‘Pakistan’s armed forces far better today than ’65, ’71’

[Joe Shearer]

So are their opponents.

you are trying to take General's statement out of context.

He means we are much better prepared to face the challenges.

That's all.




Joe sahib

Keon phas rahay hain iss dard sari main

--- Why are you taking on this headache of little puny kids devoid of any knowledge of history?


if you have to then keep the Bharati guys in check

let me trounce the $tupids from my side of the border.

LOL.

Yes, Sir!

 

[Genghis khan1]

False assessment. I totally disagree. Conventional weapon gap between India and Pakistan is increasing rapidly, Especially, Navy and Airforce. These retired generals need to get their ego heads out of their *** and start telling the nation the truth so that problem can be rectified.

 

[Joe Shearer]

We supported freedom fighters in 1965. We never started war with India. Your senior's bragged to capture Lahore Gymkhana before breakfast and eneded up defending themselves.

Regular Pakistan Army soldiers in twenty two columns trained by General Mitha were infiltrated and twenty one of them were cut to pieces. There was not a single Kashmiri who had risen for you to support them. You started the war with Gibraltar, expanded it with Grand Slam, and ended it with a whimper in the killing fields of Asal Uttar.

The seniors bragging about capturing Lahore Gymkhana was always a figment of a journalist's imagination. It is nowhere to be found except in the crowing on a dungheap of fanboys.

I suggest you improve your background reading and your knowledge. I congratulated you on a quick promotion, I commiserate now on your finding that these are deep waters.

@FaujHistorian

Apologies. I shall get out of general posting on the thread with this post. And I shall remain in it only for the purpose recommended by you.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Sir try to understand my point.

Fight in no man's land is common across the world. The one escalated the conflict to international broder , and lunched conventional attack to capture strategic objective actually lost the war.

Sorry yaar. Let me say this with utmost respect.

This is not YOUR point. This $hit has been peddled in our history books and in our media. But there are plenty of Pakistani sources that will prove YOUR point to be wrong.

Remember one thing about the war history.

If you ever fork it, it will doubly fork you back. War is the true teacher who will never forgive your mistakes.

So please do not mess with war history or military history.

Thank you

 

[Joe Shearer]

So did anything happen ?

Or was the evidence sanitized and life back to normal again ?

I have fluid leaking from my left nostril currently so difficulty typing and mopping simultaneously.

Cheers, Doc

A hot brandy?

 

[FaujHistorian]

Agreed. In my opinion this applies well here

Off course.

Thank you

A hot brandy?

hahahahahaahahh


Now thanks to your post "fluid leaks from my right nostril....."

Joe you are a terrible man. bad man. Very very very bad man (from Seinfeld comedy show) .

 

[Stannis Baratheon]

Are you saying that Mukti Bahini defeated Pakistan ? Was Pakistan so weak ? I never knew this storey If thats the case , better India withdraws all armed forces from West border. We can send all out Police constables from the bordering states to guard, may be they might walk into Islamabad next day

Why wuld India need to attack Bangladesh when it has turned Bangladesh into a satellite state! Also, remember 2001 border clash, where your so called BSF were kicked in the *** by a bunch of civilians and a few BDR. Maybe India doesn't try to pick a fight with us because you know what we can do to you if you do.

 

[spsk]

Why wuld India need to attack Bangladesh when it has turned Bangladesh into a satellite state! Also, remember 2001 border clash, where your so called BSF were kicked in the *** by a bunch of civilians and a few BDR. Maybe India doesn't try to pick a fight with us because you know what we can do to you if you do.

Are you dumb? Read my post again.

 

[Stannis Baratheon]

Are you dumb? Read my post again.

I read it quite well, it's you who can't admit the truth.

 

[spsk]

I read it quite well, it's you who can't admit the truth.

chill out buddy, Anyways I meat to deploy our police towards Pakistan not on Bangladesh. Are you from Pakistan ?

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Pakistan is managing to hold Kashmir and balochistan only because of your allies US and China. Wait for US to engage China over Taiwan Then we will see the real firepower

BLA insurgency is near over; they are hiding in the mountains and only number in less than 200. Nobody in Balochistan likes them and now even the Baloch tribes are fighting them. You guys are all talk, when someone picks up the gun; you guys shit your self. Just like the two stand-offs before.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Why wuld India need to attack Bangladesh when it has turned Bangladesh into a satellite state! Also, remember 2001 border clash, where your so called BSF were kicked in the *** by a bunch of civilians and a few BDR. Maybe India doesn't try to pick a fight with us because you know what we can do to you if you do.

I have frequently stayed awake nights WORRIED because we know what you can do to us if we do.

 

[xyxmt]

MY computer today is 100 fold more powerful than my first computer in 1987

 

[Spring Onion]

i came to this thread just to read Joe Shearer but ehhh dint know too many bharotis are infesting the thread

 

[deckingraj]

I respect your opinion however there are some obvious flaws...Please note my intention is not to degrade/chest thump here...

I don't want this to turn into yet another 1965 war narrative. But here is my brief understanding of that war, especially after reading (from the NY Times paid archives) from 7th Sept. till the end of the war: The Indian attack through the international border was judged as a "classic" diversionary move to relieve the pressure in Indian-held Kashmir. It didn't seem like India was much interested in escalation and neither was Pakistan. But for weeks there WERE a lot of Indian moves into W. Pakistan to go deep but they met fierce resistance--indeed, Pakistani forces managed something well beyond the war-capabilities. That CAN'T be taken away.

I am in agreement here...Pakistan did well to safegaurd West Pakistan(of that time) from an Indian onslaught...however we also need to keep in mind on some of key words used above...."escalation was not desired"....think about it...it was a diversionary move which means the main intent behind was to relive pressure in Kashmir...now i am not trying to defend IA not able to make deep inroads or taking away PA defending their home turf however just want to highlight that capturing Pak territory deep inside was perhaps not the main intent nevertheless an intent!!

Also, Ayub Khan is on record to have said that Indian forces were well-equipped--better than they were in 1962. Ayub blamed the West for the advanced Indian weaponry. Ayub said that India used the China bogeyman to acquire sophisticated weapons between 1962-65, only to use them against Pakistan. So, while our Indian PDF guests may be partially correct that Pakistan had qualitative advantage I think the Indian weaponry was not that bad--and neither was Indian war "preparedness" especially in light of 1962.

Now this is where you are going wrong...1962 was perhaps an awakening for us. Prior to that our beloved(pun intended) chacha Nehru was of the opinion that NAM is the way to go and Army is a waste of resource....what a moron!!

Think about it ....IA is huge as compared to PA so 3 years in that context is too small a time to induct things, prepare doctrines, create infrastructure/ground support, provide it to your huge army and train them to fight a war!! ...no??

Pakistan which was a member of CENTO, Seato in 1955 and flogging GDP rate higher than India was in much better shape than Indian Army...Indian Army major force at that time was its numerical superiority. This is also quiet evident from the fact that by the time ceasefire came into picture 80% of our ammunition was intact as compared to 20% of yours...Had war continued a bit longer PA would have find it very difficult.... In short we can't ignore that PA army was enjoying the best toys of that time and perhaps the only time in history where IN had no answers to PN(though navy hardly play a role however used just to prove a point)

My personal opinion is that Pakistanis are justified to claim a "victory" in light of the odds--a purely military victory, and not a political or strategic victory. The Indian advancement for weeks was going to take a life of its own to "degrade" or even destroy the Pakistani state and yet that was not achieved.

Bold part is wrong and sorry to say this piece smells hypocricy as well...IA did want to destroy PA however that idea was floated in 71 war which never got political nod and thus died...In 65 had the aim of destroying PA then perhaps an easier target would have been eastern Pakistan, no?? We would have gone and capture that Area and played defensive in western flank...

Also on one hand you justified claiming victory by saying that Indian Army failed to achieve objective of destroying PA(which is more of a speculation) however simply ignoring the PA objectives(which actually was the aggressor) failure viz-a-viz Gramdslam and Gibralatar....

As for 1971--it was essentially a victory for the Bangladeshi nationalists--as our BD friend rightly says above. India came in very late when the war was essentially already lost. Other than the humiliation of surrender--in a war of extremely heavy odds--Pakistanis don't cry over the loss of E. Pakistan. In fact, the loss of E. Pakistan was almost taken with a stride. Remember that: Even General McArthur had to run away with his tail between his legs at the height of American power in the Korean War.

Now this is intellectual dishonesty....Your eastern flank was never protected enough and "Defence of East lies in West" was your military staff planners mantra...check your history books...this is not something that we made...Your western flank failed to make any major inroads into our borders and that is where you lost the war...This is the time when India military was getting all the goodies from USSR and was turning into a major force to rekon with....IN which was literraly cooling heals in 65 war turned the tide never to look back from there....

On topic: Indeed, the missile capabilities of Pakistan are very lethal for India (and of course vice versa). Combine that with the upgraded air defense systems of Pakistan, I don't think, in a war on defensive footing, India can 'win' without destroying India itself. And I am not going to bother mention the nukes--they should never be used or even discussed. Only countries like Uncle Sam, Russia, and China can attack Pakistan and be "victorious" as things stand now.

If you are talking in purely conventional terms then I am sorry but you have lost the edge...An army which was more of an aggressor has simply shed the role and turned into a defensive force...if you are bringing in nukes then i believe even china will not go victorious....the day you field a true ICBM then you can strike Russia and USA as well...because nobody win's a nuclear war...simple!!