What's new

Pakistan Army is ready to fight big Army like India.

jab hum tumhe tumhare jutee se maar sakte hai apne haath kyon gande kare ... har hafte tum ek dusre ko maar rahe alll we need do is keep mum let you guys kill each othere.

Today the main threat to Pakistan is not India but the extremism & the militants. It has been more then a decade,more then 50,000 have been killed. It is only after the karachi airport attack u woke up. Law & order is becoming worse day by day,then there is politial voilence between different parties,ethnic voilence. First the petrol crisis followed by Electricity & water,where is Pakistan heading. U can't even see the elephant in yr drawing room

@jbgt90 About the general,Author of Kargil
I can feel all the Kafirs in this post getting a small erection after talking about the death of Pakistani civilians and children's that their state sponsors!
 
.
In 1965, Pakistan won most of the battles and the air war. However, Pakistan failed in its objective of taking Indian occupied Kashmir. As far as damage infliction Pakistan did more damage to India in that war and devastated the Indian Air Force and halted Indian army mobilization and caused them to retreat in many battles.

What was primary objective of PM Lal Bahadur Shastri?
 
.
Dude, What's done is done. Harijan act is reality now. Though i hate it, but can not change the reality. It is not going anywhere. As for Maya, I know she was also a corrupt, but at least she was a dictator. There was no bigger gunda in state than Mayawati. Administration was strict. Crime was low.
While nowadays, every Tata Nano driver with SP flag considers himself supreme authority and threatens with connections of 'Tipu Dadda'. There are at least 7-8 CM in U.p. now from Ramgopal to Azam, Everybody is CM now. U.P. police is puppet in hands of criminals now. Everything is going haywire.

On any given day, I would prefer a dictator Mayawati over whole family of Chief ministers.

Kisi ko freedom achchi lagti hai , kisi ko Dalito ki pairo ki dhool se orgasm hota hai

Apna apna Jaayakaa hai Bhai sahab ! 8-)
 
.
In 1965, Pakistan won most of the battles and the air war. However, Pakistan failed in its objective of taking Indian occupied Kashmir. As far as damage infliction Pakistan did more damage to India in that war and devastated the Indian Air Force and halted Indian army mobilization and caused them to retreat in many battles.

1965 was a failure of pakistan and PAF. The PAF shot down a vast number of planes of IAF on the ground when they attacked without a formal declaration of war. India practically fought 65 war without air cover. Still pakistan and PAF failed to make any inroads.

It was this inability of PAF and pakistani military that encouraged India to take a more aggressive stance in 1971 war. A country that cannot defeat its opponents who has no air cover, what will they do when their air force is fully active.
 
.
In 1965, Pakistan won most of the battles and the air war. However, Pakistan failed in its objective of taking Indian occupied Kashmir. As far as damage infliction Pakistan did more damage to India in that war and devastated the Indian Air Force and halted Indian army mobilization and caused them to retreat in many battles.

And yes thats true, in 65 India was ill-prepared.

Economy was tumbling, there was situation of famine. Food crisis and food inflation was on rocks. And Pak was prospering with US support and its weaponry.

It was India who was not prepared for war at all.
 
. .
Read on him ... he was the evilest of evil hindu out there since ages.

Is he the one who trained Ashoka, and half shaved head with pony? But I think that was Chandar Gupt Moria.
 
. .
In 1965, Pakistan won most of the battles and the air war. However, Pakistan failed in its objective of taking Indian occupied Kashmir. As far as damage infliction Pakistan did more damage to India in that war and devastated the Indian Air Force and halted Indian army mobilization and caused them to retreat in many battles.

Personally, I think Pakistan should have continued the 1965 war as it had the momentum in the Air it could have rained down destruction on Indian ground forces even more and eventually carved out a path for Pakistani land forces to invade further to Indian occupied Kashmir. Winning the air war influences the whole battlefield.
Neutral assessments
There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

  • TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[78] The article further elaborates,
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[18]
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[79] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.
 
. .
1965 was a failure of pakistan and PAF. The PAF shot down a vast number of planes of IAF on the ground when they attacked without a formal declaration of war. India practically fought 65 war without air cover. Still pakistan and PAF failed to make any inroads.

It was this inability of PAF and pakistani military that encouraged India to take a more aggressive stance in 1971 war. A country that cannot defeat its opponents who has no air cover, what will they do when their air force is fully active.

As I said I think Pakistan should have continued the 1965 war. PAF had won the air war and could have rained down destruction on Indian ground forces and carved out of a path to Indian occupied Kashmir. It was a mistake in my opinion to not continue that war when Pakistan had the momentum. Winning the air war allows you to influence the battlefield, and Pakistan did not capitalize on that to achieve it's ultimate objective. It was a failure in assessing the momentum of the time. Leadership and not the soldiers are to be blamed for this.
 
.
You got it wrong, its that Pakistanis make good strategies on paper, but implementing that on the field ends up in disaster for them.

Not exactly. Good strategies are good strategies. But it depends on when you implement them. Kargil for e.g. was a brilliant strategy, just the worst possible time to implement it.
 
.
As I said I think Pakistan should have continued the 1965 war. PAF had won the air war and could have rained down destruction on Indian ground forces and carved out of a path to Indian occupied Kashmir. It was a mistake in my opinion to not continue that war when Pakistan had the momentum. Winning the air war allows you to influence the battlefield, and Pakistan did not capitalize on that to achieve it's ultimate objective. It was a failure in assessing the momentum of the time. Leadership and not the soldiers are to be blamed for this.
Indians will never agree they lost!
 
.
Not exactly. Good strategies are good strategies. But it depends on when you implement them. Kargil for e.g. was a brilliant strategy, just the worst possible time to implement it.


Disagree with you about timing, Pakistan army still holds key strategic points in Kargil to this today. There was no "perfect timing" for an operation such as that, only time you can perform this operation and time you cannot perform this operation as planned.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom