Why India must keep LoC in a constant war like situation

[Joe Shearer]

Who will stop Pakistan from starting a war.
Pakistan did gibralter. India adopted same strategy.

Perplexing.

Where and when did India adopt the same strategy on the LOC?

Pakistan started op grand slam in response and india was forced to start a war.

What was Grand Slam, then? A kabaddi match held very close to the border?

 

[Ashraf. M]

Will the PK able to get back IOK? in near future?

 

[Esgalduin]

Budget wouldn't be the biggest constraint as you will face budget constraint too if u think of retaliation,
i want to see India change its strategy from fighting militancy in Kashmir to fighting Pakistan on LoC and fighting Pakistan in Azad Kashmir that in turn will deal with militancy issue in Kashmir in a far more effective way.

Fighting Pakistan in Azad Kashmir? Do you mean taking the offensive to Pakistan on its own soil? Please explain to me how India hopes to do that when it is currently engaged in a prolonged and bloody "counter-insurgency" operation (that is the tamest euphemism I could find) in JandK requiring massive amounts of men and materiel. What is the logic in launching a campaign on foreign soil from a region within your own borders that is effectively a police state and requires a constant security presence? The Indian military (like any other military) must have its fair share of fools but none so dumb who would believe that the Kashmiris of JandK will willingly forget the suppression they are currently suffering at the hands of the Indian government and happily assist the Indians in their fight against Pakistan. It makes no sense whatsoever and makes me less inclined to take you as a rational individual with even the most rudimentary grasp of tactics.

Perplexing.

Where and when did India adopt the same strategy on the LOC?



What was Grand Slam, then? A kabaddi match held very close to the border?

Grand Sham is to competent military operations what Modi is to male modelling. The two do not fit, at all. Grand Slam was the result of politicians and some politically inclined senior officers with no regard for understanding the lay of the land and not one iota of tactical sense whatsoever. So yes, you could make the argument that Grand Slam was perceived by its planners as a glorified Kabaddi match where more presumptions were made than are made in a desi gharaana. As for the ones who actually had to execute the plan: 'Ours not to question why; ours but to do and die."

 

[Joe Shearer]

Fighting Pakistan in Azad Kashmir? Do you mean taking the offensive to Pakistan on its own soil? Please explain to me how India hopes to do that when it is currently engaged in a prolonged and bloody "counter-insurgency" operation (that is the tamest euphemism I could find) in JandK requiring massive amounts of men and materiel. What is the logic in launching a campaign on foreign soil from a region within your own borders that is effectively a police state and requires a constant security presence? The Indian military (like any other military) must have its fair share of fools but none so dumb who would believe that the Kashmiris of JandK will willingly forget the suppression they are currently suffering at the hands of the Indian government and happily assist the Indians in their fight against Pakistan. It makes no sense whatsoever and makes me less inclined to take you as a rational individual with even the most rudimentary grasp of tactics.

Grand Sham is to competent military operations what Modi is to male modelling. The two do not fit, at all. Grand Slam was the result of politicians and some politically inclined senior officers with no regard for understanding the lay of the land and not one iota of tactical sense whatsoever. So yes, you could make the argument that Grand Slam was perceived by its planners as a glorified Kabaddi match where more presumptions were made than are made in a desi gharaana. As for the ones who actually had to execute the plan: 'Ours not to question why; ours but to do and die."

This is the first time I have heard anyone from Pakistan talk about it in such an iconoclastic vein. Fair enough, let's leave it at your assessment.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Perplexing.

Where and when did India adopt the same strategy on the LOC?

Before Gibraltar Indian army used to occupy heights and harass Pakistani civilians.
Gibralter was in response to rann of kutch.
After gibralter india did an op and captured haji pir pass.
Pakistan responded by starting operation grand slam.
India was losing so it started a war.

Everything Pakiaan did was a reaction. So no body can stop us from increasing the escalation ladder.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Before Gibraltar Indian army used to occupy heights and harass Pakistani civilians.

Please read your own military historians; it is more rewarding than concocting your own.

You also need to explain where the Indian Army occupied heights overlooking Pakistani-held territory; there are very few spots along the frontier where there is such a situation, and there was no harrassment of civilians even according to the Pakistan Army where there was such a situation.

Gibralter was in response to rann of kutch.

First, you must be clear in your mind, if possible, about which event caused Gibraltar as a reaction, Indian Army occupying heights and harrassing Pakistani civilians, or the Rann of Kutch events.

Second, you should know that Brigadier Iftikhar Janjua attacked policemen guarding the Indian border with a full-scale military assault. It is difficult to understand why Pakistan should wish to offer a 'response' to the Rann of Kutch incident, having been the aggressor in every way.

After gibralter india did an op and captured haji pir pass.

Your ignorance of your own military history is abysmal. The capture of Haji Pir Pass had nothing to do with Grand Slam. Grand Slam had been prepared by Akhtar Husain Malik as a contingency plan against the failure of Gibraltar, and was implemented on the comprehensive failure of Gibraltar.

Pakistan responded by starting operation grand slam.

Again, read your history from your own sources. fatman17 has a thread on the 1965 war; consult that, he is a Pakistani and a very senior member of PDF, and his facts will make a mess of the argument that you have presented, very unwisely.

India was losing so it started a war.

The battle was not even in full stride; where was there the question of 'losing'?

Everything Pakiaan did was a reaction. So no body can stop us from increasing the escalation ladder.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

Please read your own military historians; it is more rewarding than concocting your own.

You also need to explain where the Indian Army occupied heights overlooking Pakistani-held territory; there are very few spots along the frontier where there is such a situation, and there was no harrassment of civilians even according to the Pakistan Army where there was such a situation.



First, you must be clear in your mind, if possible, about which event caused Gibraltar as a reaction, Indian Army occupying heights and harrassing Pakistani civilians, or the Rann of Kutch events.

Second, you should know that Brigadier Iftikhar Janjua attacked policemen guarding the Indian border with a full-scale military assault. It is difficult to understand why Pakistan should wish to offer a 'response' to the Rann of Kutch incident, having been the aggressor in every way.



Your ignorance of your own military history is abysmal. The capture of Haji Pir Pass had nothing to do with Grand Slam. Grand Slam had been prepared by Akhtar Husain Malik as a contingency plan against the failure of Gibraltar, and was implemented on the comprehensive failure of Gibraltar.



Again, read your history from your own sources. fatman17 has a thread on the 1965 war; consult that, he is a Pakistani and a very senior member of PDF, and his facts will make a mess of the argument that you have presented, very unwisely.



The battle was not even in full stride; where was there the question of 'losing'?

Everything Pakiaan did was a reaction. So no body can stop us from increasing the escalation ladder.

[/QUOTE]
All of ur sources are same propaganda present in internet.
Ran of kutch was not Pakistan aggression. Later when issue was solved on table it was Pakistan whose claim was accepted and we got 800km2 of territory.
Indians both harassed civilians and tried to capture hights resulting in increased tensions. Rann of kutch was one of the reason for Gibraltar.

Grand slam was opposed by general musa but Indian operation forced Pakistan to implement it.
India was about to lose jamu or akhnoor and main highway to IOK resulting in an all out war by india. On international boundary.

Such ops on LOC r normal operations. But attacking international boundary was actually war.

 

[Jackdaws]

There are children living on both sides of the LoC. Keep nationalism, strategic depth and all other buzzwords aside. These are human lives. Villagers. Farmers. Even the soldiers - they belong to families. On one hand we are trying to save lives during the pandemic. On the other, we are making lives of our citizens expendable. Both countries know that the days of using wars to change borders are long gone.

All of ur sources are same propaganda present in internet.
Ran of kutch was not Pakistan aggression. Later when issue was solved on table it was Pakistan whose claim was accepted and we got 800km2 of territory.
Indians both harassed civilians and tried to capture hights resulting in increased tensions. Rann of kutch was one of the reason for Gibraltar.

Grand slam was opposed by general musa but Indian operation forced Pakistan to implement it.
India was about to lose jamu or akhnoor and main highway to IOK resulting in an all out war by india. On international boundary.

Such ops on LOC r normal operations. But attacking international boundary was actually war.[/QUOTE]
Pakistan claimed about 10,000 square kms and tribunal awarded it some 850-900 square kms

 

[Joe Shearer]

All of ur sources are same propaganda present in internet.

NONE of my sources are from the Internet. I have always used Pakistani authors and military historians. The whole matter is there on record in this forum, less than three months old.

Ran of kutch was not Pakistan aggression. Later when issue was solved on table it was Pakistan whose claim was accepted and we got 800km2 of territory.

Put down, if you know, what the Pakistani claim was, and what derisory extent it was awarded.

Indians both harassed civilians and tried to capture hights resulting in increased tensions.

Which civilians, where, when according to your own narrative, there was no capture of the heights? We are now shifting gradually from an established fact to an attempt.

There were NO tensions according to your own military historians. Look them up, if you have ever read a book of military history in your life. Have you, by the way? Which?

Rann of kutch was one of the reason for Gibraltar.

You succeeded in overwhelming a police contingent, so you decided to infiltrate special forces commandoes into Indian Kashmir? Where is the logic, or does that not matter?

Grand slam was opposed by general musa but Indian operation forced Pakistan to implement it.

Musa might have opposed it, but he was not the decision-maker, and his opposition counted for nothing. India's total defeat of Gibraltar was the signal for Grand Slam, and was not accidental; that was the plan. It was Plan B. Again, read your own military historians.

India was about to lose jamu or akhnoor and main highway to IOK resulting in an all out war by india. On international boundary.

Really?

Such ops on LOC r normal operations. But attacking international boundary was actually war.

You mean an armoured attack is normal operations? What la la land do you inhabit?

 

[halupridol]

First and foremost GOI needs to decide on our objectives vis a vis Pakistan both short and long term.
Then frame the course of action accordingly.
If it is just to put pressure(or political point scoring) thn no need of further escalation on loc.That can be achieved via other means effectively.
With time ,gap between India and Pakistan will only get wider,,,so we need not be in any hurry.we got a huge army,,casualities r to be expected in conflict zones and we r more thn capable of absorbing them.
If anyone its Pakistan who shud be concerned.If one notices,,Previous govts. engaged with GOP.But with each passing decade Indian stance has only got harder,,so much so that now thr r not even talks about prospective talks.In coming decades it will only become difficult for Pakistan to negotiate.

 

[I S I]

Send this pajeet on LoC. Let's see how he makes his internet farts a reality.

 

[waz]

You do realise (aimed at sensible posters) that this is a troll thread designed to wind up Pakistani posters. Indian forces have no intention to do this, and if does happen the Pakistani army will up the ante quickly.Here's a reference, anyone remember Modi's "1000 guns will fire into Azad Kashmir, and the enemy will feel the pain" speech? The Indian forces did follow through and rain down a great deal more level of fire on the LOC, Pakistan responded by raining down even more fire then hitting targets in Jammu.

They put up threads like this to make themselves feel better.

 

[blain2]

Sure Pakistan going to retaliation, and the low level skirmish may go for some time before one or other party gives in but Pakistan will suffer casualties too. Currently it's Indian forces who are bleeding in Kashmir. Pakistan enjoys seeing India bleed in hands of its trained insurgents. Once fighting starts out at LoC, pakistani forces would have to focus on themselves rather than train Jihadis.

Eventually there wont be a war, you know why because Pakistan don't want a war and it avoids war at any cost, that's why it resorts militancy in Kashmir rather than take military action in all these years.

You think Pakistan will give in? Since 1948, have we given up on Kashmir? Since 1984, have we given up on Siachen?
Pakistan will handle Indian escalations appropriately and with effect. Unless India wants to go for an all out escalation, which is not feasible for either side and even then no outcome is assured, raising the costs for Pakistan is not a one way street.
These escalations have been going on since 1988 where even brigade level actions have taken place and heavy artillery being used by both sides only to result in status-quo. You can try changing the norm to a new norm but Pakistan will ensure that it retains its deterrence.