TNT
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2019
- Messages
- 7,555
- Reaction score
- -12
- Country
- Location
True
Maybe that why Pak lost 6000 soldiers in 48 war. Around 4900 more losses than India.
Again Pak lost 800 more men than India in 65 war.
Yet in both wars Pak was unable to have a decisive victory. So doesn't seem to be a very sound strategy, does it?
Probably thats why, Pak generals decided to drop the strategy and surrender 93000 troops in 1971. So fear of death might have creeped back in them buddy.
Muslims of today dont have faith like in the past. In the past 313 poorly armed would beat 1000 well armed. Go and read history, thousands would beat hundreds of thousands. Multiple empires defeated at same time. How do u think they achieved such feats. Doesnt mean training and equipment is not important, but we can use our lives as force multipliers.
Now i cant argue with a person who thinks 48 was not a decisive victory. Had the British controlled Pakistan army at the time not stopped the lashkars, they would have reached Delhi. Still half of area was taken by a new country way way smaller than india. I wonder what is defeat for u? The only victory india ever had was 71 that too was bengali victory and not indian.
I wonder though why u didnt mention 27/2, that was a decisive indian victory right? Vir chakra and all that.