Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Every one places his own country in top 10 and suddenly the list becomes accurate.Seems legit.
Pak behinf,brazil?south korea?germany?japan,israel n turkey? lolINDIA MUST ASK THE QUEEN BEFORE THEY GO TO WAR HAHA - SOUTH KOREA will destroy north korea , just because south korea doesnt act agressive they think south koreas weak they have much more advanced weapons etc my list is this
1.USA
HUGE GAP
2.RUSSIA
LITTLE GAP
3.CHINA
4.INDIA.
5.UK/FRANCE
6.GERMANY/JAPAN
7.ITALY/TURKEY
8.BRAZIL/ISRAEL
9.SOUTH KOREA
10.PAKISTAN
ALSO I WANTED TO ASK IF UK GOES TO WAR DOES AUSTRALIA , CANADA AND ALL THOSE UK A.S LICKING STATES JOIN?
It would be a mistake on your part to assume that there is no depth in PA's leadership especially when it comes to a conventional showdown. I wont speak of the past as there have been serious blunders committed by the General Staff of PA but i can also state that serious blunders have also been committed by the General Staff of IA. What i can tell you that as of now PA's General Staff is simply top class. The current batch of Generals is probably the most finest and well trained staff in PA's history. Also, you cannot discount fighting experience as there is no substitute in life for experience.
Indeed, PA had to retrain her forces for counter insurgency from the scratch. This itself is a feat as PA retrained herself in record time. PA's COIN operations have been much more successful as compared to that of NATO or even IA's COIN operations inside Kashmir.
Sir please, these lame excuses wont work as Operation Parakram exposed the deficiencies in IA. You cannot hide IA's incompetence by using the political excuse. The order was given out to prepare for war and IA was asked to mobilize in full force, the orders were quite simply but IA failed to execute those orders in the allotted time due to their weak logistics.
BJP appeared quite eager for war and several prominent politicians and known personalities in India advocated for war. Compare that to Pakistan where there is a consensus among all political parties to avoid a war against India at all costs.
The stated new objective of the IA is contrary to that, it wants to fight a fast and fluid war against Pakistan before nukes can be brought into the equation. Any war lasting more than 2 weeks will increase the threshold level because Pakistan can simply not win a static war against India.
Lesson learned , trust me we wont be running out of ammunition if God forbid hostilities break out.
I wont blame the Air Force or the Navy, the Army treated them like a bunch of fools and paid dearly for it. That being said, the same mistakes wont be happening again. The synergy reached between PA, PAF and PN has been phenomenal. NDU had made it a priority to add courses to syllabus that would emphasize join operations. The theory was exercised on field as PA, PAF and PN have been conducting exercises together regularly.
So far the tender has not gone out.
We will see, but keep in mind that the defensive force will always have an advantage in an artillery duel as it is already set up and has marked up the enemy's axis of movement.
I would respectfully disagree with the term vast superiority, if that was the case India would have smashed Pakistan's defences.
Sure new equipment can be purchased on short notice during a time of hostility but that equipment will not arrive with ready made crew. The argument works both ways, any advantage that India enjoys Pakistan can nullify them too. Infact, some of the key war fighting advantages that India enjoyed until recently have been cancelled out.
Indeed, but these Lashkars can make lift difficult for the IA through unconventional attacks. It wont defeat them but will certainly harass them.
If Pakistan invades India, last i checked PA's doctrine was against this notion.
If India thinks that she can just run over PA's defences with ease, than she is living in a fools paradise. Looking at the balance of power of both India and Pakistan, there is not much difference between both the countries despite India spending billions of dollars to try and nullify this advantage.
Notorious Eagle said:It would be a mistake on your part to assume that there is no depth in PA's leadership especially when it comes to a conventional showdown. I wont speak of the past as there have been serious blunders committed by the General Staff of PA but i can also state that serious blunders have also been committed by the General Staff of IA. What i can tell you that as of now PA's General Staff is simply top class. The current batch of Generals is probably the most finest and well trained staff in PA's history. Also, you cannot discount fighting experience as there is no substitute in life for experience.Joe Shearer said: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.
Notorious Eagle said:Joe Shearer said: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.
Indeed, PA had to retrain her forces for counter insurgency from the scratch. This itself is a feat as PA retrained herself in record time. PA's COIN operations have been much more successful as compared to that of NATO or even IA's COIN operations inside Kashmir.
Notorious Eagle said:Sir please, these lame excuses wont work as Operation Parakram exposed the deficiencies in IA. You cannot hide IA's incompetence by using the political excuse. The order was given out to prepare for war and IA was asked to mobilize in full force, the orders were quite simply but IA failed to execute those orders in the allotted time due to their weak logistics.Joe Shearer said: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.
Who is this Pakistani general?
Notorious Eagle said:Joe Shearer said: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.
BJP appeared quite eager for war and several prominent politicians and known personalities in India advocated for war. Compare that to Pakistan where there is a consensus among all political parties to avoid a war against India at all costs.
Notorious Eagle said:Joe Shearer said: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 stated new objective of the IA is contrary to that, it wants to fight a fast and fluid war against Pakistan before nukes can be brought into the equation. Any war lasting more than 2 weeks will increase the threshold level because Pakistan can simply not win a static war against India.
Any war lasting more than 2 weeks will increase the threshold level because Pakistan can simply not win a static war against India.
Let me give you the scenario.
You have 1 million PLA troops amassed across Arunachal Pradesh and Pakistani border with India, and they are charging forward. Can India stop 1 million PLA ground forces with tens of thousands of tanks and hundreds of jets?
Notorious Eagle said:Joe Shearer said: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.
Lesson learned , trust me we wont be running out of ammunition if God forbid hostilities break out.
Notorious Eagle said:Joe Shearer said: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.
I wont blame the Air Force or the Navy, the Army treated them like a bunch of fools and paid dearly for it. That being said, the same mistakes wont be happening again. The synergy reached between PA, PAF and PN has been phenomenal. NDU had made it a priority to add courses to syllabus that would emphasize join operations. The theory was exercised on field as PA, PAF and PN have been conducting exercises together regularly.