What's new

The Fateful Para-Commando Assault - 1965 War

No you haven't. India crossed the IB on the 6th of September, and as a result started the war. Nothing you say will change that.

your analogy says if pakistan crosses border with army that is a move to solve a dispute , if india crosses border with army that is attack and declaration of war.:D
 
.
Sure, all the events are public knowledge, and nobody is denying the battle of Chawinda. So? That does not help your position.
That tells alot.You can say Pakistan loss in one way and that's that we did failed to achieve our target which was to get Kashmir but you also failed in doing what you wanted and instead got in trouble when we entered your Punjab.
 
.
Pakistan crossed LOC you indiot not IB while you crossed IB and started war.
Post all the emojis you want to satisfy your ego but it won't change the truth.

who says crossing l.o.c. is not war ?
 
Last edited:
.
That tells alot.You can say Pakistan loss in one way and that's that we did failed to achieve our target which was to get Kashmir but you also failed in doing what you wanted and instead got in trouble when we entered your Punjab.

Yes, but you started the war. This is about that, not about what finished the war. LOL.
 
.
Pakistan did so with armour, with all guns firing. What was that? A hunger-strike? :rofl:
That was inside a disputed territory which is something you have failed to understand over the years.Who has stopped you? just try to enter and you will know its consequences..and now plzz don't state the example of that routine 'sir jee kal' strike which you guys conduct in fields due to less toilets.

Yes, but you started the war. This is about that, not about what finished the war. LOL.
We are gonna start such a war every time our Kashmiri brothers will ask for help.
 
.
That was inside a disputed territory which is something you have failed to understand over the years.Who has stopped you? just try to enter and you will know its consequences..and now plzz don't state the example of that routine 'sir jee kal' strike which you guys conduct in fields due to less toilets.


We are gonna start such a war every time our Kashmiri brothers will ask for help.

And that's all we wanted to say. It's good that you have blown poor @Taimur Khurram 's laboured defence to bits, and the truth hangs out for all the world to see.

@GHALIB

Watch them blow each other up, and enjoy the show. You have no idea how stupid these fan-boys can be; keep watching.
 
.
That was inside a disputed territory which is something you have failed to understand over the years.Who has stopped you? just try to enter and you will know its consequences..and now plzz don't state the example of that routine 'sir jee kal' strike which you guys conduct in fields due to less toilets.


We are gonna start such a war every time our Kashmiri brothers will ask for help.
disputed territory is not khalajan's house where you can go every jumma :D:D:D
come on we are ready with final solution ,trailer we showed in 1971 .
 
Last edited:
.
War is defined by actions, not by self-serving definitions.

Oh the irony!

your analogy says if pakistan crosses border with army that is a move to solve a dispute , if india crosses border with army that is attack and declaration of war.:D

No, it's because India crossed the IB rather than the LOC or in a disputed piece of territory.
 
. .
Watch them blow each other up, and enjoy the show. You have no idea how stupid these fan-boys can be; keep watching.

Once again, you're proving your inability to have a normal discussion without name-calling.
 
. .
that's your ignorance which makes you so ridiculous:lol:
this is probably the result of cow urine you guys drink day-night.

you do not launch special forces raids against heavily defended targets where attacks are anticipated
 
.
disputed territory is not khalajan's house where you can go every jumma :D:D:D
come on we are ready with final solution ,trailor we showed in 1971 .
Bangladesh or east-Pakistan was our vulnerable part just like alaska is to US,andaman and nicobar to you..the point is that these parts were simply too far to save and especially when there is a hostile neighbour sitting next to you.So you didn't did much of a work that you should be proud of.There were 90k soldiers against almost a 100k mukhti bahni and 150k+ indiot troops.
 
.

That's nothing compared to the 1000 year Muslim domination in the region. Your brief phase of achieving parity is just that, a brief phase. We'll soon return to having the upper hand (insha'Allah).
 
.
As you said there was 0 chances of mission success and still they send the operatives ( no one can question their bravery) ...... but what you think the purpose of such raid whose failure was well known even before execution

The missions did have an impact on the Indian Army's offensive operations because a significant amount of manpower had to be diverted to cater to the threat of the special forces around multiple Indian bases.

The issue of sending the special forces is one that I have spelt out. The ones going in were not the ones making the go/no-go decision. The way the mission was communicated was that they HAD to go and they did.

The ill-planning is not to be commended here, rather the hardihood and dedication of those who answered the call.

I find this point of view difficult to understand.

What is glorious in dying for objectives that are unattainable from the outset? In what way did the gallantry of the troops involved affect the survival of Pakistan?

I did not say anything about "glorious death" anywhere. My point is that they were given an order and with whatever means they had at their disposal, they went to accomplish it. The decision to go or not go did not rest with them and despite that not a single one of the officers and men opted out. All of them had a lot to lose (families, loved ones) but they answered the call.

It takes guts to get into a fight in ones own patch, having to go and pick a fight in another's requires even more. I respect that immensely.

you do not launch special forces raids against heavily defended targets where attacks are anticipated

That comes across as quite logical but only with hindsight. By the way, during WWII, multiple such raids took place against heavily defended areas.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom