What's new

War of 1971 - Bangladesh

But what was the achievement on western Theatre!?

Pakistan lost more land in Western theatre which was never returned to them.

Secondly a whole Company of 120 Men ( Kumaon Regiment) fought to the last men with Bolt Action Rifle... stalled the PLA and Saved Chushul On the other hand Niazi had 26000 Troops stationed in Dhaka but he surrendered to 3000 Indians.

I will post the Fighting strength of pak later but untill than add these razakars
BzmDXoFCcAEanj3.jpg

cover9.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
@Atanz

you're a silly fellow my friend..71 war is not "India's Stalingrad",as we were not defending in 71.SU glorified "Stalingrad" to encourage their "battered","ill-fitted" and "inexperienced" troops(one may challenge me for these adjectives used.I'm open for discussion) to fight against Germans.This battle played its part in propaganda,which other battles like Battle of Sevastopol could not,because of Germany's role reversal..Stalingrad for SU was what Midway was for USA.there is no comparison with these with 1971 war..

about distance,I never heard Pakistanis complaining in discussions of previous war where they enjoyed the benefit of having covered 2 flanks of Indian border.I remember one basic principle of Warfare...Never fight a two front war..But it is India what always had to divide its force for a possible 2 front war..but what India showed Pakistan that if prepared,it can be fought with relative ease..

What a foolish claim.... pakistan was not fighting 1400miles from pakistan. But it is fighting 'ZERO' km from pakistan. Becouase bengal was pakistan. It is in bengal where indian musleem league formed. It is bengal which is the support base of pakistan ideology when west pakistanis where electing unionists,congress and regional parties.Without brngal,pakistan will never become reality as it is THEM who made it

a civil war was lost,and here we are,discussing how 1400 miles and 3400 miles became sole cause.. :lol:

they're blaming us for Mukti Bahini,but no mention of Razakars,Pakistan's proxy,that started the slaughter and sole cause of the civil war.

RAWSYNDROME.. :rofl::rofl:
 
. .
Combatents

Pakistan Armed Forces versus Bengali Mukhti Bahini and Indian Armed Forces.

Below is the map of relative position of Pakistan and East Bengal. In between as can be seen is the landmass of India which is proximate to the European landmass between UK and Istanbul, Turkey. In other words Pakistan is UK and Bang is Turkey with India as the continental Europe. The blue line is the air route 1,300 miles however it was untenable as it would be impossible to go over India without being shot down.

That left only the red sea route from Karachi, Pakistan which sailed south in the Arabian sea avoiding getting to close to India coast because of danger of India air or naval attack. The entire route of 3,500 miles involved sailing along hostile waters dominated by India. Only in the extreme south in Colombo, Sri Lanka was there refuge. The journey then involved sailing north up the Bay of Bengal again under continous danger of Indian air or naval interdiction.

This journey is about the same disance from British port of Plymouth down to Spain, along the Mediteranean, past foot of Italy, along the Greek mainland and north into Aegean Sea finaly arriving in Istanbul, Turkey. Both distance UK-Turkey, Pakistan-Bangladesh are about 3,400 sea miles.
FxC8BCq.jpg


This is the actual Indian attack from Indian mainland. In the south Indian city of Kolkata formed one pont of axis of attack, it also included Indian attack from the north from Indian Assam and from the east from Indian Tripura and Mizoram. When this mass atack occured the Pakistani forces already were under seige by Bengali Mukhti Bahini fighters. The M-H had rbeen recieving training and weapons from India.

BgxFhvi.jpg

x
Bangladesh Liberation War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
East Pakistan Air Operations, 1971 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is important also to note that there are two elements to this war that the same small beseiged Pakistani force of 50,000 men far way from home had to face. The war with Bengali freedom fighter the Mukhti Bahini supported by most of the Bangladesh civilian population who provided cover for the Mukhti Bahini fighters. To quote Mao Zedong "The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea.". This is the first aspect to the war.

The second aspect began when Indian made a full scale invasion from three sides of East Bengal. This delievered the coupe de grace to a already beseiged force worn out by months of Mukhti Bahini attacks and hostile civilian population.

Mukti Bahini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


640px-March71.PNG

x

640px-Bangladesh_1971_Liberation.jpg


The other thing thaty has to be considered is the morale of the Pakistani rroops was very low by this stage. Most of the Pakistan Army was made up of ethnic Pashtun or Punjabi's both from 1,300 miles away from the other side of the continent as shown before like UK/Turkey on extreme opposite ends of Europe.

The Pashtun/Punjabi soldiers came from a dry hilly areas areas of north west Pakistan. The Bengal delta region was nothing like they were used to to. It was tropical lush, wet and being delta region was swampy criss crossed by rivers. Movement was difficult, mechanized transport was almost impossible. Boats were needed and swimming was a must. Most of the Pashtun/Punjabi soldiers could not swim. The geography of the Bengal delta region can be seen in the map below with rivers and swamps criss crossing the area.
w8PdJQW.jpg


In fact the Bengal region in terms of climate and geography is closer to South East Asia as Burma, Thailand and Vietnam are adjacent on the east of Bengal. As can be seen in the map below Bangal is only 700 miles from Vietnam whereas it is 1,300 miles from Pakistan. The climate is almost same as Vietnam. Tropical, lush and swampy ideal guerilla warfare country as evidenced by what happened to the Americans.

In 1971 while the Bangladesh war of liberation was being fought soon to turn also into Indian Pakistan war barely 700 miles to the east of Bengal over half a million American soldiers were fighting and losing to the Viet Cong in Vietnam. Simultanous to this Pakistan Army was fighting the Mukhti Bahini soon to also face second enemy India. The superpower was defeated with ten times more men then Pakistan with the largest airforce in the world.

Yet USA did not have to face a full scale invasion by a conventional army like the Chinese army invading that Pakistan had to face. Given this is it a surprise that Pakistan lost. This war was like a boxer taking on a disabled person who is already being attacked by another person and then claming a monumental victory

Eh6n7Xf.jpg

You lost the war becuz of your stupid defense of the east lies in the west theory

@Atanz

you're a silly fellow my friend..71 war is not "India's Stalingrad",as we were not defending in 71.SU glorified "Stalingrad" to encourage their "battered","ill-fitted" and "inexperienced" troops(one may challenge me for these adjectives used.I'm open for discussion) to fight against Germans.This battle played its part in propaganda,which other battles like Battle of Sevastopol could not,because of Germany's role reversal..Stalingrad for SU was what Midway was for USA.there is no comparison with these with 1971 war..

about distance,I never heard Pakistanis complaining in discussions of previous war where they enjoyed the benefit of having covered 2 flanks of Indian border.I remember one basic principle of Warfare...Never fight a two front war..But it is India what always had to divide its force for a possible 2 front war..but what India showed Pakistan that if prepared,it can be fought with relative ease..



a civil war was lost,and here we are,discussing how 1400 miles and 3400 miles became sole cause.. :lol:

they're blaming us for Mukti Bahini,but no mention of Razakars,Pakistan's proxy,that started the slaughter and sole cause of the civil war.

RAWSYNDROME.. :rofl::rofl:

The Pakistanis are trying very hard to undermine our achievement nevertheless when we take apart Sindh they will understand our true power
 
.
1.Again this pathetic obsession of India "winning" in 1971. '71 War was basically a war of resistance fought by us when the minor part of Pakistan launched an attack on us, the major part of Pakistan. India got involved for various reasons that have been discussed again and again - an opportunity to break Pakistan, an opportunity to prove the Two Nation Theory wrong, to ensure return of a million Hindu refugees that had been expelled, smashing the raging Naxalite movement, etc. However, it was a BD-Pakistan War or a war of secession, a civil war or a war of independence/liberation of BD.
2.It was never an Indo-Pak War in the East till the last few days - 22 Nov to 16 Dec, when India jumped into the fray to steal victory from us. Pakistan Eastern Command lost to us and should have surrendered to us but for the propaganda launched by Indians that we would lynch the surrendering soldiers. That was totally wrong and totally motivated. At many locations Pak troops did surrender to us and they were treated with respect due to POWs - without exception. Whatever lynching took place was targeted at the local irregulars - Rajakars, who had committed heinous crimes.
59122136.jpg


1.Again this pathetic obsession of India "winning" in 1971. '71 War was basically a war of resistance fought by us when the minor part of Pakistan launched an attack on us, .

"Major Pakistan" started rebellion on 23rd March 1971. "Minor Pakistan" retaliated on 25th March 1971.

Pakistan Eastern Command lost to us and should have surrendered to us
:sarcastic:
At many locations Pak troops did surrender to us and they were treated with respect due to POWs - without exception

The Punjabi CO's and officers in Bengali units which rebelled were treated with respect by boiling them alive in urine pots.

The PAF pilots who ejected and MOU's of PAF were treated with less respect as they were shot and bayoneted.

The Punjabi, Pathan and Bihari civilians were given the utmost more respect via a genocide of them.
 
Last edited:
.
Well it's easy to blame it on the unfavorable situations but it was actually the strategic failure of Pakistan that caused the defeat. The Indian strategy was to wait till winter as it would neutralize the Chinese since it was difficult to cross the Himalayan pass during that time. My question is, if they already knew that India had been supporting the Mukti Bahini then why did Pakistan wait till December to declare the war against India? If the war was declared earlier, China would have surely got involved as they were already suspicious about India's nuclear program. Watching China's actions, USA would have also directly supported Pakistan since the Nixon-Kissinger administration was just searching for a way to engage with China. True, even if the result was different, Pakistan would have never established a strong foothold on East Pakistan as the anti-establishment sentiment was at its peak because of the decades of discrimination. However, it would have at least prevented India from holding the regional hegemony.
 
.
The less we discuss about that war the better...
 
.
As many already pointed out, what stopped pakistan from smashing indias defenses in west and occupying even delhi? There wasnt any distqnce or force inimbalance issue in western front now, was there?
 
.
It was never stalingrad.. it was always tilted against pakistan.. ever since 65(which was stopped due to intense pressure from russia), India wanted a short fight.
some of the decisions(delaying it till winter, going for dhaka instead of capturing and holding land for future bargain) points towards that plan. Indian military leaders say the plan was months in making.
Bhutto's cry in general assembly fell to deaf ears, he warned many times what is going to happen.

Well it's easy to blame it on the unfavorable situations but it was actually the strategic failure of Pakistan that caused the defeat. The Indian strategy was to wait till winter as it would neutralize the Chinese since it was difficult to cross the Himalayan pass during that time. My question is, if they already knew that India had been supporting the Mukti Bahini then why did Pakistan wait till December to declare the war against India? If the war was declared earlier, China would have surely got involved as they were already suspicious about India's nuclear program. Watching China's actions, USA would have also directly supported Pakistan since the Nixon-Kissinger administration was just searching for a way to engage with China. True, even if the result was different, Pakistan would have never established a strong foothold on East Pakistan as the anti-establishment sentiment was at its peak because of the decades of discrimination. However, it would have at least prevented India from holding the regional hegemony.
they had every intention of stopping the civil war by killing bunch of bengalis.. why go to war when you can do it within the country.
Some say they started war just to save face (bangladeshis say this), because they cant accept being defeated by a militia. I think surrendering to India and making sure they leave unharmsed was a better route.
Not sure what pakistanis think about the claim.
 
.
Some say they started war just to save face (bangladeshis say this), because they cant accept being defeated by a militia. I think surrendering to India and making sure they leave unharmsed was a better route.
Not sure what pakistanis think about the claim.
Wrong claim of Bengladeshis.

Fact was that even after months of intense guerrilla warfare, all major cities and towns of East Pakistan were in the hands of Pakistani Army against all odds. The Lulli Bahani couldn't do shyt.
 
.
Wrong claim of Bengladeshis.

Fact was that even after months of intense guerrilla warfare, all major cities and towns of East Pakistan were in the hands of Pakistani Army against all odds. The Lulli Bahani couldn't do shyt.
militarily they were no match, but they were much more than mere nuisance. Besides their effect on troop morale should be considerd, an west pakistani soldier after months of fighting, must be wondering what/who he is fighting for.
Niazi claims Indian side blackmailed him (surrender now else you will surrender to muktis), surrendering to muktis must be either frieghtening or degrading.
 
.
ilitarily they were no match, but they were much more than mere nuisance. Besides their effect on troop morale should be considerd, an west pakistani soldier after months of fighting, must be wondering what/who he is fighting for.
As I said in my earlier post clearly " despite all odds". It means more or less the same what you said.
Niazi claims Indian side blackmailed him (surrender now else you will surrender to muktis), surrendering to muktis must be either frieghtening or degrading.
That was after active Indian involvement and the routing of many of our forces by IA.
Muktis alone were not in any position to make PA surrender to them, even when they outnumbered our forces and had a highly favourable terrain for guerilla warfare on their side, they also had early advantage in many areas like Chittagong etc but finally they lost every major city and town to PA.

@Atanz Strength of PA regulars in EP was 34,000 personnel. There were 11000 paramillitary, police and Razakars.
Total no of combatants was no more than 45000.
 
. .
The war is not Indo - Pak war, It was Mukti Bahini that played major part in this war !
 
.
Hindus are good at propaganda, the war was about to end before hindus jumped in to claim victory. Now these petty hindus claim victory and also taunt Bengalis for giving them freedom lmao

And they only bothered to do that after making sure advantage was 50-1 in India favor, accepted by their own general on tv. cowards
 
.
Back
Top Bottom