Mav3rick
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 6,946
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
I am sure even people at your end will accept that our role was much more that playing second fiddle...Anyways Off Topic so let's not digress...I might be mistaken but i thought you were saying that Kargil was a military victory for Pakistan...Anyhow since you have rightly said here that India won the Kargil war there is nothing much to talk...So let me move on to the rest of the post.
You can claim your role to be whatever you want it to be, however everybody knows what happened in '71. And I have said on many occasions that we could not achieve our objective....our 'political' objective so despite our military victory it was an eventual loss. I do not really consider holding on to some peaks as a victory especially when we could not achieve what we had set out to do, i.e. force a Kashmir resolution.
No it doesn't and once again i would request you to study the terrain...it certainly helped us in cutting down the supplies and that was the major impact but it was not powerful enough to smoke out your men until they had the ammunition/ration and will to fight.. IA still had to fight the enemy head on where even a misfired bullet could easily result a fatal injury on our side.
Since there never was a plan to keep a logistic/supply chain, your whole claim of cutting supplies is pointless. Had there ever been a plan for continued support, Kargil would have ended in a logical conclusion.......most likely a final conclusion.
Look the pride of that battle was 120 men holding on to their positions irrespective of the fact that hunter's could not have helped them in the night. PA could have easily run over them especially given the fact that they were backed by tank regiment...so no i don't think the odds were even...
Just a few lines up you were singing the tales of terrain but your have conveniently forgotten how the terrain at Longewaala never supported Tank movement. Without the aid of terrain, even 120 'supermen' would have been unable to hold on to their posts. Indian soldiers fought bravely, but they too had the upper hand. And it was the support of IAF that turned the tables finally. All the 120 men could do was to hold on to their positions until IAF came to the rescue.
Look 5353 has been discussed many times on PDF as well so don't have the appetite for it anymore...However i will just say that if it is the most strategic peak then good for you...However just because you are holding on to that Peak doesn't necessarily mean that you won the war even in Military terms(if that is what you want to claim by bringing in that discussion)...
That's not what I wish to suggest when I boast that we still hold on to that peak. What I merely want to prove is that Indian Military was unable to push us out until we decided to pull back from many positions due to extreme external diplomatic pressure.