India's conventional military superiority over Pakistan is exaggerated.

[Piper]

The focus still remains is Indian is fast loosing it's conventional edge. Irrespective of Pakistan's variations in conventional platforms, Indian systems are depleting faster than we can induct new units or modernize existing platforms.

Previous dispensation showed extreme institutional inaction severely dented the Armed forces modernization programs. So yes, India military strength has been diluted as a side effect of political bickering, weak leadership, lack of ownership and ineffective planning. It will take atleast 5-6 years for the process to get back on the envisioned roadmap.

Is there really a road map? Most forces spend more based on extraneous considerations rather exacting ones leading to a snowballing situation as the opposing side does the same.

Let's say there is a road map and take case of most often discussed parameter i.e. is no of fighter squadrons.

a. Assuming China has 100 squadrons and Pakistan 25 or 30 and are projected to not only maintain but exceed the current numbers. What does India do? Match on some proportional basis. So India increases its numbers to 75 (at expense of welfare programs).

b. India has 75 squadrons planned. What does Pakistan do? Increase their numbers to 50.

c. US has 150 squadrons, Japan has 30 squadrons, India 75, Vietnam 20, and so on and so forth. To keep up China increases their numbers to 150.

Now coming back to India.....

If anyone plays this game and almost everyone is playing this game...it leads to militarized society looking for return on investment on their expensive toys, thus making war more and more likely. The question is does India want to get out of the loop or knowingly commit itself to the rat race

 

[MilSpec]

Is there really a road map? Most forces spend more based on extraneous considerations rather exacting ones leading to a snowballing situation as the opposing side does the same.

Let's say there is a road map and take case of most often discussed parameter i.e. is no of fighter squadrons.

a. Assuming China has 100 squadrons and Pakistan 25 or 30 and are projected to not only maintain but exceed the current numbers. What does India do? Match on some proportional basis. So India increases its numbers to 75 (at expense of welfare programs).

b. India has 75 squadrons planned. What does Pakistan do? Increase their numbers to 50.

c. US has 150 squadrons, Japan has 30 squadrons, India 75, Vietnam 20, and so on and so forth. To keep up China increases their numbers to 150.

Now coming back to India.....

If anyone plays this game and almost everyone is playing this game...it leads to militarized society looking for return on investment on their expensive toys, thus making war more and more likely. The question is does India want to get out of the loop or knowingly commit itself to the rat race

It has to for it's defense, If China and Pakistan increase their squadron strength, India will have to do what it needs to do for it's defense especially when surrounded by nuclear adversaries. But strategic road maps are not changed every day, unless we see a credible threat towards major imbalance, we continue on the current vision (with abysmal delivery on that too) and if there is a major strategic development, then we re calibrate our plans.

Given the fact that India's Military Budget is less than 2% of it's GDP, there is lot less to worry here.

 

[Windjammer]

The focus still remains is Indian is fast loosing it's conventional edge. Irrespective of Pakistan's variations in conventional platforms, Indian systems are depleting faster than we can induct new units or modernize existing platforms.

Previous dispensation showed extreme institutional inaction severely dented the Armed forces modernization programs. So yes, India military strength has been diluted as a side effect of political bickering, weak leadership, lack of ownership and ineffective planning. It will take atleast 5-6 years for the process to get back on the envisioned roadmap.




I will let your own ACM refute you.

Oh the irony, although he wasn't in charge either in 1965 or '71 however when the likes of him or Nawaz Sharif comment, it becomes the gospel truth but when some Indian commander blows the cover, it's either a ploy for more funds or they are ridiculed for not getting promoted or something....didn't the another revised version of IAF history touched some harsh truth.

 

[MilSpec]

What Indian strategists are missing is the 180 million people of Pakistan that will fight shoulder to shoulder with Pak army with a motivation of Jihad (the word that causes countless nightmares and sleepless nights for the fanatics in the Indian establishment). There will be no Punjabi, Sindhi, Pathan or Balochi...but Pakistani Muslims So I advise Indian strategists to update their calculations and I'm telling them this in advance and also the subscribers of Ghazwa-e-Hind are not in a small number and they will eat likes of @OrionHunter for a snack.

Beautiful sentiment of "when push comes to shove- everyone fights till last breath", unfortunately the reality is when push comes to shove you military's self preservation streak activates and it does what it has to do to survive. Even if it means surrendering 50K plus soldiers. Don't take this negatively, it's the most logical thing to do, live today to fight tomorrow. That is self preservation, and for Pakistani military there is a twist in war, Every war it looses, it wins the administration in Pakistan. So win or lose, there is a always an incentive for your military leadership.

Oh the irony, although he wasn't in charge either in 1965 or '71 however when the likes of him or Nawaz Sharif comment, it becomes the gospel truth but when some Indian commander blows the cover, it's either a ploy for more funds or they are ridiculed for not getting promoted or something....didn't the another revised version of IAF history touched some harsh truth.

How about this guy then.

This in short is Nur Khan’s version of 1965 war, which he calls an unnecessary war and says that President Ayub for whom he has the greatest regard should have held his senior generals accountable for the debacle and himself resigned.

This would have held the hands of the adventurers who followed Gen Ayub. Since the 1965 war was based on a big lie and was presented to the nation a great victory, the Army came to believe its own fiction and has used since, Ayub as its role model and therefore has continued to fight unwanted wars — the 1971 war and the Kargil fiasco in 1999, he said.

In each of the subsequent wars we have committed the same mistakes that we committed in 1965.

Air Marshal Khan demanded that a truth commission formed to find out why we failed in all our military adventures. It is not punishment of the failed leadership that should be the aim of the commission but sifting of facts from fiction and laying bare the follies and foibles of the irresponsible leaders in matters with grave implications for the nation. It should also point out the irregularities committed in training and promotions in the defence forces in the past so that it is not repeated in future


Nur Khan reminisces ’65 war - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

let me know if ACM too is ill informed, There is more where this came from.

 

[Centurion2016]

The more global attention India gets in Europe USA,or the middleast the more we see desperate posts and threads of mythical Pakistani greatness.

Today we have claims of a a beautiful race.

Can I suggest a weekend in Barcelona to see beautitful race or indeed Italy. I go to both and they are classy stunning races.

're the conventional.gap you need to explain. How.cause in the last decade Pakistan has acquired nothing that changes the balance.

India has better air power better navy and missiles. And better awacs. Larger nos of tanks ifv helicopters and apcs. They spend more in training and have better infrastructure due to six times the budget.

You need to qualify your reasoning not just shout we are better .

Explain. How give me facts.

I.'ll start

Two carriers v nil
Two nuke subs v nil
Three to one ratio in modern fourth gen fighters
Three one ratio in mbrl
Three to one in helicopters
Better awacs ie phalcon
Better maritime planes
Better Sam systems


Now your turn people

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Who won after 14 pages ?

This is India and Pakistan case. It won't end in just mere 14 pages man.

 

[90ArsalanLeo]

The more global attention India gets in Europe USA,or the middleast the more we see desperate posts and threads of mythical Pakistani greatness.

Today we have claims of a a beautiful race.

Can I suggest a weekend in Barcelona to see beautitful race or indeed Italy. I go to both and they are classy stunning races.

're the conventional.gap you need to explain. How.cause in the last decade Pakistan has acquired nothing that changes the balance.

India has better air power better navy and missiles. And better awacs. Larger nos of tanks ifv helicopters and apcs. They spend more in training and have better infrastructure due to six times the budget.

You need to qualify your reasoning not just shout we are better .

Explain. How give me facts.

I.'ll start

Two carriers v nil
Two nuke subs v nil
Three to one ratio in modern fourth gen fighters
Three one ratio in mbrl
Three to one in helicopters
Better awacs ie phalcon
Better maritime planes
Better Sam systems


Now your turn people

1 carrier INS vikrant (R11) 1971 war never left Mumbai Port out of fear from just 1 Pakistan Submarine PNS Ghazi as most other indian navy (read operation dwarka see how deep PN penetrated in india without getting any resistance)
3 to 1 ratio has always been maintained despite that PAF annihilated IAF in 1965 & 1971 wars (google that)
I dont need to talk about helicopter too the same ratio. Same shit indian pilots
India always had numerical superiority over Pakistan in every branch of army yet Pakistan is standing after 2 wars India cant directly beat us thats why they are fighting 4th gen war.
So back off Centurion dont talk rubbish if u dont know the topic & history

 

[niaz]

Per Military Balance of 2016, Indian Army has 1.346-million men in uniform of which Army is 1.15-million, Navy 58.34 K & Air Force 127.2 K & Coast Guard 9.55 K. Additionally, there is 1.4-million paramilitary. Pakistan on the other hand has total of 643.8 K in uniform (Army 550 K, Navy 23.8 K & Air force 70 K. Paramilitary 282 K .

Once you have the active military manpower in place, the same can easily be moved from one front to another as it happened in 2002 when Indian mobilised 500 K troops on her Western border after the attack on Indian parliament.

Air force is one of the most important instruments of war in modern combat. Indian arsenal includes 225 SU-30 MK1, 50 updated Mirage 2000 & 62 Mig-29’s. Pakistan is limited to 76 F-16 and about 60 JF-17.

India is planning to spend $100-billion in next 10 years. Pakistan could not find $700- million for the badly needed F-16’s. Despite the above I am being told that Indian superiority in conventional forces is exaggerated!!!!!.

NO Sir, I don’t buy it. IMHO this is article deliberately written to mislead naïve Pakistani public. We must remember Allama Iqbal famous saying. “Hey jurm–e- zaefi ki saza marg-e mafajaat”. Meaning penalty of the crime of weakness is sudden death.

We underestimate India at our peril.

 

[war&peace]

unfortunately the reality is when push comes to shove you military's self preservation streak activates and it does what it has to do to survive.

I don't want to go in the past since that's irrelevant but you said the right thing that military knows what to do...and that is... just to press few big buttons and create a 10 dozen smiling budha mushrooms over as much Indian cities....that's what they will do whether you like it or not...or may be you are not there to show reaction since you already got owned by a smiling budha

 

[BRAVO_]

yar some of indian fanboys are really not making any seance at all they are just keep posting on and on trying to prove that it will be a walk over for india if they attacked paksitan ... really strange ... ok .. for an instance let me quote you some facts about kargil war it was the most recent clash between both nations

Strength engaged by India : 30,000
Pakistani Strength engaged: 5000

NO. of Indian Causalities: 527
No. of Pakistani Casualties: Official 357 - un-official 453

No. of Indian wounded : 1363
No. of Pakistani Wounded: 665

Indian Captured POW: 1
Pakistan Captured POW: 8

Indian Jet Fighter Down: 1

Indian Jet Fighter Crashed: 1

Indian Helicopter Down : 1


Pakistani Airfrce did;t participated in the conflict therefore, no loses reported.

The Indian Artillery fired over 250,000 shells, bombs and rockets during the Kargil conflict. Approximately, 5,000 Artillery shells, mortar bombs and rockets were fired daily from 300 guns, mortars and MBRLs. Such high rates of fire over long periods had not been witnessed anywhere in the world since the second World War.

According to indian sources the cost of the kargil war was 10,000 + crores INR.

At the end of war Pakistan army is still holding Point 5353 a strategic point

What makes Point 5353 so valuable for the two armies is that it has a clear view of the national highway that connects the Kashmir valley with Kargil. The main reason the Army retaliated hard to the Pakistani intrusion in 1999 was that disruption of traffic on the road would cut off supplies to Ladakh and the Siachen glacier.

While indian military officers say that Point 5353 is surrounded by three Indian posts, including Point 5240 and any action from there would be neutralised, the fact remains that artillery observers from the post can easily direct fire on a 25 km stretch of the national highway.

So conclusion .. There are no chances of any full fledged war between india and paksitan. which mean both countries will observe proxy wars in future.

 

[MilSpec]

I don't want to go in the past since that's irrelevant but you said the right thing that military knows what to do...and that is... just to press few big buttons and create a 10 dozen smiling budha mushrooms over as much Indian cities....that's what they will do whether you like it or not...or may be you are not there to show reaction since you already got owned by a smiling budha

Again same argument, You nuke, we nuke. both get destroyed. There is a stark difference between India and Pakistan, My Country has a military, but your Military has a country. Why would it do something to undermine that. Mutually assured destruction means the end, a simple loss at India's hand means another decade of consolidation of military rule. The past as you put is not at all irrelevant, it shows the character of state machinery. You did not fight till the last man back then, you won't in the future either, That is the less damaging, and more profitable solution for Pakistani military leadership. Win a war, become a hero, lose a war, become the President.

 

[dadeechi]

Indian strategy appears to be employing overwhelming force against Pak thin defenses as observed in the previous wars. Pak needs to hold territory whatever resources available like one platoon against a brigade, or a column of tanks against the entire armored corps or a lone fighter against the half of a squadron..

Even though Pakistan's forces may be small they are highly motivated as they are trained with emotional Islamic principles unlike Indian forces which are trained using non emotional secular principles.

That is where Pakistan has upper hand over India.

 

[MilSpec]

1 carrier INS vikrant (R11) 1971 war never left Mumbai Port

Are you sure about that....

 

[war&peace]

Again same argument, You nuke, we nuke. both get destroyed. There is a stark difference between India and Pakistan, My Country has a military, but your Military has a country. Why would it do something to undermine that. Mutually assured destruction means the end, a simple loss at India's hand means another decade of consolidation of military rule. The past as you put is not at all irrelevant, it shows the character of state machinery. You did not fight till the last man back then, you won't in the future either, That is the less damaging, and more profitable solution for Pakistani military leadership. Win a war, become a hero, lose a war, become the President.

Sir, I say times have changed and it is not the same leadership or military, you free to make whatever assumptions you want and say whatever you. I cannot force anyone but I am telling you the truth. That will be the final war between India and Pakistan.

 

[Sliver]

on a cheeky note.. if anyone follows "epic rap battles of history", i can sum up the OP's write up about questioning India's conventional superiority in one sentence:

there are 10 million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, million, particles in the universe that you can observe... your mama took the ugly ones and put them into one nerd. (from ERB of History - Einstien vs Stephen hawking)

bascially you have taken all the ills of the system and put them into one article to show them in complete bad light, while the optimist takes all the positives and shows them in a glorious way... the truth.. usually lies somewhere in between.

If Pakistan was not convinced of India's conventional superiority, it would not have jumped into either Chinese or US band wagon or would not have to make TNWs to restore parity.