man u are totally mad.... pakistan politicians try to fool their citizens with all the false stories i think.... and the media their is a kiss a__ of the government. If you are really interested in knowing the truth then search for the details of the war in a site like the wikipedia which is totally nuetral.
i would like to quote some sentences from wikipedia to help u...
* TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[48] The same article stated that -
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N
* Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[49] -
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.
* In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[50] Gertjan Dijkink writes -
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.
* An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India,[51] summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, is as follows:
In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.
In his book "War in the modern world since 1815", Jeremy Black mentions that "Pakistan gambled and lost heavily"
* Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war.[53]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and materiel, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.
It was determined later that only 14% of India's frontline ammunition had been fired and India held twice the number of tanks as Pakistan. By this time, the Pakistani Army had used close to 80% of its ammunition.
However, the Pakistani government was accused of spreading disinformation among its citizens regarding the actual consequences of the war.
In his book "Mainsprings of Indian and Pakistani foreign policies", S.M. Burke writes[78]
After the Indo-Pakistani war of 1965 the balance of military power had decisively shifted in favor of India. Pakistan had found it difficult to replace the heavy equipment lost during that conflict while her adversary, despite her economic and political problems, had been determinedly building up her strength.
The war was heading for a stalemate, with both nations holding territory of the other. The Indian army suffered 3,000 battlefield deaths, while Pakistan suffered 3,800. The Indian army was in possession of 710 mile² (1,840 km²) of Pakistani territory and the Pakistan army held 210 mile² (545 km²) of Indian territory. The territory occupied by India was mainly in the fertile Sialkot, Lahore and Kashmir sectors,[19] while Pakistani land gains were primarily south in deserts opposite to Sindh and in Chumb sector near Kashmir in north.[20]
REMEMBER NONE OF THE ABOVE FACTS ARE TAKEN FROM A BIASED ARTICLE BUT HAS BEEN QUOTED FROM THE WIKIPEDIA
of Pakistani territory and the Pakistan army held 210 mile² (545 km²
