Why A Medium / Heavy Strike Aircraft For Defense of Pakistan?

[CriticalThought]

You are ignoring the point I raised. Taliban had control of the entire country for a good six years, what did that do to our relations? Politically Afghanistan was always hostile, and the attitude turned national and even personal thanks to our own lack of understanding and well-doing during Taliban reign. The fact you think a bunch of illiterates with no knowledge of Islam, their own history, their culture and diversity can run an entire nation itself should be a worry for you thinking.

Tribal Pashtuns are a minority in Afghanistan, who have been the biggest obstacle in everything positive Afghanistan could experience. They're not Islamic, they're enemies of progress and Taliban are a perfect example of that. Urban Pashtuns and every other ethnic of Afghanistan despises anything to do with the Taliban, and anyone who wishes to force upon them any different view is the reason of the hostility they'll show.

Tribals there are not winning because of their so called strength, power, general support or any of these nonsense. They're winning because NATO's mission was never concerning the best interest of the country. The whole scenario what's happening there, and elsewhere in Middle East, is a big fat joke. A joke made by the West, and put into practise by the East.

The whole time Taliban was in power, we had absolutely no trouble on our Western border. No army deployment was needed, no bomb blasts were reported. You are being ignorant because in this case it serves your purpose.

The illiterates you are referring to are now on record using drones. And while they were in power they had their own airforce comprising a few light bombers and pilots who flew sorties against the Northern Alliance.

But in any case, illiterate or not, it is on Pakistan's best interest to get them on our side and safeguard their interests.

You ignored my concerns that the Afghans government is hostile and India's proxy against us. We do not see eye to eye with them and never will.

 

[MaMo]

The whole time Taliban was in power, we had absolutely no trouble on our Western border. No army deployment was needed, no bomb blasts were reported. You are being ignorant because in this case it serves your purpose.

The illiterates you are referring to are now on record using drones. And while they were in power they had their own airforce comprising a few light bombers and pilots who flew sorties against the Northern Alliance.

But in any case, illiterate or not, it is on Pakistan's best interest to get them on our side and safeguard their interests.

You ignored my concerns that the Afghans government is hostile and India's proxy against us. We do not see eye to eye with them and never will.

So you're basically saying our own interest is only best served by oppressing a huge majority of our neighbours with a regime we wouldn't even like to see on our own streets, forget as ruling elite? See, this is the mentality which is earning us hostility, NOT pro or anti-India government of Kabul. The government, and Afghan nation as a whole, are SO weak that if we decide to fence and seal our borders, foreign insurgency from Afghanistan will be zero. But we love to learn the things hard way, don't we?

 

[CriticalThought]

So you're basically saying our own interest is only best served by oppressing a huge majority of our neighbours with a regime we wouldn't even like to see on our own streets, forget as ruling elite? See, this is the mentality which is earning us hostility, NOT pro or anti-India government of Kabul. The government, and Afghan nation as a whole, are SO weak that if we decide to fence and seal our borders, foreign insurgency from Afghanistan will be zero. But we love to learn the things hard way, don't we?

I will wait until a successful 'fencing of border' gets accomplished anywhere in the world. India has sunk millions of dollars in its fencing project and is still complaining of militant incursions.

You have the problem of elitist snobbery. Some people are less than human in your eyes because they are poor and illiterate and want to follow Islam as it was revealed by Allah the Almighty to His Last Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu 'Alaihi Wa Aalihi Wasllam. And of your own accord, you have relegated them to a minority. You have a self-reinforcing world view where your desire to achieve certain vested interests feeds what you regard as 'truth' and 'ground reality'. Afghanistan today is backed not just by the West, but also by India. Are you telling me that such major powers along with a majority of Afghanistan's population are unable to control an illiterate minority? Right. I will happily side with illiterate minority against grossly incompetent, pseudo-intellectual, and so called civilized majority. Thank you.

 

[MaMo]

Just because you don't know of any case where neighbouring borders have been fenced is no excuse to support barbarism in any country, neighbouring or not. If not fencing then stricter border controls will reduce insurgency and illegal activities by a significant amount, and Pakistani security forces are very well capable of that.

Unlike you, I value ALL innocent human lives. Which is why, again, I don't support barbarism in an entire country just because that 'might' give our own borders a more secure future. Google 'Taliban and Afghan minorities' for once and see how amazingly Islamic and peaceful your brothers in deen truly were.

Even if Afghan government is supported by the entire world against Pakistan, mentally, physically and technically the country as a whole CANNOT stand up to Pakistan. Same-wise, the Taliban is not standing because of their so-called power or majority backing. They're standing because they're being saved as tennis ball for the future, and Kabul again will be its battlefield.

You haven't been to Afghanistan, you haven't spoken to their general public. Nor have you read about the history of tribal Pashtuns in politics, or about the aftermath of fall of Najibullah and Taliban regime. Had you done either of the above, you wouldn't make half the gestures you just did.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi,

Since the F16 Mafia has taken over the Paf---bombers have disappeared and and anyone talking about them is banished from Paf.



Hi,

Just to pi-ss off the americans---I have used the 'fail' term many a times---

But with 1 1/2 million afghans dead in afghanistan and nation totally destroyed---the americans have succeeded what they wanted---' the begining of the destruction of strong muslim nations in the middle east '.

Yes they have destroyed ... the real practicing muslim taliban gov is lost ... but still complete objective not met ... pupit gov has failled miserably in controlling afghans and there is a very high probability that afghanistan will move back to taliban setup ... recent meetings between russia china and pakistan is also an step in same direction ...

 

[CriticalThought]

Just because you don't know of any case where neighbouring borders have been fenced is no excuse to support barbarism in any country, neighbouring or not. If not fencing then stricter border controls will reduce insurgency and illegal activities by a significant amount, and Pakistani security forces are very well capable of that.

Unlike you, I value ALL innocent human lives. Which is why, again, I don't support barbarism in an entire country just because that 'might' give our own borders a more secure future. Google 'Taliban and Afghan minorities' for once and see how amazingly Islamic and peaceful your brothers in deen truly were.

Even if Afghan government is supported by the entire world against Pakistan, mentally, physically and technically the country as a whole CANNOT stand up to Pakistan. Same-wise, the Taliban is not standing because of their so-called power or majority backing. They're standing because they're being saved as tennis ball for the future, and Kabul again will be its battlefield.

You haven't been to Afghanistan, you haven't spoken to their general public. Nor have you read about the history of tribal Pashtuns in politics, or about the aftermath of fall of Najibullah and Taliban regime. Had you done either of the above, you wouldn't make half the gestures you just did.

Look if the Afghans want peace in Afghanistan here is what they need to do:

1. Completely move away from the Indian camp.

2. Work with Pakistan to completely eliminate TTP, BLA, RAW from Afghanistan.

3. Under no circumstance must they attack Pakistan or its interests.

If not, there won't be an Afghan government left to ask for peace. Very simple. Even a child can get this.

 

[MastanKhan]

No-one can control Afghanistan , not even the Afghans.

Yes they have destroyed ... the real practicing muslim taliban gov is lost ... but still complete objective not met ... pupit gov has failled miserably in controlling afghans and there is a very high probability that afghanistan will move back to taliban setup ... recent meetings between russia china and pakistan is also an step in same direction ...

Hi,

I am surprised at your illusion---they have already met their major target---except for pakistan and Egypt.

There are around 4 1/2 million muslims dead---over 30 million homeless---total chaos in the islamic world---and you are counting victory---.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi,

I am surprised at your illusion---they have already met their major target---except for pakistan and Egypt.

There are around 4 1/2 million muslims dead---over 30 million homeless---total chaos in the islamic world---and you are counting victory---.

No sir i am not in any dillusion and i completely acknowledge we are continously being humiliated by western world ... but i what i am trying to say war is not over yet ... we have lost all the battles but hope not lost ... Pakistan has fought back by operation zarb.e.azab ... turkey is also trying get out of western influence and trying to create identity of its own as a strong nation even without nato ... china and russia are backing up this group ...

I completely acknoledge the most firious battle between ksa and iran is yet to take place after which even remaining mslim powers will destroyed ...

My instance is no one can save middle east not as their rulers are hell bent upon killing each other ... my point from very start to strengthen Pakistan ... Pakistan needs to keep itself away from middle east to save itself from upcoming battles so that we can lead the final battles ... pakistan is too weak to lead now and persians and arabs are too arrogant to settle their dispute without fighting ...

What i am trying to say is the whole fire in middle east was to suck in all military might of mslims so that israel can walk in easily ... Pakistan has to keep itself at bay from this crisis and also avoid a war with india which is plan b of west of destroy pakistan ...

Regarding taliban they have paid a huge price but they have not lost all the grounds yet ... they still exist and they are getting stonger again .... so all battles are lost but war is not over yet ... you will see IA in a decade or so taliban leadership will again be rulling afghanistan ... the only thing to see whether it will be same taliban gov which had cabinet miniters from all ethinicities and under which afghanistan witnessed one kf the most peaceful period of the recent history ... if yes then suerly usa will be the looser of the war ...

 

[Zaem]

Hi,

Since the F16 Mafia has taken over the Paf---bombers have disappeared and and anyone talking about them is banished from Paf.



Hi,

Just to pi-ss off the americans---I have used the 'fail' term many a times---

But with 1 1/2 million afghans dead in afghanistan and nation totally destroyed---the americans have succeeded what they wanted---' the begining of the destruction of strong muslim nations in the middle east '.

Take off your tinfoil hat, firstly, there are no "strong" Middle East countries, except Israel, which isnt islamic.

Secondly, why US would like to destroy strong islamic countries, because Jews told them to? You have no proof other than "my mullah said so". Afghanistan had reason behind it, those terrorists are muslims, not americans. Saudis are big reasom why jihadism is raging in globe, not US alone.

 

[Danish saleem]

You have answered yourself ... Air superiority was never in doctrine of PAF and thats the reason we never invested in dual engine or heaver platform ... Our doctrine is Air defence and area denial ... Bombers no where fits in that doctrine ... Thats why a short leged light weight fighter JF-17 is being given so much importance by providing all the latest goodies ... whereas low turn around time kept intact ...

Then why we have Bombers in Past? and when we changed that doctrine!

i hope you knew in just recent past A-5c retired from PAF service, and their primary role is Bombers.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Just for the record, I am not proposing starting a war, I am proposing using the next war as an excuse. Depending on India's appetite for playing Nuclear Roulette with us, the Hammer and Anvil may never materialize, but a war with Afghanistan is simply writing on the wall at this point. I guess my proposal for attack and hold will get vindicated then. Or, if we adopt a declared posture to attack and hold, the war may never happen, may being the operative word since the Afghans don't have much to lose.

Air superiority over Afghanistan is a settled question.

So, about those bombers...

War with Afghanistan would be a stupid idea. Look at the recent super powers that attacked Afghanistan. Conquering isn't that much of a problem, it's the holding of it that matters. How do u expect Pakistan to succeed where such mighty powers with immense military, resources, and economy failed?

Additionally it will cement a hatred towards Pakistan in the mind of all Afghans. With India on the east u don't wanna make a permanent enemy on the west even if it is weaker militarily. Germany lost both WWI and WWII mainly due to two front war.

In this day and age conquering and holding another country's territory also gives a bad image and may invite sanctions like in case of Russia holding Crimea.

There is another way besides a military option. Wars are fought on more than one front
Most likely their politicians and key leaders are up for sale. Some well placed bribes, a few leaders in our pocket, some betterment of Pakistan's image in the Afghan mindset and that's all that's really needed to keep that border peaceful.

 

[Majet Raha]

send some of your guys with packed vest of bombs. and you got your bombers

 

[The Accountant]

Then why we have Bombers in Past? and when we changed that doctrine!

i hope you knew in just recent past A-5c retired from PAF service, and their primary role is Bombers.

Coz in past radar coverage of the opposition was not that dense so bobers could move in ... furthermore there were no percision munitions so in order to attack you have to drop plenty of dumb bombing for which you require bombers ... furthermore at the time bombers was purchased concept of multurole was new ... now for high value target stad off weapons are avaliable furthermore we dont have enemy at other end of the globe like russia china and usa ... our adversary is in neighbour so we have what we need to strike them in current scenario ...

 

[CriticalThought]

Coz in past radar coverage of the opposition was not that dense so bobers could move in ... furthermore there were no percision munitions so in order to attack you have to drop plenty of dumb bombing for which you require bombers ... furthermore at the time bombers was purchased concept of multurole was new ... now for high value target stad off weapons are avaliable furthermore we dont have enemy at other end of the globe like russia china and usa ... our adversary is in neighbour so we have what we need to strike them in current scenario ...

There are two advantages bombers provide: range and capacity. Range may not be an issue but more capacity is always welcome.

And, I haven't touched the topic yet, I am going to post in detail later, but the naval theatre obviously needs both range and capacity.

Finally, given the enemy's strategic depth, bombers open up lots more possibilities.

 

[fitpOsitive]

I can understand half

the other part was: the big question is who will give us bombers.