanned, in order to discredit the regime. However, any insurgents who have fought with the government troops knows that these news are far from correct. That is the reasons why many insurgent groups are signing peace deal with the regime.

In Bakapa post,,We are same opinion on Burmese Army 's Human resource or burmese soldiers have good battle experiences because they always fight with local insurgent groups .They don't need special military exercises for infantry units.
But they haven't been Joint exercise between army,navy,air force .
I think that Burma Army fighting skill is 2nd in South east Asia armies.#1 is Vietnamese army.BTW Burma was quiet before1999 and they use diplomacy to solve border problems even 100 of soldiers were killed by Thai helicopters gunship and howitzers .
Now ,They have already balanced military power with Thai.Bakapa ,you know about latest Light tanks(Stingray)are used by Royal Thai army.
Now Burma have good enough tanks and MLRS and 105,120 to 155mm howitzers.250 APC ,some are amphibias APC.
Burmese Airforce also use russian MIG29 and F7,A5m,PC6 and 7 .MI17,sokol helicopters(Poland),F8 trainners,4engine china transporters.
so burma will be ready for regional war without any support of super power countries.But I love peace between neighboring countries....

bomber · Apr 7, 2007

On side note, I find it interesting that Israel is selling to both sides. Israeli companies are known to have upgraded F-7M's in Myanmar's service, as well as the F-16A/B's and L-39's in Royal Thai AF's service.[/QUOTE]Isreali always seek their profit ,it is their nature...even they are getting help from US

bakapa · Apr 8, 2007

adeptitus said:
I think the Royal Thai AF has more F-16's (59) than F-5's (46).

Thailand purchased 52 F-16A/B's + 2 hulks from the US, and Singapore gave them 7 F-16A/B's for free, probably in exchange for using their air space for training.

The majority of their F-16A/B's are block 15OCU, except for 16 ADF variant that are ex-US ANG. They're armed with AIM-9, Python-3, AIM-120, AGM-65, and Atlas II targetting pods for precision strike.

Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Royal Thai AF also paticipates in multinational training/exercise events, such as the annual "Cope Tiger" event held at Korat Royal Thai AFB, with aircraft from USAF, USMC, Singapore, and Japan attending for air-to-air and air-to-ground training missions.

I can't speak for the Thai military's combat experience, but it does seem that they're better equipped than their counterparts in Myanmar.

On side note, I find it interesting that Israel is selling to both sides. Israeli companies are known to have upgraded F-7M's in Myanmar's service, as well as the F-16A/B's and L-39's in Royal Thai AF's service.

These F16s are not yet in service, current ORBAT for Thailand (according to IISS military balance 2006) shows they have more F-5 squadrons then F-16s in active service. Participating in training sorties doesnt necessarily means pilots have the mastery of the aircraft. It may have a lot of F16 on order or in inventory, but it has not actually fielded them in front line squadrons.

Better equipments doesnt necessarily win the war, especially in South East Asia, history has proven that better equipped foes have been defeated and humiliated by peasents with bare foot in the paddy fields in Vietnam. The fact that both Thai Army and Airforce lack real combat experience is a major weakness.

As for the F-16s, they are still easy picking for SAM systems like Tor-M1. Thailand does not appear to have any HARM missiles in their inventory, nor does it have any AGMs, all they have laser guided bombs and GP bombs. Laser guided bombs are useless if there is no one "litting" the target, thus it is highly questionable Thailand's ability to effectively field their F-16s in a state of war.

In any case, regardless of being better equipped and having state of the art aircrafts, the current military government's foreign policy towards Myanmar suggest that Thailand does not want to provoke Myanmar into any form of war, be it border skirmarshes or full scale battle. To that end, Thai government has been forcing the ethnic rebels (KNU and SSA) they once armed and supported through their buffer zone policy to sign peace agreement with Myanmar government in order to ensure that the fighting at border does not spill into their country or much worse drawn Thai Army into open war with Myanmar Army.

bakapa · Apr 8, 2007

bomber said:
In Bakapa post,,We are same opinion on Burmese Army 's Human resource or burmese soldiers have good battle experiences because they always fight with local insurgent groups .They don't need special military exercises for infantry units.
But they haven't been Joint exercise between army,navy,air force .
I think that Burma Army fighting skill is 2nd in South east Asia armies.#1 is Vietnamese army.BTW Burma was quiet before1999 and they use diplomacy to solve border problems even 100 of soldiers were killed by Thai helicopters gunship and howitzers .
Now ,They have already balanced military power with Thai.Bakapa ,you know about latest Light tanks(Stingray)are used by Royal Thai army.
Now Burma have good enough tanks and MLRS and 105,120 to 155mm howitzers.250 APC ,some are amphibias APC.
Burmese Airforce also use russian MIG29 and F7,A5m,PC6 and 7 .MI17,sokol helicopters(Poland),F8 trainners,4engine china transporters.
so burma will be ready for regional war without any support of super power countries.But I love peace between neighboring countries....

You have to understand the doctrine and organisational structure Myanmar armed forces properly to understand the reason for the lack of joint exercises. Myanmar armed forces is a single fully integrated fighting force, which means navy and airforce are not organised as seperate branches, rather as extension and subordonate branches of the army, thus making command, communications and integration much more effective. For example, any naval command HQ and air forces bases in particular region are subordonate to the army's Regional Military Command (RMC). RMC deploy naval and airforce assets as and when necessary or requested by tactical operation commanders in the field. This method of joint service operations are quite apperent in the recent Myanmar Army's attack on rebel strongholds such as Manerplaw and Kawmura.

Myanmar often tries to resolve their regional conflicts through diplomatic means in order not to fight the war on two fronts, i.e. insurgents as well as invading foreign enemies. This is quite apprent in Myanmar military's doctrine. Since the turn of millenium, after a series of modernisation, expansion programs along with procurement of modern weaponry, Myanmar armed forces have adopted a new doctrine, where it look to resolve any regional and border conflicts through military means rather than by diplomatic means. This change of stance can be noted from recent border incidents, where RTA helicopter was shot down by Myanmar army and also the arrest of RTA Rangers who trespassed into Myanmar side of the border.

The Stingray Light Tanks used by RTA are thinly armoured and can easily be knocked out by HEAT round from 82mm Carl Gustuv recoiless guns, let alone using any anti-tank weapons like Milan, AT-3 sagger missiles.

You are right about Myanmar armed forces ability to wage a conventional war in the region without any support from super power allies, but sadly the same cannot be sad about Thailand, as they have to rely on US intervention in order to prevent their country's sovreignity should it ever come under attack.

bakapa · Apr 8, 2007

bomber said:
On side note, I find it interesting that Israel is selling to both sides. Israeli companies are known to have upgraded F-7M's in Myanmar's service, as well as the F-16A/B's and L-39's in Royal Thai AF's service.

Isreali always seek their profit ,it is their nature...even they are getting help from US

They transferring missile technology (US origin) to DPRK,PRC and anti US countries.They were killed by Iraq missiles in last war(Invasion of Kuwait).these missile technology came from isreal.

*********************************

WHATCH IT! ANOTHER RACIST REMARK AND I KICK YOU OUT! UNDERSTOOD

Violet Oboe · Apr 8, 2007

Well, our members should avoid ranting about other nations traits on the intellectual level of drunken chicks in a bar (´Oh f***, those men are all pigs it's their nature!´:rofl: ) and disseminating disinformation like that Israel has played a part in enhancing Iraq's missile capability before 1991 (perhaps bakapa meant Iran? In that case there is indeed some evidence for this allegation.).

But bakapa has a case in point as far as incidents like the ´Phalcon´ and ´Harpy´affair are concerned. Israel has indeed exported sensitive tech to China and some people in the DoD were certainly near boiling point as they discovered that they were deceived for years by their Israeli ´allies´ about the regular upgrade of the deadly Harpy attack drones. The Pentagon was also only able to cancel the transfer of the ´Phalcon´AWACS after heavy pressure on Jerusalem and at least partially Israeli stubborn resistance to Washingtons demands was obviously motivated by financial interest of their weapons industry.

Without doubt Israel is playing a very complicated double game from time to time with the US and although Israel is a valuable ally for Washington it is simultaneously a powerful regional player with congruent but not identical interests. Israel is a country not willing to compromise her long term strategic plan (a viable exclusively jewish state with unilaterally defined borders (1967 line + settlements/security exclaves + Golan) and a lasting military hegemony in the middle east) and the US would be well advised to recognize that simple fact.

should burma use multi billions on self defence?

Finn McCool

Captain

SteelBird

Colonel

bakapa

New Member

adeptitus

Captain

bomber

New Member

bomber

New Member

bakapa

New Member

bakapa

New Member

bakapa

New Member

Violet Oboe

Junior Member