Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
Merely fighting experience is not sufficient. The quality of leadership is also important. Judging by the events since 1971, there is not much depth in the Pakistani military leadership, perhaps partly because they have been so distracted by the attraction of political developments in their country. Neither their attempt to capture Siachen, which was let down by sloppy staff work and poor confidentiality, nor their attempt at redressing the balance in Kargil was particular impressive.
Further, VERY limited forces were involved in these two efforts, and only tactical thinking was required. Strategic thinking was conspicuous by its absence.
Their action against their own extremist was nowhere near as effective as these counter-insurgency operations can be, perhaps because the Pakistan Army never trained for counter-insurgency; those who might be thought to be insurgents were already auxiliaries of theirs.
On comparison, the Indian Army has been in a predicament (as usual) largely due to political indecision. The BJP ordered mobilisation, after the attack on Parliament, but had not done the necessary preparation to fight a war, nor was it sure that it wanted to fight a war. As a result, the Indian Army was put to a most uncomfortable alert which lasted for nearly a year. This was disgraceful.
This indecision of the politicians does not surprise me. No section of the Indian political leadership is eager for war. Perhaps that is now true of the Pakistani leadership also, although IK is an unknown quantity.
I agree.
The odds for the Pakistan Army would be highest at the outset of hostilities. It is and always has been a quick-reacting force (by and large). With every passing week, its advantage will drop substantially. In case of hostilities lasting over a month, it will be at a serious disadvantage. A reasonable Indian Army strategy would be to engage it in a barren artillery and limited infantry and armour war for two to three weeks, before committing any assault troops to action, or setting out on a plan with objectives, strategy and tactical doctrine taped down.
The tea leaves were clear to read. The Pakistan Army had run dangerously short of ammunition and supplies in 65, and in contrast, the Indian Army, while it still had supplies for another three weeks or more, advised its civilian leadership that stocks were running dangerously low, and a ceasefire would be a good thing. It would have been FAR more difficult for Pakistan if hostilities had continued for another twenty days.
That situation remains the same. It is not much better for the Air Force. During the Kargil hostilities, the Air Force bluntly told the Army that it could not intervene because of the very low level of spares and supplies. The Navy leadership famously declared sick en masse on learning about the developments in Kargil.
Dude u have to accept the fact Conventionally Indian army will Win ... due to our Size... i am not disrespecting Pak army in any way by putting this... i have already said in the other post That Pak army is one of the most battle hardened army in the world...
But when the war lasts for a longer time the Country with larger resources will win eventually Hence India will prevail over Pakistan & China will Prevail over India... thats a Fact ... the Country which has the bigger economy & resources will always prevail over the Smaller 1...
they r Good at marching parades& will Die in Numbers
But will prevail eventually due to there Bigger Size...
All this discussion and debate fails to take certain historical facts into account.
Unfortunately for Pakistan, and this is not said in any ironic or sarcastic sense, but as plain, blunt fact, artillery is one of the areas of deficiency which is most easy to make right with the spending of money. Spending more money doesn't speed up the training of an Infantry unit, it doesn't help in speeding up the design of a Main Battle Tank, or of a Light Combat Aircraft. It certainly helps to buy large quantities of tubed artillery at short notice. Or of battlefield missile batteries, for that matter.
This is not a superiority tenable for long.
Again, both sides are forgetting historical factors which give India a vast superiority.
True. These two services alone can put enormous pressure on Pakistan.
What the hell do you mean? You know damn right that our artillery is superior to yours in terms of quality, though you guys do have a large quantity of artillery guns you want to phase out.
There is no Gun in your arsenal that is superior to T-155, and we will mount these babies on a chassis making it a self propelled beast!!
Our SH-1 SPG's as well as M109 series SPG's are superior to your Bofors.
All that is just talk. At the end of the day, there is no advantage for Pakistan that cannot be neutralised with expenditure at relatively short notice. At that time, none of these technologies will cancel the superiority of the other side, while the Indian Army will still not have extended itself.
The side that benefits from a short war will try to wind things up in a maximum of ten to fifteen days. The side that benefits from a longer war will try to resist diplomatic pressure and sabre-rattling by interested onlookers to try and extend the war and win major breakthroughs at the end.
When war is fought, it will be fought, sad to say, without either of us being consulted. I, too, hope that there is no war.
They are still civilian thugs, not combat troops able to stand up to regular units in a battle field. They cannot withstand the Pakistan Army, unfamiliar with counter-insurgency warfare as it is; it is difficult to visualise them on a battle field. It will be carnage.
With reserves that Pakistan cannot dream of.
At this stage, I would like to point out that in any of the last three engagements and two skirmishes, the Indian Army has actually, thanks to its own mental lethargy, fought with one hand tied behind its back.
A quick look at the regimental composition of the Indian Army - and the Pakistan Army - will reveal that this was NOT the Army with which the British conquered India. This was the imperial army designed to fight overseas and across the borders that they conceived and executed AFTER 1857. Prior to that, to fight the Carnatic Wars, the campaigns in Bengal, Bihar and what was then Oudh, the Mysore Wars, the Maratha Wars, the Sikh Wars, even the Gurkha Wars, and two out of three Burmese wars were fought with a wholly different force composition. For that matter, even one of the two Afghan wars was fought the same way.
In changing the composition of the Indian Army after 1857, the British almost completely discarded the Bengal, Madras and Bombay Armies. Their key troops, Bihari and Oudh-based Hindus and Hindustani Muslims in the Bengal Army, and similar compositions in the Madras Army and Bombay Army, were suddenly sidelined. The tough fighting regiments that had gained the British such significant success, that had trained generations of their best soldiers, including Field Marshall the Duke of Wellington, were all gone, almost overnight.
When we analyse the relative strength of the Indian and the Pakistan Army, therefore, it would be well to remember that these huge reserves, these inexhaustible soldier mines are available for recruitment, and could possible treble the strength of the standing army today. It may be hoped that in case of such a dismal eventuality, the Indian leadership will remember Lord Kitchener, and bring troops on line as they are recruited and trained, one cohort at a time, as Kitchener had planned his Millions, one Million at a time. Considering the number of troops contributed by India during the Second World War, after discounting the number drawn from currently Pakistani sources, there is still scope for recruitment a force a number of times the size of the present, without resorting to conscription.
This is one reason why it is in Pakistan's interest not to wage war beyond a short period, so that such inauspicious ideas do not float idly by any Indian politician's 'brain'; it is even better for Pakistan not to wage war at all, as bringing this genie out of the bottle would represent a barrier of unthinkable proportions and definitive significance.
, trust me we wont be running out of ammunition if God forbid hostilities break out. 
