There is no question that the skill and tenacity of the Indian infantryman in Kargil is of great importance-equal only to the technology that he is supported by. So no one should take a stand that either one can independently bring the battle to a speedy close. Unfortunately, there are many in the hierarchy who believe that technology has little role to play in the current scenario. This issue, therefore, needs wider debate-and to do so, the possibilities of their use are discussed here. If they are needed, they should be bought, flown in and given to the troops to use. They are not fighting alone-the country stands behind them. Kargil may be a boon in disguise, because years of under-funding of the armed forces and the failure to modernise has been demonstrated in a small battle. These deficiencies must be rectified before we embark on anything bigger. The technologies that the forces lack will probably cost Rs 500 crore to induct for the army and air force. We are not discussing the purchase of new weapon platforms, but making the existing ones relevant. The F-16s being used in Kosovo are 14 years old, the B-52s are 40 years old, laser-guided bombs are 20 years old and the EA-6C, the missile radar-suppressing aircraft is 30 years old. The failure to modernise is more the failure to prioritise than the lack of money. But make the money available and fix the accountability later.