India-Vietnam Supersonic Missile Talks in 'Advanced Stage'

[GBCW 397]

Talks for the sale of the joint Russia-India-developed BrahMos supersonic cruise missile platform to Vietnam are in an “advanced stage.” Vietnam first expressed interest in acquiring in the platform in 2011.

...

Indication that New Delhi and Hanoi may be closer to closing a deal on the BrahMos ... comes as New Delhi prepares to receive Chinese President Xi Jinping on his inaugural trip to India. China, a major claimant of territory in the South China Sea, will not welcome the deal as it will improve Vietnam’s deterrence capabilities.

...

The BrahMos acquisition would represent a second peg in Vietnam’s asymmetric deterrence strategy, the first being its acquisition of six Russian improved Kilo-class submarines. The supersonic missiles would allow Vietnam to threaten any naval assets that China may choose to use in the future against Vietnamese interests.

The BrahMos is considered to be one of the most formidable cruise missiles to ever exist. It is the fastest operational cruise missile, capable of operating at Mach 3.0 speeds. In addition to Vietnam, the Indian government is considering exporting the BrahMos to several other states. According to the CEO of BrahMos Aerospace, the key condition for countries being allowed to import the missile is that they are fundamentally “friendly to both India and Russia.”

http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/india-vietnam-hypersonic-missile-talks-in-advanced-stage/

[GandD 5,966]

This is the inherent problem with US isolationism. The world is at peace when there is a dominant force. Not so much when there isn't.

[GBCW 397]

This is the inherent problem with US isolationism. The world is at peace when there is a dominant force. Not so much when there isn't.

US isolationism? When? Where? The US has a bigger global footprint than any nation on the planet.

[GandD 5,966]

US isolationism? When? Where? The US has a bigger global footprint than any nation on the planet.

Its a popular concept in some groups these days. I believe that our wishy-washy approach to China in the SCS as of late is what is leading countries like Japan and Vietnam to begin building up their own arsenals. Granted, there are more ships actively relocating to the SCS, but I think our leaders should be more vocal in our support of our Asian allies and their current territory maps.

[Karee 4,190]

If anyone has any doubts about AJ's new identity, look no further than than person that started this thread.

[GBCW 397]

Its a popular concept in some groups these days. I believe that our wishy-washy approach to China in the SCS as of late is what is leading countries like Japan and Vietnam to begin building up their own arsenals. Granted, there are more ships actively relocating to the SCS, but I think our leaders should be more vocal in our support of our Asian allies and their current territory maps.

Why is it so bad that our allies arm themselves? Do you prefer a state of affairs where they are defenseless without American help?

[GandD 5,966]

Why is it so bad that our allies arm themselves? Do you prefer a state of affairs where they are defenseless without American help?

It works out better for us. The more countries have armies, the higher the likely hood of them using said armies. The world does best when "who's the strongest" is well established. Not so well when it isn't. Its this concept:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana

[GBCW 397]

That's expensive. I'm not sure that paradigm is still practical.

[GandD 5,966]

That's expensive. I'm not sure that paradigm is still practical.

Its hard to say. But it seems to work fairly well as long as you don't have to spend much money on your citizens

There's got to be an advantage economically to controlling the direction of the world. I'm not sure the current global economy is practical if nearly all of its members and all of the post WW2 council of 5 are hopelessly in debt.