India's conventional military superiority over Pakistan is exaggerated.

[farhan_9909]

The difference is that unlike 71 when the Pakistanis didn't even had sticks to fight,today its population is armed to teeth.

So this time india won't be fighting the armed forces alone but also the civilian.The civilian that consider fighting against india as some sort of national duty with major portion of the country having the experience of operating guns.

On the other hand the burger population of India not only has ever seen guns in real let alone having them and forgot about firing them.

So we are talking about country full of army against a Billion Population country with an army.

 

[farhan_9909]

miltary professionals are trained to deal with civilians that why armoured regiments come to place
Civilians are physiological weak to stand against military at large

You can take examples in modern times

US invading iraq & afganistan or
Much smaller forces like ISS capture large chunck of lands from Kurds & shia's

As for burger population
I advice you to visit nothern states like , uttranchal ,himachal , haryana,UP or rajasthan (rajputs & warrior clans tribes )you know what you get when you raise pakistan name in certain way

The Pakistani Civilian will have support of Paksitan armed forces and maybe even let say one week of basic training.You have no idea of the Pakistani Population,the reason i told you this is not 71 when we didn't even had sticks to fight.

Our population will take care of india.

 

[cerberus]

The Pakistani Civilian will have support of Paksitan armed forces and maybe even let say one week of basic training.You have no idea of the Pakistani Population,the reason i told you this is not 71 when we didn't even had sticks to fight.

Our population will take care of india.

You are getting emotional mate if you are from the army you know how military forces are trained to operate against hostile population there own or against foreign

In times of emergency or Civil war


You have also have no idea about how bad military will get to control hostile population
That is uncomfortable but hard truth

Thats how conventional forces capture enemy territory and hold it
Civilian cannot match might of professionally trained forces

 

[chanikya]

In Pakistan's case they target soft targets like civilians . I was talking about your army's capabilities . Took them 5 days to take out few people . In Mumbai's case it took them the same time to take out few people .

Pakistan's army just finished zar-e-azb in North waziristan wiping TTP out of its territory while as we speak numerous insurgencies still go on in North East of India since Decades despite your army's numerous attempts .

It seems something went wrong some where, dude please check with someone

 

[cerberus]

That was Gen Shahid Aziz, DG ISI.

HeL don't believe in the Pak casualties figure of Kargil war.

According to him Mushraf concealed the facts just like 1971 war.

Many others as well make mushy guilty of kargil he were on verge court marshall for his past sins

 

[Jamwal's]

I was talking about your army's capabilities . Took them 5 days to take out few people . In Mumbai's case it took them the same time to take out few people .

How convenient !

So in what way PNS Mehran, Badebar or Karnachi is different from Pathankot attack ?

All of these are Military installations. What matter is the objective - our forces neutralize those terrorists while yours failed both in saving the lives and Aircrafts.

Pakistan's army just finished zar-e-azb in North waziristan wiping TTP out of its territory

Congratulation.

as we speak numerous insurgencies still go on in North East of India since Decades despite your army's numerous attempts .

Except for few isolated incidents in North East the region is peaceful than your Karanchi and Punjab let alone FATA.Even Karanchi is under Paramilitary.

Don't take my word for it, just check the facts and casualties over the years.

We conducted South Asian Games in North East, you can't have a Cricket match in Lahore.


This is when we hardly use heavy weapons or Air strikes.

On the other hand your military offensive flattened Shawal and frontier areas with Airstrikes, Tanks, Artillery and most importantly Drones both US and Burraq.

 

[Hellfire]

you really need to study military warfare rather than being emotional, for instance Vietnam war lasted 20 years resulted massive american causalities and a worst defeat. though Americans were well trained well equipped and well funded

Kindly elucidate the bold portion.

thing.. after world war two England was victorious at military front but its economy was torn apart resulted the great British empire in which sun was never set left merely like a dot at world map, at the end of war most of British gold reserves were exhausted and the economy was shattered..

Agreed. Point being?

indian total military active manpower strength is 1.3 million while Pakistan is maintaining a half of it which is 620,000 india has a border of 3,380 km with china, further they share 4000 plus km border with bangladesh as well as they have a border of 1643km with mayamar etc. do you think india will divert all of its military manpower and its resources toward pakistan ? to win the war?

Factually incorrect.

Borders of North Eastern States with Myanmar and China are having ITBP and BSF with Assam Rifles and other CAPFs forming second line. Bangladesh is manned by BSF completely.

No active units deployed on border with either China or Myanmar or Bangladesh.

 

[guest11]

@The SC

Since the author counted all the Indian weaknesses but none its strength let me provide some counter arguments. The article in OP specifically mentioned conventional warfare and not nuclear warfare so it'd be wise to keep it out of the discussion.


Part 1

1) OP only took the "numbers" of one arm of the military i.e. army but hasn't included IAF and IN and their respective assets which is downright disingenuous.

IAF

• IAF holds a significant advantage over PAF both in terms of quantity and quality. Now if someone comes up with a argument like "pilot skills" and "courage" which cannot be quantified, this will end up a useless exercise. At present, mainstay as well as frontline fighter of IAF is Su-30MKI of which more than 220 are in service. Mainstay of PAF are ~170 F-7 of which only a about a third are F-7PG which again do not have BVR capability. There are humongous differences between both platforms in terms range, time on station, payload and firepower so no competetion there whatsoever. Will gladly explain further if asked to. More platforms will be added to IAF in near future than PAF.
  
• In terms of transport capabilities, Pakistan's transport fleet is older, fewer and far less capable when compared to India's. Mainstay of PAF transport fleet are 18 C-130 most of whom were built in the 1960s along with a few odd transport planes with limited payload and no strategic air lift capability. On the other hand, IAF not only has a much larger fleet of both tactical as well as statregic airlift platforms including the newly built 11-12 C-130J-30s, 17 Il-76s, 10 C-17s, 100+ An-32s, 56 HS 748, 40 Do-228s and few odd aircrafts. Difference is way too large and will increase further as more platforms are being bought or constructed.

Will provide more information if asked.

IN

• Any kind of comparison between IN and PN is unfair to both so I'll leave it at that.

2) Not only IA has more equipment but the obsolescence of the said equipment is being taken care off. Some examples;

• More than 1000 T-72s have been upgraded with domestically built Israeli thermal sights. This is in addition to the 692 combat improved Ajeya already in service. A more comprehensive upgrade package is on the table for which Russian and Israeli firms are competing.
  
• Artillery shortfalls are being remedied, with the upcoming induction of Dhanush, K-9 and M777.

3) War wastage reserves for 40 days of intense war are almost done for most of the ammo types with it reaching 100% by the end of year 2016.

 

[Hellfire]

it may be smaller but not far far smaller, and what makes you think that these limited number of Indian industrial zones and main power grids would be safe from PAF and Pakistan's ballistic missiles force.

When you claim first strike as a doctrine .. your ability to deploy ballistic missiles in depth is questionable .... since you are a military professional ... use your head and ask whether your ballistic missile deployment has any rationale as a commander at strategic level/overall battle plan?

 

[hussain0216]

Pakistan has a very powerful conventional military

Any misadventure by indians will lead to the mass slaughter of tens of thousands of their soldiers

Pakistan is a heavily armed state with a heavily armed population

The indian military know this hence apart from the odd lungi dance dont dare to attack Pakistan even after things like Mumbai and Pathankot which they pin on us

They know the consequences

 

[AUz]

Exactly! The question is, how long will Pakistan be able to fight a war with a far, far smaller industrial base than India? 10 days? 15? And after that? You won't be able to last even a fortnight. Your limited assets like dams, power stations, ports, oil refineries etc are all in an area having no depth which will be taken out in the first few days of war.

Oh ok, so you'll do that and

And I'm not talking of a nuclear war, which will never happen.

Classic example of why people shouldn't try to act smarter than they actually are.

In any way between India and Pakistan--there are only two binaries.

1- Either Pakistan prevails by thwarting indian attack, making the war useless for both parties, and stopping india at the gates--with both sides taking casualities and both countries returning to status-quo antebellum.

2- OR india breaks through and delivers massive punishment to Pak armed forces and infrastructure---in which scenrio Pakistan unleashes its nuclear weapons to utterly decimate indian existence on this planet--and getting decimated in process.


There's no other possibility, kid. And We have seen indian establishment getting backed off again and again against Pakistan precisely due to this binary of war possibilities.

 

[Hellfire]

The Pakistani Civilian will have support of Paksitan armed forces and maybe even let say one week of basic training.You have no idea of the Pakistani Population,the reason i told you this is not 71 when we didn't even had sticks to fight.

Our population will take care of india.

We are aware of your population being trained .... we see the results daily on the news don't we?

1- Either Pakistan prevails by thwarting indian attack, making the war useless for both parties, and stopping india at the gates--with both sides taking casualities and both countries returning to status-quo antebellum.

2- OR india breaks through and delivers massive punishment to Pak armed forces and infrastructure---in which scenrio Pakistan unleashes its nuclear weapons to utterly decimate indian existence on this planet--and getting decimated in process.


There's no other possibility, kid.

The third option you have forgotten .... the systematic disruption of the social fabric of Pakistan ... and increased instability to keep it off balance aka asymmetric war.

 

[hussain0216]

We are aware of your population being trained .... we see the results daily on the news don't we?

And considering we have a heavily armed military and very powerful ISI to top that

Indian military and soldiers would be butchered something your military hierarchy knows well

 

[-xXx-]

Ok, Good, superb.

Now can Pakistan stop madness of shouting "nuke" at the drop of hat and do something constructive for humanity?

Save money and launch some satellites, improve medical services and perhaps impart quality education in schools?

 

[temporary12345]

The difference is that unlike 71 when the Pakistanis didn't even had sticks to fight,today its population is armed to teeth.

So this time india won't be fighting the armed forces alone but also the civilian.The civilian that consider fighting against india as some sort of national duty with major portion of the country having the experience of operating guns.

On the other hand the burger population of India not only has ever seen guns in real let alone having them and forgot about firing them.

So we are talking about country full of army against a Billion Population country with an army.

The only thing that it would accomplish is mass slaughter of Pakistani civilians without Indian army being labelled a genocider, as according to GEneva convention: You could freely slaughter armed combatants.

You do not become soldier just by picking up a gun, and armed militias are regularly slaughtered by trained armies.