Coward Pakistan begs US to not help India with..., will Trump agree?
In a desperate plea, Pakistan has appealed to the US not to sell F-35 stealth fighter jets to India which was offered to Prime Minister Narendra Modi by US President Donald Trump during his US visit in February. After this, when US Vice President JD Vance visited India in April, he also offered F-35 to India.
Will India take it from US?
Even though there has been no official confirmation on this, last week Defense Secretary RK Singh had definitely said, without naming US, that India is seriously considering buying stealth fighter jets from a 'friendly country.'
What Pakistan has pleaded?
Pakistan Air Force Chief Air Chief Marshal Zaheer Ahmed Babar Sidhu who visited US has requested the US not to sell F-35A stealth fighter to India. During this time, he met US Air Force Chief General David Allwine, along with some other US military officials and some MPs. In which he requested the US officials not to give F-35 stealth fighter to India. Expressing his fear, he said that if US gives F-35 to India, then it can dangerously disturb the regional strategic balance. Pakistan, whose air force capability is much weaker and limited than India, believes that if India gets fifth generation stealth fighters like F-35A, then it will seriously affect the balance of air power in South Asia and regional strategic stability will be threatened.
Will China help Pakistan with J-35 stealth fighter jet?
Pakistan has raised this concern to the US at a time when it has reached the final stage in the process of buying J-35A stealth fighter jet from China. China's Shenyang Aircraft Corporation has built the J-35A, a twin-engine stealth fighter and is considered a competitor to the F-35. According to reports, Pakistan has ordered 40 J-35A aircraft, the delivery of which is expected to be completed in the next two years. China has speeded up production to deliver the first batch in the next 6–8 months. Apart from this, there are also reports of Pakistani pilots training with the J-35. This fighter aircraft will be equipped with long-range PL-15 or PL-17 missiles. Pakistan aims to deploy a full stealth squadron by the year 2026. Reports say that China is selling it the J-35 at a 50 percent discount.
Will India buy F-35 fighter jets from the US?
To counter the possible acquisition of J-35 stealth fighter by Pakistan and China, India is seriously considering buying advanced fighter jets like F-35A from the US or Su-57E from Russia. However, nothing has been said officially about both the aircraft. The Indian Air Force has already signed several defense agreements with the US, including MQ-9B drones, C-17, P-8I and Apache helicopters. Apart from this, the US is going to supply the engine of Tejas-1 fighter aircraft to India and talks with the US to manufacture the engine of Tejas-2 fighter aircraft have reached the final stage.
Now the Donald Trump administration is planning to offer India the F-35A stealth fighter jet specifically according to the needs of the Indian Air Force, which will include software defined radio, advanced IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) system and other custom hardware according to Indian operational needs. This will be a similar customization as has been done in the Israeli F-35I 'Adir' version. This proposal was also mentioned in the talks between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Modi.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Apple cites Supreme Court's birthright ruling in fight over Epic Games injunction
Apple is hoping a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling curbing the power of federal judges to issue nationwide orders will help the technology giant win an appeal in a lawsuit requiring it to revamp its lucrative App Store. In a court filing on Tuesday, Apple told the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Supreme Court's June order in a case involving birthright citizenship bolsters the iPhone maker's arguments in a high-stakes standoff with "Fortnite" game developer Epic Games. The Supreme Court limited when judges can issue so-called universal injunctions that apply broadly, and not just to the parties in a lawsuit. The justices did not rule on whether the Trump administration can legally terminate the right to citizenship for people born on U.S. soil, but the decision was a win for the administration, which had complained about individual lower courts blocking its policies nationwide. Even though the case at the high court had nothing to do with Apple, its appeal could test the scope of the justices' ruling. Apple and Epic did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Apple in its appeal is challenging a U.S. district judge's order in April that said the company must open its App Store to more competition, allowing all developers - not just Epic - more freedom to steer consumers to alternative payment options outside of an app. The appeal also challenges the judge's finding that Apple was in contempt for violating a prior injunction in the same case. Epic Games sued Apple in 2020 to loosen its control over transactions in applications that use its iOS operating system and how apps are distributed to consumers. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in 2021 said Apple must allow developers to more easily steer consumers to potentially cheaper non-Apple payment options. Apple defied that court order to maintain a revenue stream worth billions of dollars, Gonzalez Rogers ruled in April. Apple has denied any wrongdoing, and defended its compliance with the court's orders. Apple told the 9th Circuit that, after the Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision, judges no longer have freestanding authority to issue universal injunctions. Apple also noted that Epic pursued its lawsuit on its own, not as a class action on behalf of a larger group. Epic told the appeals court in May that Apple's App Store changes will have wide-reaching benefits for the industry and consumers. "The sky has not fallen. Instead, developers and consumers are finally beginning to see the long-awaited benefits of increased competition," Epic said. The case is Epic Games Inc v. Apple Inc, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 25-2935. For Epic: Gary Bornstein and Yonatan Even of Cravath, Swaine & Moore For Apple: Gregory Garre and Roman Martinez of Latham & Watkins Read more: Apple, Visa and Mastercard win dismissal of merchant antitrust lawsuit over payment fees Epic Games settles lawsuit against Samsung over app controls Swiss privacy tech firm Proton sues Apple in US over app store rules Apple must face consumer lawsuit over iCloud storage, US judge rules
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump hits brakes on Obama's speed rule: Limit on large trucks, buses removed; what changes
Representational AI image The Trump administration has scrapped a proposed rule from the Obama era that aimed to limit the speed of large trucks and buses on US highways to improve safety and cut fuel costs. The speed limiter rule was first proposed in 2016 by Obama-era regulators. It aimed to cap the top speed of big rigs and buses to reduce the severity of crashes. Officials believed this could save between 63 and 214 lives annually and cut over $800 million in fuel and emissions costs. The suggested speed caps ranged from 60 to 68 mph. On 24 July, the Trump administration formally ended the plan. Federal regulators said mandating speed governors on all trucks over 26,000 pounds could increase operational costs, worsen traffic flow, and potentially harm road safety. They also warned of longer delivery times, lower driver pay, and a shift of heavy trucks to smaller roads. Truckers and states Independent truckers and several states opposed the Obama-era proposal. More than 15,000 public comments were filed against it. Many states argued the rule would interfere with their authority to set speed limits. The administration, following Trump's broader push against burdensome regulations, sided with these objections. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top 15 Most Beautiful Women in the World Undo Regulators also noted that the original proposal did not address the safety risks of slower trucks mixing with faster-moving cars. Additionally, modern safety technology—such as radar-based emergency braking—has improved vehicle safety since 2016, reducing the need for such a rule. Safety concerns While this national plan has been dropped, the debate around speed-limiting technology isn't over. The American Trucking Associations (ATA), which had backed a 65 mph cap, said it remains open to working with regulators on balanced safety measures. In California, a bill to alert drivers when speeding was vetoed last year by governor Gavin Newsom.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Donald Trump: Everyone is saying I will Destroy Elon Musk's companies, but this is not so, I want Elon to ...
Donald Trump has denied claims that he intends to harm Elon Musk's companies or eliminate their government subsidies, emphasizing his desire for all US businesses to prosper. This statement follows escalating tensions between the two figures, sparked by Musk's opposition to Trump's spending bill and the resurfacing of Trump's connection to Jeffrey Epstein. President Donald Trump has publicly refuted claims that he intends to destroy Elon Musk 's companies or remove their significant government subsidies . He stated that he wants all US companies to thrive because their good performance is better for the country. Trump's denial comes soon as a war of words between the two figures continues to escalate. 'Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon's companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the US Government,' Trump stated in a post on Truth Social. 'This is not so! I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before!," he noted, adding, 'The better they do, the better the USA does, and that's good for all of us.' "We are setting records every day, and I want to keep it that way!" he stated. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Elon Musk opposed Trump's 'One, Big Beautiful Bill' Trump's statement addresses ongoing speculation fueled by a public spat with Musk. The 'problems' between the pair reportedly began with Musk's opposition to a major spending bill – 'One, Big Beautiful Bill' – pushed forward by the President. The dispute intensified when the Tesla CEO brought up Trump's past association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In June, Trump had threatened to cut some of Musk's government contracts as their disagreement over the 'Big Beautiful Bill' deepened and their relationship visibly soured. This marked a shift, as Musk had previously chaired the president's Department of Government Efficiency and had contributed millions to Trump's re-election campaign. Musk says Tesla is facing a 'few rough quarters' On Wednesday (July 24), during a second-quarter earnings call, Musk indicated that Tesla could face 'a few rough quarters' due to upcoming tariff costs and the expiration of federal electric vehicle benefits at the end of September. Earlier the same day, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had also suggested that the current administration was not keen on federal agencies collaborating with Musk's artificial intelligence startup, xAI . Realme 15 Pro: Flagship Features for Less? AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
