And thats where it never really added up for me ! I can't understand why would such a misadventure be initiated if we weren't in the position of sustaining an all out war on the diplomatic & more so military front. I can understand the argument given that we were banking on the Nukes to bail us out from an all-out-war but I don't understand how we were planning on doing that when we didn't have much in the way of deliverance capability as Musharaf himself pointed out ? I still don't understand why wasn't the PAF or the Navy kept in the loop surely the top military minds no matter how less than exemplary they maybe can't be so naive so as to assume that even a mild escalation of sorts wouldn't lead to an all-out-war or at least a small border skirmish so that at the very least the Airforce & Navy High Command could be notified to have a contingency if something really happened. I can't understand how could seasoned soldiers including Musharaf who had the experience of serving in Siachin & even executing an attempt or two to make some inroads at there would be so utterly oblivious of the logistical & military constraints on any conflict at the positions we were fighting at. I can't understand how could someone, Musharaf, who displayed good diplomacy & the reading of International Politics later on as the Chief Executive & President of Pakistan even if his decisions had a blow-back effect was so utter devoid of that insight that he couldn't judge the response of the International Community when even a lay-man like myself can ? I can't understand how there appeared to be no contingency in place to deal with the situation if Kargil failed, I'm sure even a mid-level Officer is taught that never mind a bunch of Corp Commanders who are seasoned officers with years of Operational, Tactical & Strategic experience under their belts !
So no matter from where I look at it - It doesn't make much sense to me ! I could accept incompetence in a few areas but its very hard for me to rationally accept that the entire Operation & its adjacent decisions were utterly incompetent from A-to-Z; unless we were led by absolute amateurs who hadn't a clue about what the military is, which I don't think was the case, I find it very hard to believe that even less-than-capable officers could so magnanimously fail to appraise the situation properly.
Then theres the other thing - Whatever the objectives were in case of Kargil whether to cut-off Siachin or do something else....why did Pakistan still hold onto some of the peaks & still does till now ? Why....what was the purpose behind it ? Face saving ? I think not ! And why didn't India manage to evict us from what is maintained to be as Indian territory ? Or better yet why didn't India, like '65, cross over the border & attack some of our city centers to relieve some of that pressure either during the war or at its closure when we still had some of those ever so strategic peaks overlooking that Highway ? Was it that farce of a measured response that keeps showing its face over & over again whether it be the '01/02 Stand-Off, the Mumbai Attacks or even the recent alleged beheadings & the ensuing media frenzy ?
So whichever way I look at it - I dunno what happened there & why did it happen ? I think the argument that we failed on the diplomatic front & that we could have sustained it on the Military front may merit a second glance but even that doesn't add up for me ! And so I really don't know about this that much !
And thats where it never really added up for me ! I can't understand why would such a misadventure be initiated if we weren't in the position of sustaining an all out war on the diplomatic & more so military front. I can understand the argument given that we were banking on the Nukes to bail us out from an all-out-war but I don't understand how we were planning on doing that when we didn't have much in the way of deliverance capability as Musharaf himself pointed out ? I still don't understand why wasn't the PAF or the Navy kept in the loop surely the top military minds no matter how less than exemplary they maybe can't be so naive so as to assume that even a mild escalation of sorts wouldn't lead to an all-out-war or at least a small border skirmish so that at the very least the Airforce & Navy High Command could be notified to have a contingency if something really happened. I can't understand how could seasoned soldiers including Musharaf who had the experience of serving in Siachin & even executing an attempt or two to make some inroads at there would be so utterly oblivious of the logistical & military constraints on any conflict at the positions we were fighting at. I can't understand how could someone, Musharaf, who displayed good diplomacy & the reading of International Politics later on as the Chief Executive & President of Pakistan even if his decisions had a blow-back effect was so utter devoid of that insight that he couldn't judge the response of the International Community when even a lay-man like myself can ? I can't understand how there appeared to be no contingency in place to deal with the situation if Kargil failed, I'm sure even a mid-level Officer is taught that never mind a bunch of Corp Commanders who are seasoned officers with years of Operational, Tactical & Strategic experience under their belts !
So no matter from where I look at it - It doesn't make much sense to me ! I could accept incompetence in a few areas but its very hard for me to rationally accept that the entire Operation & its adjacent decisions were utterly incompetent from A-to-Z; unless we were led by absolute amateurs who hadn't a clue about what the military is, which I don't think was the case, I find it very hard to believe that even less-than-capable officers could so magnanimously fail to appraise the situation properly.
Then theres the other thing - Whatever the objectives were in case of Kargil whether to cut-off Siachin or do something else....why did Pakistan still hold onto some of the peaks & still does till now ? Why....what was the purpose behind it ? Face saving ? I think not ! And why didn't India manage to evict us from what is maintained to be as Indian territory ? Or better yet why didn't India, like '65, cross over the border & attack some of our city centers to relieve some of that pressure either during the war or at its closure when we still had some of those ever so strategic peaks overlooking that Highway ? Was it that farce of a measured response that keeps showing its face over & over again whether it be the '01/02 Stand-Off, the Mumbai Attacks or even the recent alleged beheadings & the ensuing media frenzy ?
So whichever way I look at it - I dunno what happened there & why did it happen ? I think the argument that we failed on the diplomatic front & that we could have sustained it on the Military front may merit a second glance but even that doesn't add up for me ! And so I really don't know about this that much !
we can also apply for commission based officer on MBA basis
LOLOL
ab sabkuch chup chup ke karna padta hai. Galti se boldiya bewde dinon ke bare me abhi udhar hai to bhi, shyam ko phone aata hai for checking ki kya kar raha hai ye.
aur bolta hu ki "kuch aisa waisa nahi kiya" 
