The 1965 Indo-Pak war

[paritosh]

India lost many of its aircrafts and the IA could not make any real dent to the PA. Don't you think that this was a great humiliation and defeat for the IA? Retrospectively, it was a Pakistani win over a much larger IA.

Back your points by numbers or some known facts that can be verified.
3000 Indians killed vs 3,800 Pakistani killed...is the official figure.
The ratio comes out to be 0.78947 in favor of the IA.

To win even an unequal war a larger army needs brave soldiers willing to sacrifice their lives. Indians are not that willing to do this sacrifice, they want to overwhelm its adversary only with numbers.

and how do we overwhelm the enemy by numbers?do we dive into the enemy bunkers like frantic mice?
next time you think of posting your ridiculous findings of the IA's non performance....don't.

 

[sensenreason]

its only tough for you to digest. you will only harp about what has been told to you for good night sleep.
Hunters, and Gnats are a decade ahead in terms of technology, while Mystere is .5 decade ahead.
so basically these 3 type of planes were late 1950s technology.
in case of PAF... transformed from P-51 mustang and developed in 1946! only 24 F-86 were equipped with 1st generation 30% kill ratio AIm-9.and 10 F-104 which was the only technical equal of main bulk of IAF fleet. only if PAF were operating Mirage-III F-4 F-105 could we say PAF had technical advantage over IAF with 130 or so combat fleet!

so you are going to be deluded? and believe in your own version of victory? I didnt say that but JANE's certainly did.

Im no expert so what you tell me above sounds good...ok..so Im convinced..but then another guy but an Indian fellow will bring some other factor to repudiate what you've said above...

The point being size is easy to prove and tech is not as easy.

Im not claiming victory for one or the other..frankly, it does not matter to me...if for instance what you claim is right then Im happy for PAF. Well done as I said....

The only point I want to make is that the sub text that I discern in this PAF victory thread is a theory of martian races. If thats the sub text..it should be discussed in the main text....as by this logic it lies at the heart of the arguement.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Back your points by numbers or some known facts that can be verified.
3000 Indians killed vs 3,800 Pakistani killed...is the official figure.
The ratio comes out to be 0.78947 in favor of the IA.

sorry to burst your bubble but you are by far the biggest deluded, hippocrate, state propaganda brain washed, and a pathological liar fanboy. you are so happy to blindly believe in what ever baseless claim is made in favor of India but in your blind patriotism you never bother to check its credibility..

and how do we overwhelm the enemy by numbers?do we dive into the enemy bunkers like frantic mice?
next time you think of posting your ridiculous findings of the IA's non performance....don't.

You are not that smart or are you kid?

 

[paritosh]

sorry to burst your bubble but you are by far the biggest deluded, hippocrate, state propaganda brain washed, and a pathological liar fanboy. you are so happy to blindly believe in what ever baseless claim is made in favor of India but in your blind patriotism you never bother to check its credibility..

did you burst my bubble...eh?
who the fck cares about what you think about me?
and I see you are not using your smilies now...if you really hate me so much then why bother dueling with me?
highlight the part that you don't like and ask questions or correct stuff you think is not right...you've been on this forum for a long time now...

You are not that smart or are you kid?

biggest deluded, hippocrate, state propaganda brain washed, and a pathological liar fanboy
shows how desperate you are...yeah i guess I am smart enough.

 

[M_Saint]

Yes, you are right. The colonial British originated it as a part of their divide and rule policy. I never claimed that Pakistan/Islam was the originator of the martial races BS. However Pakistan, especially East Pakistanis, whole heartedly adopted it and made it part of their military doctrine. Many of the so called British designated martial races are also in India, but India never accepted it as a state policy.
Also, as a Bangldeshi you should be aware that if it was not for India, the 'martial races men of Pakistan' would still be having a 'nice time' with your non-martial Bengali Sisters/daughters like they were doing in 1971.

Like Satan, Indians try to camouflage their faces with humanistic virtues but it doesn't take too long for their real colors to appear. Now listen up, people of East PAK were given enough chances to take part in PAK-MIL in the form establishing Dhaka Cadet College, calling for recruits repeatedly in 1950s but there weren't even enough enrollees, so the college had to be re-located in Mirzapur, near at Tangail that let the W Pakistanis to live up with the BRITS ran myth. Furthermore, even in British era, recruits from Bengal in Mil were much less than Punjab, NWFP etc. But W Pakistanis tried to break that stagnation by giving us enough chances but we weren't passionate to take that route rather chose to be intellectual. So, was it W Pakistanis fault on baiting on the perception that 'East PAK's defence lied in West'? And for your info., regard martial man's honeymoon with non-martial women, it seemed like all the raped women migrated to IND and gave birth the buoyed martial, who jumped on this forum that happened to surpass W Pakistanis by many folds.

 

[Narkun]

sorry to burst your bubble but you are by far the biggest deluded, hippocrate, state propaganda brain washed, and a pathological liar fanboy. you are so happy to blindly believe in what ever baseless claim is made in favor of India but in your blind patriotism you never bother to check its credibility..

Hmm.. so what is a credible source?

US Congress Study -

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 -

India holds 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan... 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" -

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.

Gertjan Dijkink's "National identity and geopolitical visions" -

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.

Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" -

Although both sides lost heavily in men and materiel, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

Fact remains, for Pakistanis, every non-Pakistani source is not credible. Agreed that Pakistan Air Force did perform well during the war, but the Indian Army clearly had the better of the Pakistani Army.

And what difference it makes.. we came back and defeated both the Pakistani Army and the Air Force comprehensively six years after this war.

 

[paritosh]

Fact remains, for Pakistanis, every non-Pakistani source is not credible. Agreed that Pakistan Air Force did perform well in the war, but the Indian Army clearly had the better of the Pakistani Army.

And what difference it makes.. we came back and defeated both the Pakistani Army and the Air Force comprehensively six years after this war.

precisely...1971 shows how we won by achieving our military goals.
Pakistan in '65 waged the war to liberate Kashmir...did not happen.

 

[M_Saint]

And what difference it makes.. we came back and defeated both the Pakistani Army and the Air Force comprehensively six years after this war.

Save false prophecy for another place. In 1965, your country didn't attack East PAK, infect there wasn't any war there at all. So how did the lesson of fighting in a completely different terrain, land and sky help you to win war in 1971 in E PAK? I meant what kind of logistics that correlated of W PAK's war in E PAK? Now listen up very carefully, IND decided to break E PAK up even before PAK came to a being. 1952’s language movement was the first mean towards that end. Then in 1963, by conspiring in Agartala it recruited student, professional and political leaders, who regularly fed Intel to IB/RAW and it was mutual of both parties not to involve in quarrel in 1965 because time wasn't ripe at that time and their ultimate goal could be jeopardized by it. Then continuous agitation through six points, 70’s election and decades of espionage related collaboration provided IND the golden moment in thousand years to defeat a bettered, cut off, fatigued force of 37,187 soldiers. So, tell your fellow to pet you accordingly but not by spreading smoke over here.

 

[Narkun]

Save false prophecy for another place. In 1965, your country didn't attack East PAK, infect there wasn't any war there at all. So how did the lesson of fighting in a completely different terrain, land and sky help you to win war in 1971 in E PAK? I meant what kind of logistics that correlated of W PAK's war in E PAK?

You are talking as if India and Pakistan didn't fight a single battle on the Western front! Ever heard of Battle of Longewala and Battle of Basantar? No offense.. but you are so ignorant that I didn't even bother to read the rest of your comment.

Enjoy!

 

[toxic_pus]

A 'pun'less version of my previous post which was deleted by Mr Web. (One of course wonders what prevented him from editing the 'puns' and retaining the post). Hopefully this will be allowed in the same spirit as Growler's derisions are.

Here are some excerpt of a recently declassified telegram from US Embassy in Karachi to Secretary of State, Washington DC, US, on 20th October, 1965. [Words in parenthesis () are my amateurish editing. When in doubt, check with the origianl]

'Continuing propaganda re achievements of Pak forces seems to have convinced most that only Pak forbearance (has) saved the Indians from disaster.'

'Oddball aftermath is unshakeable conviction (in) all strata that (the) Indians (are) armed by USA to fight Pakistan, while many refuse (to) believe Paks had modern American weapons. News photo of US ammunition repeatedly cited as proof (of) diversion (of) US aid from Pakistan to India, altho some will admit US (is) only misguided, deceived by wily Hindus.'

'Ayub position: No audible murmurs of Dissent, but some concern over future support by army, which has now spent six months on front lines without getting sense of accomplishment.'

'Peshawar and Kohat sites of IAF bombs raids continue to be drawing card for West Pak politicians.'

The war officially started on 6th September of 1965 and it seems that IAF was bombing, pretty much at will, well past mid-October.
Correction: The telegram was referring to the IAF raid of Peshawar and Kohat, on 14th September 1965.

 

[EagleEyes]

A 'pun'less version of my previous post which was deleted by Mr Web. (One of course wonders what prevented him from editing the 'puns' and retaining the post). Hopefully this will be allowed in the same spirit as Growler's derisions are.

We dont have time to edit the moronic posts.

 

[paritosh]

Save false prophecy for another place. In 1965, your country didn't attack East PAK, infect there wasn't any war there at all. So how did the lesson of fighting in a completely different terrain, land and sky help you to win war in 1971 in E PAK? I meant what kind of logistics that correlated of W PAK's war in E PAK? Now listen up very carefully, IND decided to break E PAK up even before PAK came to a being. 1952’s language movement was the first mean towards that end. Then in 1963, by conspiring in Agartala it recruited student, professional and political leaders, who regularly fed Intel to IB/RAW and it was mutual of both parties not to involve in quarrel in 1965 because time wasn't ripe at that time and their ultimate goal could be jeopardized by it. Then continuous agitation through six points, 70’s election and decades of espionage related collaboration provided IND the golden moment in thousand years to defeat a bettered, cut off, fatigued force of 37,187 soldiers. So, tell your fellow to pet you accordingly but not by spreading smoke over here.

yeah we rigged the Pakistani election results...we paid the Pakistanis to murder the east Pakistanis...and heck it was Mahatma Gandhi and not Jinnah who wanted Urdu to be the national language and Bengali to be trashed.

you are no longer East Pakistan.Respect your freedom fighters by not 'blaming' us for the coup d'etat in '71.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Fact remains, for Pakistanis, every non-Pakistani source is not credible. Agreed that Pakistan Air Force did perform well during the war, but the Indian Army clearly had the better of the Pakistani Army.

Holy Sh**. facts? what facts?

you mean the fact that your air chief could no longer assure safty of indian air space in 65 war when PAF planes bombarded day/night... you mean facts about 65 era western journalists reporting on the scene and admiting that indian are lying and they are getting their *** humiliated by 5 times smaller enemy!

"India is claiming all out victory. I have not been able to find any trace of it. All I can see are troops, tanks and other war material rolling in a steady stream towards the front."

"If the Indian Air Force is so victorious, why has it not tried to halt this flow?. The answer is that it has been knocked from the skies by Pakistani planes."

"These muslims of Pakistan are natural fighters and they ask for no quarter and they give none. In any war, such as the one going on between India and Pakistan right now, the propoganda claims on either side are likely to be startling. But if I have to take bet today, my money would be on the Pakistan side."

"Pakistan claims to have destroyed something like 1/3rd the Indian Air Force, and foreign observers, who are in a position to know say that Pakistani pilots have claimed even higher kills than this; but the Pakistani Air Force are being scrupulously honest in evaluating these claims. They are crediting Pakistan Air Force only those killings that can be checked from other sources."

Roy Meloni,
American Broadcasting Corporation
September 15, 1965.

"India's barbarity is mounting in fury as the Indian army and Air Force, severely mauled, are showing signs of demoralisation. The huge losses suffered by the Indian Armed Forces during the last 12 days of fighting could not be kept from the Indian public and in retaliation, the Indian armed forces are indulging in the most barbaric methods."

"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.

Combat Over The Indian Subcontinent
"In September 1965 a festering border dispute between India and Pakistan erupted into full scale war. The Indian possessed the larger air force numerically, composed maily of British and French types- Hawker Hunter, Folland Gnat and Dassault Mystere fighters, Dassault Ouragon fighter-bombers and English electric Camnberra bombers. The smaller but highly trained Pakistan air force was equipped in large part with F-86F Sabers, plus a few F-104 Starfighters. Fighting lasted little more than two weeks, but during that time, Pakistan gained a definite ascendancy in the air……….. It was the well proven Sabers that emerged with honors, being credited with all but five of the 36 victories claimed. The Indians claimed 73 victories - undoubtly a considerable overestimate - for an admitted loss of 35."

(Christopher Sivores, Book: Air Aces)

"One point particularly noted by military observers is that in their frist advances the Indians did not use air power effectively to support their troops. by contrast, the Pakistanis, with sophisticated timing, swooped in on Ambala airfield and destroyed some 25 Indian planes just after they had landed and were sitting on the ground out of fuel and powerless to escape (NOTE: PAF has not claimed any IAF aircraft during it's attacks on Ambala due to non-availability of concrete evidence of damage in night bombing.)"

"By the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own."

Everett G. Martin,
General Editor, Newsweek
September 20, 1965.

"One thing I am convinced of is that Pakistan morally and even physically won the air battle against immense odds."

"Although the Air Force gladly gives most credit to the Army, this is perhaps over-generous. India with roughly five times greater air-power, expected an easy air-superiority. Her total failure to attain it may be seen retrospectively as a vital, possibly the most vital, of the whole conflict."

"Nur Khan is an alert, incisive man of 41, who seems even less. For six years he was on secondment and responsible for running Pakistan's civil air-line, which, in a country where 'now' means sometime and 'sometime' means never, is a model of efficiency. he talks without the jargon of a press relations officer. He does not quibble abobut figures. Immediately one has confidence in what he says."

"His estimates, proffered diffidently but with as much photographic evidence as possible, speak for themselves. Indian and Pakistani losses, he thinks, are in something like the ration of ten to one."

"Yet, the quality of equipment, Nur insists, is less important than flying ability and determination. the Indians have no sense of purpose. The Pakistanis were defending their own country and willingly taking greater risks. 'The average bomber crews flew 15 to 20 sorties. My difficulty was restraining them, not pushing them on.' "

"This is more than nationalistic pride. Talk to the pilots themselves and you get the same intense story."

Peter Preston,
The Guardian, London
September 24, 1965.

"Pakistan's success in the air means that she has been able to redeploy her relatively small army -- professionally among the best in Asia -- with impunity, plugging gaps in the long front in the face of each Indian thrust."

"By all accounts the courage displayed by the Pakistan Air Force pilots is reminiscent of the bravery of the few young and dedicated pilots who saved this country from Nazi invaders in the critical Battle of Britain during the last war."

Patrick Seale,
The Observer, London,
September 12, 1965.

No matter how much pathological liars indian manipulate history, at the end of the day pakistan technically/numerically outnumbered whopped indian butt! however if both sides had same equipments and same number of troops then pakistan would have walk all over india in matters of weeks.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

'Peshawar and Kohat sites of IAF bombs raids continue to be drawing card for West Pak politicians.'

The war officially started on 6th September of 1965 and it seems that IAF was bombing, pretty much at will, well past mid-October.

huh? what were they bombing? 90% of PAF fleet were all parked up in Sargodha in 65 war....

 

[Myth_buster_1]

OMG... indian are so deluded..... after giving over dose of reality checks they are again back to square one whit same old BS posts.