What's new

The 1965 Indo-Pak war

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pakistan won the war in 1965, not India!

Did Operation Grand Slam Succeded? No
Did Operation Gibraltor Succeded? No

What land/town/areas Pakistan won? None

Was their any changes in MAPS of India? NO

Still if you think that Pakistan won then I dont want to spoil your party.

P.S: - Zaid Hameed forgot to add some videos on how Pakistan won the 1971 war by successfully getting rid of East Paksitan.
 
.
India Claims Land area won1,500 mi2 (3,885 km2) of Pakistani territory


Pak Claims Won 250 mi² (648 km²) of Indian territory

From Neutral Sources :

India held 710 mi²(1,1840 km²) of Pakistani territory and Pakistan held 210 mi²(545 km²) of Indian territory

I dont know, this in PAK called Victory ????
 
.
India Claims Land area won1,500 mi2 (3,885 km2) of Pakistani territory


Pak Claims Won 250 mi² (648 km²) of Indian territory

From Neutral Sources :

India held 710 mi²(1,1840 km²) of Pakistani territory and Pakistan held 210 mi²(545 km²) of Indian territory

I dont know, this in PAK called Victory ????

India returned all the Pakistani territory that it occupied. Therefore Pakistani did not lose any territory. Thus it is a victory for Pakistan :blah: Pakistan still exists today despite huge efforts of Pakistanis. This is even a greater victory :no:
 
.
India returned all the Pakistani territory that it occupied. Therefore Pakistani did not lose any territory. Thus it is a victory for Pakistan :blah: Pakistan still exists today despite huge efforts of Pakistanis. This is even a greater victory :no:

There is a saying in Tamil. to indicate sarcastic sentences. " as soft as pushing a needle into a ripe banana"

Yours is a classic case of the same :P
 
.
For Indian readers, we Pakistani’s are always told what Pakistan military wants us to hear via radio Pakistan regardless of the truth on the battle filed or the end result. Just remember that Pakistani's are always winner.

Following is a repost of an article that I posted in an another thread for your reading. I hope this will answer most of your questions.

The myth of September 6, 1965

Mehmal Sarfraz

Every year we Pakistanis celebrate September 6th with a lot of ‘national fervour’ and laud the armed forces for being ‘victorious’ against the Indian forces back in the 1965 war. The state commemorates the ‘Defence Day’ by holding various ceremonies and special programmes. Milli naghmay (patriotic songs) are aired on the local television channels and radio stations, while the newspapers bring out special supplements to mark the day. This is all very well, but I wonder if our people know that in actuality we are not celebrating a victory. Not only did we lose militarily in 1965 – state propaganda aside – but we also lost our national unity in the process. Forty-two years down the road, ours is a country that is on the verge of dismemberment, again.

August 1947 gave birth to two independent states, India and Pakistan. It also gave birth to territorial disputes that haunt both South Asian neighbours to date. Kashmir is one of the main disputed territories. The two infant states fought a war in 1948 on the Kashmir issue, but despite a ceasefire, the issue was never resolved. At the beginning of 1965, skirmishes between the two neighbours erupted once again on another disputed territory – Rann of Kutch. Having no real economic value, the Rann conflict was only rooted in the overall contentious relationship between the two sides.

Fortunately, the Pakistan army was successfully able to defend itself against the Indian army and in fact gave it a bloody nose. This served as a morale booster for our military.

The high morale of the military, egged on by Ayub Khan’s overambitious foreign minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, led to a misadventure that cost Pakistan its dignity. In the late summer of 1965, Pakistan launched ‘Operation Gibraltar’. Pakistan sent infiltrators – military commandos in civvies – into Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) to ‘liberate’ it, and expected that the ‘downtrodden’ Kashmiris would support the insurgency. Little did we know that the plan would crumble like a house of cards.

It was not only a plan fraught with miscalculation, but a foolish one to begin with. There was no proper reconnaissance, no political intelligence, and the Kashmiris in IHK were not even taken into confidence. “Whatever his [Ayub’s] reasons, Pakistan went into Operation Gibraltar without any preliminary preparations and undertook a guerrilla operation inside IHK with a large number of regular soldiers, some SSG elements and a smattering of irregulars, expecting to be welcomed by the local population and raise them up in arms against the Indian government. They were destined to be rudely disillusioned. Far from rising up in arms, the local population denied any support and, in many instances handed over the infiltrators to Indian troops” (Qadir, Brigadier (retd) Shaukat, ‘Operation Gibraltar: Battle that never was’, Rediff.com).

Before the operation was launched, Z A Bhutto somehow managed to convince Field Marshal Ayub Khan that even if India responded to the incursions in Kashmir, it would not cross the international border. Thus there was no question of a full-fledged war. But as soon as India had brutally crushed the insurgency in IHK, it launched an attack on Pakistan on September 6, 1965. The public was led to believe that India had launched a ‘surprise attack’ on Pakistan, and that ‘Hindu India’ would be taught a lesson. Thus the armed forces had full public support.

It is to the credit of our air force and the jawans fighting in the battlefield that they put up a strong fight against a superior enemy. But it is the generals who let the country down. “Ayub had attempted to save his forces in Kashmir; more importantly, he wanted to avoid a general war. But the war he sought to avoid had come to Pakistan, and the nation had to be rallied to efforts not envisaged in the plans to capture Kashmir. The vast majority of Pakistanis knew virtually nothing about the course of the hostilities. All they knew came from Radio Pakistan, and in the name of national morale, the public was informed over and again of the successes on the battlefield, or at the very least, the heroism of units and individual members of the armed forces who had fallen in combat. The fact that Pakistan itself had been targeted by Indian forces, that air raids had ranged to Peshawar on the one side and Dhaka in East Pakistan on the other, did not shake the Pakistani public’s belief that the war was going well and that India was paying a heavy price for its audacious assault on Pakistani territory” (Ziring, Lawrence, Pakistan in the Twentieth Century: A Political History, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997, p. 293).

The reality of the much-touted ‘friendly’ relations between Pakistan and the US was also exposed during the 1965 war. Pakistan had allied itself with the US during the Cold War era, and in an effort to please the US, Pakistan joined the South East Treaty Organisation (SEATO) in 1954 and later the Baghdad Pact in 1955, which was renamed the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO) in 1959. Being a signatory to these treaties gave Pakistan the necessary means and resources to strengthen itself militarily and economically. When the war broke out in 1965, Pakistan expected that the US would come to its aid and used US-supplied weaponry against India. The US never came to Pakistan’s help, because it perceived communism to be the threat to its interests, hardly India. Thus a military embargo was imposed on Pakistan and military supplies were cut off by the US.

A little more than two weeks into the battle and it was quite evident to Ayub that the army was running out of logistics – ammunition, fuel, food, etc. It is reported that during the war, the American ambassador said to Ayub Khan, “They [the Indians] have got you by the throat Mr President, don’t they?” or words to that effect. It is ironic that when our fairweather ‘friend’ the US decided to leave us in the lurch, the communist Soviet Union came to our aid and helped broker a ceasefire between India and Pakistan.

The Pakistani nation was left bewildered about why Ayub Khan opted to end the war that we were ‘winning’ and instead signed the Tashkent Agreement. Since the public was kept in the dark about the real reasons behind the war and its actual progress, it was hard for them to understand that Ayub had indeed made a wise move by ending the war. The public considered it a sell-out and a betrayal. Little did the public know that had the war gone on, we would have lost much more than our ‘pride’.

There are some lessons to be learnt from the experience of 1965. One of the main lessons is that subjective and wishful thinking in politics and war is no substitute for objective analysis. It would be useful in this context to recall the old Clausewitzian adage: ‘War is the extension of politics by other means.’ It is also time we reflect on the loss of our national unity. Back in 1965, the nation stood behind our military. Today, the situation is quite different. Why is it that today we are not as emotional about our ‘sons of the soil’ as we were back in 1965? These are the wages of repeated military interventions at the cost of national unity. When the military took away the sovereign right of the people, the right to rule the country themselves, it took away the respect it rightfully deserved. We can still rediscover this unity if the military goes back to the barracks and allows the civilians to exercise their democratic rights.
 
.
Did Operation Grand Slam Succeded? No
Did Operation Gibraltor Succeded? No

What land/town/areas Pakistan won? None


Was their any changes in MAPS of India? NO

Still if you think that Pakistan won then I dont want to spoil your party.

P.S: - Zaid Hameed forgot to add some videos on how Pakistan won the 1971 war by successfully getting rid of East Paksitan.

you sound like as if India was on the defence all the time... but lol india got bullied in 65 war... our AF terrorized IAF and IA...
"The Chief of Indian Air Force could no longer ensure the safety of Indian air space. A well known Indian journalist, Mr Frank Moraes, in a talk from All-india radio, also admitted that IAF had suffered severe losses and it was no use hiding the fact and India should be prepared for more losses...."
Indonesian Herald
September 11, 1965.

and btw... PA did capture alot of indian lands and had to give up due to UN and international presser..
 
.
and btw... PA did capture alot of indian lands and had to give up due to UN and international presser..

I thought it was reverse thing. Possibly both capture each others but larger share was captured by India.
 
.
I thought it was reverse thing. Possibly both capture each others but larger share was captured by India.

larger share? got have substantial proof? other then pathological lying ego satisfaction wild claims on wikipeedia and bharatraksah?
 
.
Remembering 6th of September 1965
By Dr. Ahmad Faruqui
CA

The 6th of September is observed as the Defense of Pakistan Day in Pakistan. According to the official history that has been taught to generations of Pakistani school children, on this day India launched an unprovoked attack on Lahore. The much smaller Pakistani armed forces successfully fought off a much bigger enemy and deserve to be recognized for their valor and courage.
While there is no question that the lower ranks of the Pakistani armed forces fought bravely in this war and there were several instances of brilliance and heroism in the middle ranks as well, the fact is that this war was brought on by the foolhardiness of the Pakistani high command. Much of the blame for the disaster that ensued rests on the shoulders of the military government headed by President Field Marshal Ayub Khan.
Ayub in 1965 blundered into a general war with India, fully knowing that Pakistan was in no position to fight one. His top-secret order, sent on 29 August 1965 to the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Musa, was titled “Political Aim for Struggle in Kashmir.” It instructed the Pakistan Army:
To take such action that will defreeze Kashmir problem, weaken India’s resolve and bring her to a conference table without provoking a general war. However the element of escalation is always present in such struggles. So, whilst confining our action to the Kashmir area we must not be unmindful that India may in desperation involve us in a general war or violate Pakistan territory where we are weak.
In December 1964, New Delhi had absorbed Kashmir into the Indian Union. Sensing that the Indian military had begun a massive program of rearmament after its humiliation at the hands of the People’s Liberation Army in 1962, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, convinced President Ayub that a “now or never” window of opportunity had opened up to reactivate the liberation struggle in Kashmir.
Ayub initially rejected Bhutto’s plan to infiltrate irregular fighters into Kashmir, fearing that it would place Pakistan’s survival at stake. However, after witnessing the Pakistan army’s successful performance in the Rann of Kutch in April, he changed his mind. While in New York for medical treatment toward the end of his life, he would confide to G. W. Choudhury that this was his worst presidential decision. However, in the summer of 1965, he talked about how “Hindu morale would not stand a couple of hard blows at the right time and place.”
Operation Gibraltar, named after Tariq bin Ziad who conquered Spain in the year 711 with 10,000 Moroccans (whence the name Moors), was launched on August 5/6. Seven thousand fighters crossed the cease-fire line in Kashmir with a simple mission: spark a wild fire in the Vale of Kashmir and bring to a satisfactory conclusion the unfinished business of partition. However, it was soon evident that the fighters were insufficiently trained in the tactics of guerilla warfare and were in no condition to lead a revolt against Indian rule.
On August 7 the irregulars attacked Kargil, which would gain notoriety 34 years later. By mid-August, they had roused the ire of the Indian army and Pakistan was forced to commit regular troops to keep the fight from dying out. By August 21, the Indian forces had routed the irregulars and by the end of the month, all of them had been killed or captured. The situation was eerily similar to President John F. Kennedy’s fiasco in the Bay of Pigs in 1961, when the US landed 1,400 Cuban exiles on Cuba’s south coast, hoping to trigger a revolt against Fidel Castro. In two days of fierce fighting, 114 were dead and 1,200 captured. A chastened Kennedy called off the attack.
At this point in Pakistan’s history, Ayub too had the opportunity to call off the dogs of war. Instead, he chose to up the ante. Switching metaphors from Islamic history to the card game of bridge, the Pakistan army launched Operation Grand Slam on September 1. The objective was to capture Akhnur within 72 hours, cutting off India’s line of communication with Srinagar and forcing it to the negotiating table. The first stop along the way, Chamb, was taken in a day, as Indian forces withdrew under the weight of the Pakistani offensive. Four Indian Air Force (IAF) Vampires, brought in to stop the onslaught, were shot down by American-supplied F-86 Sabre jets of the PAF, leading to the withdrawal of 128 Vampires from the IAF lineup.
Then the attack stalled and Pakistan’s General Headquarters changed commanders in the heat of battle, allowing the Indian army to re-gird its defenses of Akhnur. On September 5, General Musa, the Pakistani army chief, impatiently harangued his troops, “You have got your teeth into him. Bite deeper and deeper until he is destroyed.” However, Akhnur was to remain a town too far for the Pakistan army.
On September 6, the Indian army launched a three-pronged attack on Lahore. This came as a rude shock to Ayub, since Bhutto had convinced him that India was not in a position to risk a war of unlimited duration against Pakistan. Bhutto had argued that Pakistan had relative military superiority against India, and while the latter might wage a general war of limited duration, it would not be along the Punjab Frontier.
Pakistani army units successfully fought off the Indian attack by blowing up 70 bridges along the BRB canal. As the front stabilized, Pakistan launched a counter-offensive on September 10 in Khem Karan with its mailed fist, the 1st Armored Division. Unfortunately, the sophisticated American-supplied M-47 and M-48 Patton tanks of the 1st Armored raced ahead of their supporting infantry units. Soon they found themselves bogged down in sugar cane fields near the village of Asal Uttar, where the Indians had breached a canal that did not exist on Pakistani maps. Indian hunter-killer teams armed with jeep-mounted recoilless rifles took out 40 Pakistani Patton tanks in one day. On September 11, Pakistan’s vaunted 4 Cavalry ceased to exist, effectively dashing Islamabad’s hopes of winning the war.
Next, India opened up another front around Sialkot. Pakistan’s 6th Armoured Division, which was deployed in this area, fought tenaciously and with tactical skill, blunted the Indian offensive. However, it was running out of fuel and its 155 mm howitzers were put on a daily ration of five rounds per gun. The soldier in Ayub knew the game was over and he began to seek a diplomatic solution to the conflict.
The people of Pakistan, who had been expecting an imminent victory over India, listened in disbelief as a ceasefire was announced over Radio Pakistan on September 23. Ayub visited the US in December and was told by President Lyndon B. Johnson that the special relationship between the two countries was over. In January Ayub signed the Tashkent Agreement, which restored the pre-war boundaries and provided no new mechanism for resolving the Kashmir dispute.
Pakistani soldiers fought with gallantry and distinction in 1965, even though they deserved better generals. The Pakistani Navy kept the sea-lanes open against a much bigger enemy. But it was the PAF that excelled in all respects. On one day it shot down 11 IAF fighters. In a single encounter, Squadron Leader M. M. Alam shot down five IAF Hunters in less than two minutes over Sargodha. It is no wonder that John Fricker chose to entitle his history of the air war the “Battle for Pakistan,” no doubt inspired by the Battle for Britain waged by the Royal Air Force during the Second World War and designed to evoke Winston Churchill’s effusive comment, “Never have so many owed so much to so few.” This war resulted in a military stalemate for Pakistan and became a political liability for Ayub. Under the advice of his Foreign Minister, he had raised very high expectations among the people of Pakistan about the superiority - if not invincibility - of its armed forces. Ayub and Bhutto presumed that Kashmir was ripe for an uprising, and that Indian forces in the state - which numbered five infantry divisions - would be unable to hold out against a single Pakistani division. Worse, they presumed that India would not launch a counter attack along the international border. Their erroneous presumptions resulted in some 25,000 men being killed or wounded on both sides, with no military or political gain being realized by Pakistan.
When these objectives were not realized in the form of an outright victory in the battlefield with India, the backlash effectively debilitated Ayub’s leadership in Pakistan. It triggered a popular uprising that Bhutto, who had fallen out of favor with Ayub after the fiasco with India, used to hound him out of office in less than four years, while he and his coterie were busy celebrating a “decade of development.”
In the late sixties, one of Ayub’s former cabinet ministers, G. W. Choudhury, asked him whether the usual military procedure for debating both sides of the issue had not been followed with respect to the crucial decision to launch the war in Kashmir. Ayub answered: “Please do not rub in my weakest and fatal point.” Ayub died in 1974, a sad and broken man.
 
.

unlike in india which is "STATE" run media here in pakistan anyone is allowed to criticize the pak army and here we have no other then hippi liberal anti-war douchebag trying to get some international attention..

however it still does not change the fact that PAkistan wipped and bullied 10 times bigger enemy.
 
.
is the 6th of september really celebrated as some victory day in Pakistan?
This is bewildering....on this forum I was shocked to hear claims like..."PAF pilots running out of fuel..rammed their jets into Indian air bases" and "PA jawans...when facing assault by the IA tanks used to strap onto anti-tank mines and jump on to the tanks...."
Pakistan did not win the '65 war...that is a fact we all know....but it's chocking to see that the media and the govt. is twisting history in such a bizarre fashion
 
Last edited:
.
unlike in india which is "STATE" run media

Time Group (TOI, Maha Times, Nav Times Times Now) = Bennet and Colman Group
CNN-IBN = Read the word CNN besides Rajdeep Sardesai is a known communist.
NDTV = Belongs to Pranoy Roy who is a communist. He is a relative to Prakash and Brinda Karat.

Now tell me which one is state run in this?

If our media was a state run you would have never read about the air crashes, fake encounters, Defence scandals, DRDO failures and your all time favorite poverty and toilets.

GB
 
. .
is the 6th of september really celebrated as some victory day in Pakistan?
This is bewildering....on this forum I was shocked to hear claims like..."PAF pilots running out of fuel..rammed their jets into Indian air bases" and "PA jawans...when facing assault by the IA tanks used to strap onto anti-tank mines and jump on to the tanks...."
Pakistan did not win the '65 war...that is a fact we all know....but it's chocking to see that the media and the govt. is twisting history in such a bizarre fashion

yes 6th september is really celebrated in pakistan because you see...
in WWII germany just ran over entire FRANCE in just under a week while pakistan which was 10 times smaller force did not only kept indians off the bay or at the borders but also captured indian land and inflicted heavy causalities on indian army air force and bit of navy.
IAF entire mig-21 fleet were wiped out, hunters were hunted, and IAF cr@ped in their pants.
:pakistan:
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom