Jungibaaz
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2010
- Messages
- 8,756
- Reaction score
- 113
- Country
- Location
It’s as we all expected that nothing ought to have caused a botched raid on the 26th, apart from human error and glitches in planning. And as expected our RoEs on day one would have always severely restricted the effectiveness of our interception of the strike package.
I agree with the members above, going forward, had the seminary have been hit successfully, we might have waited a little while longer to capitalise on the media angle of displaying an Indian war crime and gross display of barbarism. But when we do eventually strike back, at a minimum we’d have intended to inflict large numbers of casualties, strike a larger number of targets than we did on the 27th. And PAF would go in expecting the IAF to intercept aggressively with much relaxed RoEs. We have to factor in that in this scenario the IAF would be fully expecting a big response and would perhaps be better prepared than they were.
This whole scenario is way more dangerous than the actual one turned out. Neither side would be able to back down as easily as they did, even if escalation was somehow pre-emoted by international pressure and panic, the political situation in both countries would be conducive to another clash as soon as feasible.
The real question for us is. What would swift retort have looked like had the Indians actually murdered a seminary full of kids. The gloves would be off for sure. APS like national outrage, we’d all be baying for blood.
Rafales are very capable, and nothing even stopped the IAF from pulling a swift retort on us on the 26th. I think both sides proved that whoever is attacking, tends to do so in a way that maximises their own chances of success and plans to thwart any interception.
As long as we have the capacity to respond in turn, we can expect the Indians to perhaps proceed with caution. They should realise that limited strikes with no Pakistani response are not possible based on their size alone. They lack the substantial tech asymmetry required.
I agree with the members above, going forward, had the seminary have been hit successfully, we might have waited a little while longer to capitalise on the media angle of displaying an Indian war crime and gross display of barbarism. But when we do eventually strike back, at a minimum we’d have intended to inflict large numbers of casualties, strike a larger number of targets than we did on the 27th. And PAF would go in expecting the IAF to intercept aggressively with much relaxed RoEs. We have to factor in that in this scenario the IAF would be fully expecting a big response and would perhaps be better prepared than they were.
This whole scenario is way more dangerous than the actual one turned out. Neither side would be able to back down as easily as they did, even if escalation was somehow pre-emoted by international pressure and panic, the political situation in both countries would be conducive to another clash as soon as feasible.
The real question for us is. What would swift retort have looked like had the Indians actually murdered a seminary full of kids. The gloves would be off for sure. APS like national outrage, we’d all be baying for blood.
what stops India from optimally utilizing their current assets? Even removing Rafales from the next scenario, we are still at a disadvantageous position if they manage to effectively utilize their fighter aircrafts and tactics. And I am sure after the Feb 27th event, PAF will probably be in for a rude awakening in the next conflict.
The only advantage PAF has is superior tactics and strategy. But it is a function based on humans which are prone to make mistakes. I am just trying to remind everyone that the same Indian vulnerabilities that help us can be present at our end in the future too.
We can not afford to dismiss or remain oblivious to our limitations.
Rafales are very capable, and nothing even stopped the IAF from pulling a swift retort on us on the 26th. I think both sides proved that whoever is attacking, tends to do so in a way that maximises their own chances of success and plans to thwart any interception.
As long as we have the capacity to respond in turn, we can expect the Indians to perhaps proceed with caution. They should realise that limited strikes with no Pakistani response are not possible based on their size alone. They lack the substantial tech asymmetry required.
Last edited: