Pakistan's Millitry has to emphasiz doctrine of "offensive defense,"

[batmannow]

One ideally needs a 25:1 ratio in terms of men to combat guerilla conflicts (both local and foreign).

A 10:1 ratio is a bare necessity. A guerilla war isn't a war; it is more police-work with somewhat heavy weapons.

If we reduce our troops, the guerilla war picks up again. There is no start and end to a guerilla war... It is perpetually moving to and fro...

Our troop presence in our side of J&K has to go hand in hand with slow and steady development.


Batmannow:

Your country needs boots in the ground; not state-of-the-art hardware.

We are not going to attack you; it does not benefit us in any way.

For guerilla war; you need men on the ground; give them a second-hand AK-47 and that's it.

In my view, your biggest danger is that these guerillas are really smart.

They have made sure that the locals are pissed off with the government. They have maximized the genuine anti-American current to their advantage. They have used religion as the perfect propaganda. Above all, are there any jobs left in the region?

Your country is in this **** for decades; surprisingly, you guys still talk hardware and India and parity and not the real threat.

Thanks, a lot my dear MAJOR VISH , sir i totaly agree with ur point of view
"Your country needs boots in the ground; not state-of-the-art hardware.

We are not going to attack you; it does not benefit us in any way.

For guerilla war; you need men on the ground; give them a second-hand AK-47 and that's it".
A 10:1 ratio is a bare necessity.
thats what was my point , PAKISTAN immediedtly need a increased number of troops to protect its boders, not that LAZY & insaficiant FC... actully we need at least 30,0000( three hunderd thousnd) well trained & well EQUIPED brigads... to post rit of the govt. in the troubled regions like FATA & BALUCHISTAN!!! with a efficiant air arm.

OUR economic situation isnt good to do this at the moment, but at least we can plan in the period of 6 months time. AS for INDIAN DANGER , my dear sir,, it is there dont deny it, and it will remain there till the END OF THE WORLD.

 

[vish]

Thanks, a lot my dear MAJOR VISH , sir i totaly agree with ur point of view
"Your country needs boots in the ground; not state-of-the-art hardware.

We are not going to attack you; it does not benefit us in any way.

For guerilla war; you need men on the ground; give them a second-hand AK-47 and that's it".
A 10:1 ratio is a bare necessity.
thats what was my point , PAKISTAN immediedtly need a increased number of troops to protect its boders, not that LAZY & insaficiant FC... actully we need at least 30,0000( three hunderd thousnd) well trained & well EQUIPED brigads... to post rit of the govt. in the troubled regions like FATA & BALUCHISTAN!!! with a efficiant air arm.

OUR economic situation isnt good to do this at the moment, but at least we can plan in the period of 6 months time. AS for INDIAN DANGER , my dear sir,, it is there dont deny it, and it will remain there till the END OF THE WORLD.

Well thank you... please refer to me only by my name.

My question was, how exactly does offensive defense come in the picture?

The troop deployments won't be "offensive"; they will be COIN operations.

Further, you will only be shooting yourself in the ground by attacking the ISAF.

 

[IceCold]

Your country needs boots in the ground; not state-of-the-art hardware.

We are not going to attack you; it does not benefit us in any way
Your country is in this **** for decades; surprisingly, you guys still talk hardware and India and parity and not the real threat.

I'm sure China wont attack you either but then again you prepare for the unseen. How is that when we do the same you guys come out with this nonsense about not attacking us. We already know you wont attack us, reason is not your love for us but rather the Pakistan army. What we are facing is not home grown, its coming from Afghanistan, India does not have a border with Afghanistan otherwise we would have seen how much uneffective would India have remained when a war is going on next door. What ever **** our country is in, we surely know how to deal with it and it has nothing to do with India and its not at all surprising when we talk about the parity or hardware, we certainly know what we want and when we want, quit telling us as if you know better.

 

[batmannow]

I'm sure China wont attack you either but then again you prepare for the unseen. How is that when we do the same you guys come out with this nonsense about not attacking us. We already know you wont attack us, reason is not your love for us but rather the Pakistan army. What we are facing is not home grown, its coming from Afghanistan, India does not have a border with Afghanistan otherwise we would have seen how much uneffective would India have remained when a war is going on next door. What ever **** our country is in, we surely know how to deal with it and it has nothing to do with India and its not at all surprising when we talk about the parity or hardware, we certainly know what we want and when we want, quit telling us as if you know better.

WOW, WOW, ICECOLD , sir! you did explain it all in a style. thanks , always looking for your guidence & what ever our ECONOMIC situation is but we have to adopt and keep best options for the future of our country.

 

[GHATAK]

I have a few questions about pak.

1. Why PAK does not have a clear stand against the US. They need to tell clearly if they are the allies of US or not. Taking double stand will not help in their stablity. At one hand it takes US Aid and other hand peopel say US wants to destroy pakistan.

2. When did India become US ally ? What US military action has India supported ? Which military action have we done jointly ?

3. Why is the offensive defence policy not used against the terrorists. Why are there negotiations with terrorists.

 

[GHATAK]

I have a few questions about pak.

1. Why PAK does not have a clear stand against the US. They need to tell clearly if they are the allies of US or not. Taking double stand will not help in their stablity. At one hand it takes US Aid and other hand peopel say US wants to destroy pakistan.

2. When did India become US ally ? What US military action has India supported ? Which military action have we done jointly ?

3. Why is the offensive defence policy not used against the terrorists. Why are there negotiations with terrorists.

4. India's threat prespective is NOT pakistan specific.

5. Nuclear weapons are deterent as long as they are not used. Once used, they are suicidal weapons. This is the only reason that after Hiroshima and Nagasakhi nobody has ever used it again.

6. I feel that Pakistan must come out of the fear of being split be western forces. Pakistan is a strong country of 160 million people, its not a cake. Such articles will only instill fear among the masses, and make the job of the invader simpler.

 

[IceCold]

I have a few questions about pak.

Why am i wasting my time over this ahhh well i think i just did.

1. Why PAK does not have a clear stand against the US. They need to tell clearly if they are the allies of US or not. Taking double stand will not help in their stablity. At one hand it takes US Aid and other hand peopel say US wants to destroy pakistan.

Sometimes one has to play diplomatic. The problem is not with the aid rather a straight no. US is bent on destabilizing Pakistan, well when we say that, we mean that US is not understanding the complexity being involved in the tribal area a military action by the US will only increase an already volatile situation meaning more destabilizing in Pakistan. In that sense destabilizing.

2. When did India become US ally ? What US military action has India supported ? Which military action have we done jointly ?

Supporting a military action does necessarily defines the term allies. The way things are going between the two side, we know India is eager to get inside the same bed with the US. Take the 123 deal for example. Such love shown by the US, a first non member of any treaty being given the status, well its not that hard to imagine whats going on between the 2 sides.

3. Why is the offensive defence policy not used against the terrorists. Why are there negotiations with terrorists.

Ohh please! don't tell us where we need to do what. On a side note we are.

4. India's threat prespective is NOT pakistan specific.

I guess that is the reason why Singh sb showed disappointment with this new saga that took place with the F-16 deal.

5. Nuclear weapons are deterent as long as they are not used. Once used, they are suicidal weapons. This is the only reason that after Hiroshima and Nagasakhi nobody has ever used it again.

I agree and that is exactly why we need to upgrade our conventional capabilities so that nuclear threshold just doesn't get any lower.

6. I feel that Pakistan must come out of the fear of being split be western forces. Pakistan is a strong country of 160 million people, its not a cake. Such articles will only instill fear among the masses, and make the job of the invader simpler.

That's not a question.

 

[pkpatriotic]

Why am i wasting my time over this ahhh well i think i just did.

Sometimes one has to play diplomatic. The problem is not with the aid rather a straight no. US is bent on destabilizing Pakistan, well when we say that, we mean that US is not understanding the complexity being involved in the tribal area a military action by the US will only increase an already volatile situation meaning more destabilizing in Pakistan. In that sense destabilizing.

Supporting a military action does necessarily defines the term allies. The way things are going between the two side, we know India is eager to get inside the same bed with the US. Take the 123 deal for example. Such love shown by the US, a first non member of any treaty being given the status, well its not that hard to imagine whats going on between the 2 sides.

Ohh please! don't tell us where we need to do what. On a side note we are.

I guess that is the reason why Singh sb showed disappointment with this new saga that took place with the F-16 deal.

I agree and that is exactly why we need to upgrade our conventional capabilities so that nuclear threshold just doesn't get any lower.

That's not a question.

Well Said IceCOld............

 

[vish]

I'm sure China wont attack you either but then again you prepare for the unseen.

True, very true.

How is that when we do the same you guys come out with this nonsense about not attacking us. We already know you wont attack us, reason is not your love for us but rather the Pakistan army.

Again, true. But the reason I said that "nonsense" (gee... prejudicing are we?)was because there was a lot of rhetoric chest-thumping going on.

What we are facing is not home grown, its coming from Afghanistan, India does not have a border with Afghanistan otherwise we would have seen how much uneffective would India have remained when a war is going on next door.

You created the mess along with RSA and USA to poke the Soviets. After the Soviets left you guys used the "fighters" on us. The IA was fighting these fighters in J&K for a decade or so. That is the reason why we have perhaps the most experience in COIN warfare.

You also prepped these fighters up in Afghanistan. Post 9/11 when Uncle put things in order, things hit the fan for you. The mess was all Utopia till then.

The mess is your (along with some other parties) making and is now boomeranging, unfortunately only on you.

What ever **** our country is in, we surely know how to deal with it.

Ofcourse you do. But your record speaks otherwise.

It has nothing to do with India.

Then why bring us in between all that chest thumping?

Its not at all surprising when we talk about the parity or hardware.

It is, especially when your priority is elsewhere.

We certainly know what we want and when we want.

Ofcourse you do. I just stated my viewpoint.

Quit telling us as if you know better.

I was replying to somebody.

In any which way, who the eff are you to tell me that?

 

[IceCold]

You also prepped these fighters up in Afghanistan. Post 9/11 when Uncle put things in order, things hit the fan for you. The mess was all Utopia till then.

The mess is your (along with some other parties) making and is now boomeranging, unfortunately only on you.

not really. Why is it that just before 9/11 this part of the world was very peaceful. One was not witnessing any suecide attacks. Taliban is a force, you cant act like they never existed. Keeping them out of the system will do nobody any favor just more harm. The root cause of destabilization is Afghanistan and not Pakistan. Do i need to remind you about the load of the refuges that Pakistan had and still has to bared.

Ofcourse you do. But your record speaks otherwise.

Ohh really! would you mind elaborating how?

Then why bring us in between all that chest thumping?

Not really, infact the most troubled part is when you guys jump in where not needed and tell us what we need to do and what we don't.

It is, especially when your priority is elsewhere.

No our priorities are well balanced, don't mix between India and WOT. We have our own threat assessment and we work accordingly to that, not what you think.

Ofcourse you do. I just stated my viewpoint.

Your view point results in the beating of the triumph

I was replying to somebody.

In any which way, who the eff are you to tell me that?

I'm sure you were but when you mention a country certainly it brings it people into the context. who am i well certainly no one as an individual however it isn't an individual we are talking about, it was about Pakistan, and we certainly don't appreciate someone belonging to a country with such hostility towards Pakistan telling us about our priorities. No offense intended.

 

[vish]

not really. Why is it that just before 9/11 this part of the world was very peaceful.

There was a big Disneyland in Afghanistan where these guys were mucking around and spewing terror all over the world.

One was not witnessing any suecide attacks.

Not in Pakistan; the same cannot be said of every other place in the world (example India).

Taliban is a force, you cant act like they never existed. Keeping them out of the system will do nobody any favor just more harm.

The Taliban is your worst enemy; they ought to be nihilated or marginalized.

The root cause of destabilization is Afghanistan and not Pakistan. Do i need to remind you about the load of the refuges that Pakistan had and still has to bared.

The root cause of this mess is the creation of Islamic guerillas and not having any contingency for their disarming.

Ohh really! would you mind elaborating how?

Is there a need to? You guys have made a mess of your own WoT. You stoll are not addressing the major problem: boots on the ground.

Not really, infact the most troubled part is when you guys jump in where not needed and tell us what we need to do and what we don't.

Isn't that what a discussion forum is all about? The only reason I commented because the posts were too wierd.

No our priorities are well balanced, don't mix between India and WOT.

I disagree and hence stated the same.

We have our own threat assessment and we work accordingly to that, not what you think.

True, so?

Your view point results in the beating of the triumph.

How? When did I boast India or IA, except for our COIN skills?

I'm sure you were but when you mention a country certainly it brings it people into the context. How am i well certainly no one as an individual however it isn't an individual we are talking about, it was about Pakistan, and we certainly don't appreciate someone belonging to a country with such hostility towards Pakistan telling us about our priorities. No offense intended.

You could have put it in a better manner. Plus, is this not a multi-national discussion forum?

 

[GHATAK]

Sometimes one has to play diplomatic. The problem is not with the aid rather a straight no. US is bent on destabilizing Pakistan, well when we say that, we mean that US is not understanding the complexity being involved in the tribal area a military action by the US will only increase an already volatile situation meaning more destabilizing in Pakistan. In that sense destabilizing.

Ok go ahead and play diplomatic. We will have the fun watching it.



Supporting a military action does necessarily defines the term allies. The way things are going between the two side, we know India is eager to get inside the same bed with the US. Take the 123 deal for example. Such love shown by the US, a first non member of any treaty being given the status, well its not that hard to imagine whats going on between the 2 sides.

Much better than taking money [AID] and going to bed, after killing its own people.


Ohh please! don't tell us where we need to do what. On a side note we are.

Really. We saw that!!!


I guess that is the reason why Singh sb showed disappointment with this new saga that took place with the F-16 deal.

Give the the link. Btw, a few outdated F-16's don't add that required punch in PAF. I will wait for your link



I agree and that is exactly why we need to upgrade our conventional capabilities so that nuclear threshold just doesn't get any lower.

Please do that.

That's not a question.

Question - Why are pakistanis afraid of being split ?

 

[GHATAK]

not really. Why is it that just before 9/11 this part of the world was very peaceful. One was not witnessing any suecide attacks. Taliban is a force, you cant act like they never existed. Keeping them out of the system will do nobody any favor just more harm. The root cause of destabilization is Afghanistan and not Pakistan. Do i need to remind you about he load of the refuges that Pakistan had and still has to bared.

Oh Yes, the world was peaceful, Pakistan was peaceful, and life was easy for Pak... till its jihadis were fighting only India....but then one fine morning, your brothers stuck US. And that was the beginning of dooms day.

Well, India has been reaping the benefits of 9/11 like no one else, cos the enemy fights the enemy. It just cant get better.



Cheers!

 

[IceCold]

There was a big Disneyland in Afghanistan where these guys were mucking around and spewing terror all over the world.

Ohh please even Americans themselves are not sure whether 9/11 really occurred or was it all staged. Other then that what else happened in the world? Or anything happening in the US to you is like happening in the whole world.

Not in Pakistan; the same cannot be said of every other place in the world (example India).

India wasn't facing suecide attacks, all it was facing was freedom struggle(terrorism according to you) in IOK. Also when we talk about destabilization, its doesn't only means attacks. Take the world economy for example, the high fuel prices, the impact that it is causing on the economies specially to that of the developing world.

The Taliban is your worst enemy; they ought to be nihilated or marginalized.

Not exactly. Like i said we need to differentiate between those who are willing to talk with those who only know the way of the gun. Those who are willing to talk should be brought in the political system other them judging all with the same stick because that will only make one thing sure and that is increase the support of those who think gun is the only answer.

The root cause of this mess is the creation of Islamic guerillas and not having any contingency for their disarming.

Not really. The root cause of this is when the world left Pakistan alone into this mess without giving a consent to the aftermath. Pakistan alone did not had the resources to stabilize Afghanistan, we did what we could however. The example of immigrants proves my point.

Is there a need to? You guys have made a mess of your own WoT. You stoll are not addressing the major problem: boots on the ground.

Dude we have more then 100000 boots on the ground.

You could have put it in a better manner. Plus, is this not a multi-national discussion forum?

I tried too put it in plain simple way. Its not about mulitinational discussion, it is the way you put it. I too can say that if you have had put it in a better way, i would have not bothered to reply to a post not directed towards me.

 

[IceCold]

Ok go ahead and play diplomatic. We will have the fun watching it.

Sure. You have pretty much of your own fun to watch.

Much better than taking money [AID] and going to bed, after killing its own people.

That's where you are wrong and clearly shows your level of maturity. Why do you think US is having such problems with us over our commitment on WOT. Because we differentiate between the two.

Really. We saw that!!!

Do you mind telling us what you saw.

Give the the link. Btw, a few outdated F-16's don't add that required punch in PAF. I will wait for your link

I don't have the time to paste links for you. Its in the war on terror related thread an article about US aid being switched towards the upgradation of the F-16s. I'm sure those out dated F-16s will be flying ducks for the IAF however your PM thinks other wise.

Please do that.

Then why crying out at the first place? What was all those stupid questions for?

Question - Why are pakistanis afraid of being split ?

Grow up.