what does the Pak armed forces realiticially need to counter india conventially

[Slayer786]

Better trained soldiers. The most important asset Pakistan military have. They can counter larger untrained enemy soldiers. In the end defending one's country always motivates while attacking another raises doubts.

 

[Yousafzai_M]

First and foremost we need armed forces that stick to defending the borders and not interfere in the politics, domestic and foreign policies of Pakistan !

Leave politics and foreign policy to takla PML fart and madari you mean?? give me a break !

 

[deckingraj]

6 Pages...scores of trolling...both sides nuking each other....47, 65, 71, siachen, kargil fought all over again....hacked account of my favorite @MastanKhan and yet not one single serious answer to OP questions .... Amazing isn't it

 

[Pak_88]

Operation Parakram only aimed at mobilizing troops in short time which at that time gave a physiological fear to Musharraf who then agreed to freez the terror funding.

What you want us to enter in a war and ruin our economy just because of a usual terror strikes from pakistan!! Remember the costs of 71 you had to pay when India was prepared for war

'71 can easily be attributed to our own internal political mishaps/failures.... '71 didn't happen over night... No country separates over night... It took several years of successive idiocy on our own end for '71... Look at the battles of Hilli and the defence of Kamalpur as examples.... Qaiser-e-Hind and Hussainiwala sector... Chhamb Jaurian... '71 was a fine moment for the armed forces, where we had tactical and operational advantage in many areas, but that doesn't necessarily equate to strategic victory for the country as a whole... Because remember, it is a country and not the armed forces of said which wins wars...

 

[tsinga]

A much larger country(in all aspects)

Pakistani Miliary could only have thought of parity with India till they had the land & resources of East Pakistan with them. The resources- of all kind - land, human, economic... afforded them all the benefits of being a large country.

Since that is no longer the case, regardless of what Pakistan military buys, it will never be able to match India militarily. It is destined now to lose any and all military conflicts with India.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistani Miliary could only have thought of parity with India till they had the land & resources of East Pakistan with them. The resources- of all kind - land, human, economic... afforded them all the benefits of being a large country.

The East Pakistan argument is utter nonsense - what the 'land and resources of East Pakistan' would provide Pakistan, in the form of 2 separate geographic entities separated by a hostile enemy, is essentially a requirement to double her military, and even then probably not maintain the current status quo given East Pakistan's unique geographic and border constraints.

 

[tsinga]

The East Pakistan argument is utter nonsense - what the 'land and resources of East Pakistan' would provide Pakistan, in the form of 2 separate geographic entities separated by a hostile enemy, is essentially a requirement to double her military, and even then probably not maintain the current status quo given East Pakistan's unique geographic and border constraints.

East Pakistan provided a lot of things...that are clearly visible if you're not intent of igoring them.

A big land mass.
A unique ability to having an 'enemy country' at two borders. Couple that with an alliance with China in the North and Pakistan would have had India locked up on almost all sides barring the South.
A very porous border - which could have been easily used to smuggle people in. Something that Pakistan finds much harder now with India fencing up the Western border.

Lastly and most importantly - it would almost double your population. This initself means that your country would have had a massive economic boost for all generations to come and all that it entails.

A market power that would have clashed or disrupted world interests aligning so obviously with India.

There are very many advantages of being a large country with a large population. Far too many to list down. These would have come into play.

 

[Indika]

The East Pakistan argument is utter nonsense - what the 'land and resources of East Pakistan' would provide Pakistan, in the form of 2 separate geographic entities separated by a hostile enemy, is essentially a requirement to double her military, and even then probably not maintain the current status quo given East Pakistan's unique geographic and border constraints.

Some thing is better than nothing. your reasoning reeks of sour grapes nothing more. Every nation's main asset is ppl and pakistan lost tonnes of it but still no regret.

 

[FullMetalJacket]

All pakistan needs to do is:
1. Re-test some nasrs
2. Make more nuclear threats to India
3. Keep supporting kashmiri insurgents
That's literally it. Albeit, that's really all they can do.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

East Pakistan provided a lot of things...that are clearly visible if you're not intent of igoring them.

A big land mass.

A big land mass surrounded by a hostile enemy that would be even more challenging to defend than West Pakistan, and therefore require proportionally more resources diverted to the military to address those issues.

A unique ability to having an 'enemy country' at two borders. Couple that with an alliance with China in the North and Pakistan would have had India locked up on almost all sides barring the South.

It would be a unique ability alright, but in an extremely negative way. East Pakistan would be surrounded by enemy territory and in fact require more military resources to defend, let alone to create an offensive capability out of it, than today's Pakistan requires.

A very porous border - which could have been easily used to smuggle people in. Something that Pakistan finds much harder now with India fencing up the Western border.

That works both ways, as India showed with its support for terrorists that helped exacerbate the violence in East Pakistan in 1971.

Lastly and most importantly - it would almost double your population. This initself means that your country would have had a massive economic boost for all generations to come and all that it entails.

More hogwash - the 'double population' still needs to be fed, housed, educated and provided jobs. The increased strain of maintaining a proportionally larger military force in East Pakistan would drain even more resources than today's Pakistan. A geographically disjointed entity, separated by thousands of miles would essentially have to be treated as a second market.

A market power that would have clashed or disrupted world interests aligning so obviously with India.

The geographic and military realities, as pointed out above, don't support your outlandish contentions.

There are very many advantages of being a large country with a large population. Far too many to list down. These would have come into play.

There are indeed many advantages of being a large country with a large population, provided the country is geographically contiguous to some degree. The geographic and military realities of West and East Pakistan do not fit this 'large country' mold of yours.

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

Hi,

The thing is that our sole purpose in life is to fight you and conquer you.....

Truth be told---how many Indians get up everyday and say we want to destroy and conquer Pakistan---not many---but how about Pakistan----!!!! Think about it---. That is all we think---from dawn till dusk----.

---.

True, and utterly depressing. And yet, we keep putting the blame on our neighbour for bad relations.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Some thing is better than nothing. your reasoning reeks of sour grapes nothing more. Every countries main asset is ppl and pakistan lost tonnes of it but still no regret.

My arguments are made in a very specific context, as laid out by the poster I was responding to. The arguments are based on the ground realities of the military and geographic situation the Pakistan would face were East Pakistan still part of a united Pakistan, and those realities do not support the rosy alternate reality being painted by your countryman.

True, and utterly depressing. And yet, we keep putting the blame on our neighbour for bad relations.

I have no idea what you two do, but neither I nor any Pakistanis that I know, in the US or Pakistan, spend our lives 'hating India and dreaming of ways to conquer it'.

For at least 2 election cycles India has played absolutely no role in Pakistani political campaigns, whereas the Bollywood tamasha of 'Pakistan bashing' has been in full view on the Indian side, in every way possible. Even the spike in reporting on India, in the Pakistani media, is a result of the Indian naach gaana, specifically the BJP, dragging Pakistan into every issue - no one gives a hoot who wins the elections in Bihar otherwise.

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

My arguments are made in a very specific context, as laid out by the poster I was responding to. The arguments are based on the ground realities of the military and geographic situation the Pakistan would face were East Pakistan still part of a united Pakistan, and those realities do not support the rosy alternate reality being painted by your countryman.


I have no idea what you two do, but neither I nor any Pakistanis that I know, in the US or Pakistan, spend our lives 'hating India and dreaming of ways to conquer it'.

For at least 2 election cycles India has played absolutely no role in Pakistani political campaigns, whereas the Bollywood tamasha of 'Pakistan bashing' has been in full view on the Indian side, in every way possible. Even the spike in reporting on India, in the Pakistani media, is a result of the Indian naach gaana, specifically the BJP, dragging Pakistan into every issue - no one gives a hoot who wins the elections in Bihar otherwise.

A nation that threatens nuclear Armageddon repeatedly, and makes it known that it cares not whether it survives...when you say that you don't know what MasterKhan is talking about, then you speak for yourself.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

A nation that threatens nuclear Armageddon repeatedly, and makes it known that it cares not whether it survives...when you say that you don't know what MasterKhan is talking about, then you speak for yourself.

Pakistan never 'threatened nuclear Armageddon', it made a very specific statement that it would use tactical nuclear weapons as a 'defensive response' to a military attack by India (that tries to accomplish the goals articulated in 'Cold Start') on Pakistan.

Note the underlined part - the threat to use tactical nuclear weapons is defensive, and contingent on a very specific situation that could arise as a result of an Indian military attack on Pakistan.

Perhaps the two of you need to seek professional assistance, if your lives are so permeated with blind hatred and visions of destruction of another nation.

 

[Ifteqar Aisan]

Pakistan never 'threatened nuclear Armageddon', it made a very specific statement that it would use tactical nuclear weapons as a 'defensive response' to a military attack by India (that tries to accomplish the goals articulated in 'Cold Start') on Pakistan.

Note the underlined part - the threat to use tactical nuclear weapons is defensive, and contingent on a very specific situation that could arise as a result of an Indian military attack on Pakistan.

Perhaps the two of you need to seek professional assistance, if your lives are so permeated with blind hatred and visions of destruction of another nation.

You are either making silly claims without verification, or lying outright. Wreaking a nuclear holocaust upon the subcontinent is a daily theme in Pakistan, from the politicians to the media and even in schools. Underlining phrases in bold does not turn hogwash into facts.