Pakistan Army is ready to fight big Army like India.

[SQ8]

Again Pak nightmare. So, how it was good military strategy?

The Kargil strategy was best implemented during a semi-wartime approach as a responsive move to an Indian incursion rather than being an offensive move from the start. It was the ace in the hole that in a modified form would have created serious pressure on Indian resources during wartime.

NOTE TO ALL: On topic only or find yourself Shackled quickly.

 

[Indian Patriot]

Incorrect, the soldiers were fairly motivated but without a sound translation of the plan it was bound to fail.
Have a read.
Aeronaut: Kargil Conflict and Pakistan Air Force

The soldiers motivation cracked up and India upped the pressure. The Pakistani troops on the heights were outgunned, outnumbered and left with no support. The diplomatic offensive against Pakistan was something that the Pakistanis did not take into consideration. Things turned worse when even China kept mum. The world sided with India and Pakistan refused to aid and supply their troops. It was only a matter of time before they were cut down.

Left with dwindling supplies their morale was broken and they lost the will to fight. The planning was good at the concept level, even the execution was good because the Pakistanis managed to capture the heights without Indian knowledge. From then on it was downhill. The diplomatic fallout and Indian counter-offensive both were underestimated while the Pakistani military was overestimated.

The Kargil strategy was best implemented during a semi-wartime approach as a responsive move to an Indian incursion rather than being an offensive move from the start. It was the ace in the hole that in a modified form would have created serious pressure on Indian resources during wartime.

The Kargil operation was offensive in nature. The plan was to occupy uninhabited Indian posts when both sides vacate their positions in winter. In war time the posts will be manned, so how do you think the plan could have been operational. The whole Kargil operation was based on speed and surprise. The objective of Kargil was to cut off Ladakh and force India onto the negotiating table under Pakistani terms. These things cannot be done in war time or in a "defensive" manner.

It was a game of political dare and Pakistan blinked first. As I said they did not expect such a hostile international condemnation and they underestimated the Indian military response. India deployed IAF but for some reason Pakistan could not do the same. (Of course now many thinkers would give different opinion but the actual cause would be classified).

 

[suresh1773]

Bravery of Indian people after wagah bomb blasts

The Indians thought some suicide bomber will attack the place once again,it was just a matter of precaution.

 

[Yaduveer]

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.

Gustakhi muaaf Janab , Kargil was good tactics but bad strategy . Kargil could be a good action during an all out India-Pakistan war.
But kargil alone don't stand on it's feet.

 

[wolfschanzze]

Yawn,wake us up when you were able to defeat us,You know what we did in 47,65,71,99.
This same brilliant tactician General Musharaff went crying to Pm Nawaz Sharif asking him to beg in front of USA to mediate a ceasefire n Kargil.
'Musharraf begged for Kargil ceasefire'

 

[kaku1]

The Kargil strategy was best implemented during a semi-wartime approach as a responsive move to an Indian incursion rather than being an offensive move from the start.

Again military strategy is not jus about invade..but also about to hold it. And fullfil strategic goals. If you dont meet then its a failure.. And that was bad strategy. Period.

Lol..even i have seen Pakistanis taking pride of winning air battles of 65. But again what was objectives.

Again.. Winning against india doesnt mean..you won the wc.

It was the ace in the hole that in a modified form would have created serious pressure on Indian resources during wartime.

Just to show this.. Musshy killed 3000 of its own men. What a egoistic move.

NOTE TO ALL: On topic only or find yourself Shackled quickly.[/QUOTE]

 

[singh sahab]

Again military strategy is not jus about invade..but also about to hold it. And fullfil strategic goals. If you dont meet then its a failure.. And that was bad strategy. Period.

Lol..even i have seen Pakistanis taking pride of winning air battles of 65. But again what was objectives.

Again.. Winning against india doesnt mean..you won the wc.


Just to show this.. Musshy killed 3000 of its own men. What a egoistic move.

NOTE TO ALL: On topic only or find yourself Shackled quickly.

[/QUOTE]
LOl, that bold underlined part almost made me pee, laughing

 

[SQ8]

Again military strategy is not jus about invade..but also about to hold it. And fullfil strategic goals. If you dont meet then its a failure.. And that was bad strategy. Period.

Lol..even i have seen Pakistanis taking pride of winning air battles of 65. But again what was objectives.

Again.. Winning against india doesnt mean..you won the wc.


Just to show this.. Musshy killed 3000 of its own men. What a egoistic move.

NOTE TO ALL: On topic only or find yourself Shackled quickly.

[/QUOTE]

Again your opinion, it seems less objective and more focused on "Pakistan fucks up no matter what". Something I do not disagree with, but have better sense to give credit where it is due rather than just dissing.

 

[kaku1]

Again your opinion, it seems less objective and more focused on "Pakistan fucks up no matter what". Something I do not disagree with, but have better sense to give credit where it is due rather than just dissing.

No..if india fucks up in kargil..then i accept that. Like we fucks up in 62 and almost fucked up in 65.. Because cost of war was terrible for a bad conditioned economy.

But in 99..Pak was fucked up actually diplomatically( defamation was terrible for pak..and india crucified Pak), militarically and politically( 99 coup).

 

[SQ8]

No..if india fucks up in kargil..then i accept that. Like we fucks up in 62 and almost fucked up in 65.. Because cost of war was terrible for a bad conditioned economy.

But in 99..Pak was fucked up actually diplomatically( defamation was terrible for pak..and india crucified Pak), militarically and politically( 99 coup).

Not disagreeing, but there is a difference in how the operation is perceived; You continue with dissing our soldiers and calling the entire operation a mess up, I see it as a good idea wasted along with good troops.

 

[haviZsultan]

The Kargil strategy was best implemented during a semi-wartime approach as a responsive move to an Indian incursion rather than being an offensive move from the start. It was the ace in the hole that in a modified form would have created serious pressure on Indian resources during wartime.

NOTE TO ALL: On topic only or find yourself Shackled quickly.

Kargil was also in response to Siachen incident when India despite being unthreatened decided to take 1000 km's of territory from us. US turned a blind eye to that but supported India in the kargil episode.

 

[SQ8]

Kargil was also in response to Siachen incident when India despite being unthreatened decided to take 1000 km's of territory from us. US turned a blind eye to that but supported India in the kargil episode.

Off course it will, at the end of the day.. the plans for the region entail a Pakistan like a lifetime amputee and gastric issues patient. It cannot be allowed to fail, but at the same time careful management is required to ensure that it does not succeed either; such is the role of useful buffer states in the entire world.
There is no conspiracy theory here, its just international consensus seeing what works best in the interest of a lot of nations.

 

[kaku1]

Not disagreeing, but there is a difference in how the operation is perceived; You continue with dissing our soldiers and calling the entire operation a mess up, I see it as a good idea wasted along with good troops.

Lol..no. I am just saying, you cant go to war with just a one aspect in mind. And forgetting about all other that they are irrelevent.

Equation cant be completed with one variable in knowledge.

Even see actually how the Mrs. Gandhi won the 71. The invasion was decided in March. But again she thought about every aspect,, and worked upon it. It took 9 month to plan the attack..and everybody knows inside PMO that what India next step going to happen.

 

[singh sahab]

Kargil was also in response to Siachen incident when India despite being unthreatened decided to take 1000 km's of territory from us. US turned a blind eye to that but supported India in the kargil episode.

Kargil - 99. Siachin - 84. Can you please show me the connection?
And please explain the bold part.

 

[SQ8]

Lol..no. I am just saying, you cant go to war with just a one aspect in mind. And forgetting about all other that they are irrelevent.

Equation cant be completed with one variable in knowledge.

Even see actually how the Mrs. Gandhi won the 71. The invasion was decided in March. But again she thought about every aspect,, and worked upon it. It took 9 month to plan the attack..and everybody knows inside PMO that what India next step going to happen.

I dont disagree with that either, not sure why you continue to focus on why Kargil happened rather than what the tactical movement in Kargil entailed and its merits; which is what I am talking about.