What's new

The 1965 Indo-Pak war

Status
Not open for further replies.
yep.. that PAF kicked IAF butt really hard.
If that gives you a peaceful sleep at night, I am cool with it.:cheers:
Wait i have learned today that you are a clueless boy. just to inform you... IAF flights over Peshawar were carried from "srinager", not all the way from punjab Provence.
Strawman. Never claimed that. In any case that doesn't make any difference, because the point is, and will always be, that the flight took the bombers deep within, and back from, Pak territory with PAF being able to do exactly zilch.
so another important lesson you have learned today.. and oh oh.. another lesson we are about to learn today is that IAF canberras were night time capable and were not venerable to "PAF Sabers" which mainly operated in day time as interceptors.
Another strawman. But first, congratulations on learning that Canberras were night capable. Given the amount of chest beating one would have thought you knew that. Second, and this is about the strawman, Pak did have night capable fighters, if I am not mistaken. It was F-104 and indeed it was a lone F-104 that tried to intercept the Canberras.
unless you can prove me that IAF canberras at least destroyed 20 planes in Peshawar you need to STFU.
I have already stated that the bombers unloaded their cargo on a highway, which, because of low visibility, was taken as the target runway. But as I said, this is a shifting of goal post and is not going to earn you any brownie points.
you are jumping up and down as if entering your foe's air space in war time is some sort of victory.. lolz
Not just entering foe's air space, but flying merrily from one end of the border to almost another end and coming back untouched. It is another matter that the bombing raid was unsuccessful, though PAF had no role to play in the failure.

Yes, given your claim, it is indeed a big deal. In fact that American telegram, seems to be insinuating that it was not exactly a comfortable situation for Pak politicians.
wha??? :bounce: calm down..
those canberras flew at night from srinager away from punjab which had most of the PAF planes stationed...
Oh ok, I see. So IAF should have flown over those areas where PAF had an apparent advantage and during that time when it was conducive for PAF to fly.

Oh yeah. You will make a fine strategist someday.
and what did those canberras did to PAF?
Send a nifty message that you can scream and shout and engage in every propaganda conceivable, but we can and will bomb at will, at our time and place of choosing.
how many planes did they destroy other then few bombs drooped on highways.
Thank low visibility for that. Hallelujah
you are really clueless....
did those mig-21 operate in 71 war? just where they phuck did they go? what happened to them... or did they end up in IAF top secret facility and can not be disclosed?
You have to do a hell of a lot more than pose rhetorical questions.
no comments..
I am sure.:cheers:
 
Last edited:
Strawman. Never claimed that. In any case that doesn't make any difference, because the point is, and will always be, that the flight took the bombers deep within, and back from, Pak territory with PAF being able to do exactly zilch.
strawman? pretty much reflection of yourself.... and quickly tell me what did those bombers do to peshawar AB? since the subject now is about AF how many planes destroyed? and strawman i am talking about neutral source.. Infact it was PAF who bombarded Amballa day and night out and returned back.

Another strawman. But first, congratulations on learning that Canberras were night capable. Given the amount of chest beating one would have thought you knew that. Second, and this is about the strawman, Pak did have night capable fighters, if I am not mistaken. It was F-104 and indeed it was a lone F-104 that tried to intercept the Canberras.
strawman. this is probibly your tactics of being sorry loser strawman and in your attempt to over glorify god knows what victory for IAF canberras but you forgot that PAF had 10 F-104s not 100... 10 F-104 can not do the job of 100...

Not just entering foe's air space, but flying merrily from one end of the border to almost another end and coming back untouched. It is another matter that the bombing raid was unsuccessful, though PAF had no role to play in the failure.
you clearly lack the understanding of 65 era capabilities.. you could stay below 100 feet and next the ground radar knows that you are in his territory.
i traveled from nowsharrah to lahore within 6 hours by car and i bet it would take days for one to travel from west to east of india. so one like a strawman like you could only oversimplify and present this however possible to satisfy own dirty ego.
Yes, given your claim, it is indeed a big deal. In fact that American telegram, seems to be insinuating that it was not exactly a comfortable situation for Pak politicians.
you are a world known bullSh***er.

Oh yeah. You will make a fine strategist someday.

Send a nifty message that you can scream and shout and engage in every propaganda conceivable, but we can and will bomb at will, at our time and place of choosing.

Thank low visibility for that. Hallelujah

You have to do a hell of a lot more than pose rhetorical questions.

:blah:
enough of your c88p oh btw... i am still waiting for IAF side of the story.. who won in air and ground. so far you have been a strawman with your irrelevent posts..
 
Last edited:
Going by the way that you have used the word ‘strawman’, I get the feeling that you don’t know what it means. You may read this.
toxic_pus said:
Strawman. Never claimed that. In any case that doesn't make any difference, because the point is, and will always be, that the flight took the bombers deep within, and back from, Pak territory with PAF being able to do exactly zilch.
strawman? pretty much reflection of yourself.... and quickly tell me what did those bombers do to peshawar AB? since the subject now is about AF how many planes destroyed? and strawman i am talking about neutral source.. Infact it was PAF who bombarded Amballa day and night out and returned back.
Going in circles now. Not sure, if it is deliberate because you can’t quite figure out how to tackle this newly acquired information that flies pretty much like a pin, into your overtly bloated balloon. Or if it is genuine inability to debate. I am assuming it’s the former.
strawman. this is probibly your tactics of being sorry loser strawman and in your attempt to over glorify god knows what victory for IAF canberras but you forgot that PAF had 10 F-104s not 100... 10 F-104 can not do the job of 100...
I have no intention to glorify anything. I am only stating facts that run counter to your premise of PAF ‘air superiority’. It appears to be a glorification to you, because you realize, that all the allegations of doctoring of history books, by Pak authorities, has probably some truth in it, since no one in Pakistan had ever told you of this incidence, and hence by association, it might so happen that the glory of PAF is probably exaggerated, as well. I know it is a disturbing revelation.

Regarding the number of F-104, well, you had assumed that the night operations of IAF couldn’t be countered simply because Sabres weren’t equipped to do so. I merely reminded you, that PAF had F-104 which were night capable, and hence PAF response should have been with F-104 and not Sabres. Yes, numbers matter, and they always do. But since Peshawar was about 600 miles into Pakistan, and given the speed at which bombers would fly to attain maximum range, one would assume that the bombers had spent a considerable time within PAK air space. And Pak’s response to that was just 1 F-104. Hardly a response expected of an airforce bubbling with confidence from all that ‘butt kicking’.
you clearly lack the understanding of 65 era capabilities.. you could stay below 100 feet and next the ground radar knows that you are in his territory.
What you are essentially saying is that, if anybody flew at night, below 100 ft(?), and carefully plotted the flight path so as to avoid majority of PAF deployment, one could easily fly deep into Pak territory. If that was so, then one wonders, what kind of ‘air superiority’ was PAF enforcing within its own airspace. What good was its supposed achievements in destroying IAF planes on the ground, if it eventually failed to protect its own airspace? One can only guess.

I understand, you are finding it hard to reconcile the supposed PAF ‘air superiority’ with this disturbing revelation of IAF bombing runs. Keep trying though.
you are a world known bullSh***er.
‘Peshawar and Kohat sites of IAF bombs raids continue to be drawing card for West Pak politicians. Government ministers come for photos, tea and few words of inspiration, but no hard cash: latest carrot was suggestion WAPDA rebuild homes destroyed but villagers reported highly skeptical. NAP leaders spent several days "preparing report on bomb damage" considered illogical excuse by Pak observers.’
Source

I don’t see anything worthwhile coming out of any engagement with you on this issue. So, probably, this will be my last post, as of now.
 
On 14th September 1965, the IAF used Canberras to bomb the Peshawar and Kohat military bases. PAF had stationed its B-57 at its Peshwar air base and these B-57s were IAF target. Unfortunately though, the bombing run was unsuccessful as the Canberras unloaded their bombs on a highway, mistaking it as the runway. [I made an error in post #250, which I have now corrected]

The point however is, that Peshawar was too deep into Pakistani territory. That IAF was able to fly all the way to Peshawar, begs a question: how much IAF 'butt' did PAF really kick.

Interestingly, that site, which you claimed to be 'the most "neutral" one could get', doesn't list a Canberra kill on 14th September. In fact, no 'air-to-air' kill is recorded on 14th September. This would mean, that those Canberras not only flew deep into Pakistan, but flew out of it unscathed. That hardly warrants the chest beating that you are displaying here.

PS: Can you please post thumbnail images. Thank you.



ok toxic-puss can you please give me a neutral source that claims that your air raid was a success!!

the only succesful air raid recorded in 1965 was the PATHANKOT raid done by PAF....

1965 WAS A STALEMATE!! which WE PAKISTANIS consider as a victory given the fact that we are 1/6 your size!!!

@growler please boy control yourself you are actually making them sound right!!!!
 
ok toxic-puss can you please give me a neutral source that claims that your air raid was a success!!

the only succesful air raid recorded in 1965 was the PATHANKOT raid done by PAF....

1965 WAS A STALEMATE!! which WE PAKISTANIS consider as a victory given the fact that we are 1/6 your size!!!


@growler please boy control yourself you are actually making them sound right!!!!

Now that sums up the situation pretty well...you consider it so it has to be but going by the sound logic that you failed to get to the goal after initiaing the attack pretty much counts as a failure of your millitary.

And what is this ****-and-bull story thrown about of 1/6th 1/8th sizes...size doesnt mean much if you have the technology and the equipment...germany kicked ***.e.s of ten to 15 times its geography in WW1 and again in WW2, same with japan kicking china...proof enough size doesnt have much to do with military power.
 
Going by the way that you have used the word ‘strawman’, I get the feeling that you don’t know what it means. You may read this.
and how exactly is this relevent to 65 war? your entire post is nothing but rubbish..
in your dictionary of "air superiority" one that sends canberras across the border achieving absolutely "nothing" over the enemies but the deluded dude that you are you simply ignore the fact that it was actually PAF who ruled the skies in sub-continent.
time for you to drop this useless canberras subject and bring something more significant if you can.

like Sir muradk said.
B-57s operated form all Major bases including FOBs, It was like we has 20 bombers on monday and 2 on tuesday , We had a strategy which the IAF never could understand, India had there spies they reported every thing what landed where it landed so we said ok if you want to take a short at me I am taking off from Peshawar but landing in Sargodha or Karachi come and get me their and they used to take the bate.
 
And what is this ****-and-bull story thrown about of 1/6th 1/8th sizes...size doesnt mean much if you have the technology and the equipment...germany kicked ***.e.s of ten to 15 times its geography in WW1 and again in WW2, same with japan kicking china...proof enough size doesnt have much to do with military power.

typical brained washed indian. Pakistan never had a technical superiority over india at any time of the history between india pakistan.
and seriously your last part of the posts sums up that you are not educated in this subject. your analogy is really useless.
 
typical brained washed indian. Pakistan never had a technical superiority over india at any time of the history between india pakistan.
and seriously your last part of the posts sums up that you are not educated in this subject. your analogy is really useless.

In addition, the US cut off military supplies to Pakistan at the time of war - and that embargo lasted till 1975 I believe.

So were handicapped on several fronts.

Though 1965 is not the only time, the PA acquitted itself rather well in 1947-48 as well, despite being hamstrung by first the British CiC who kept stalling the deployment of the PA, and then the political leadership, who wanted the PA to primaily fight defensively to merely hold onto terrain it already controlled, so as to not allow an Indian link with the NWFP and act in support of an Afghan backed insurgency or invasion.

Thread closed for moderation.
 
DAWN.COM | Editorial | The guns of August
By Ahmad Faruqui
Monday, 31 Aug, 2009 | 01:09 AM PST

SOME of the writing about the Indo-Pakistan war of September 1965 borders on mythology. It is no surprise that generations of Pakistanis continue to believe that India was the aggressor and that one Pakistani soldier was equal to 10 Indian soldiers.

A few have argued that the war began in August when Pakistan injected guerrillas into the vale of Kashmir to instigate a revolt and grab it before India achieved military dominance in the region. That was Operation Gibraltar.

When it failed to trigger a revolt and drew a sharp Indian riposte along the ceasefire line, Pakistan upped the ante and launched Operation Grand Slam on Sept 1. Infantry units of the army backed by armour overran the Indian outpost in Chamb, crossed the Tawi river and were headed towards Akhnur in order to cut off India’s line of communication with Srinagar.

In the minority view, the Indian response on Sept 6 across the international border at Lahore was a natural counter-response, not an act of aggression.

I asked Sajjad Haider, author of the new book, Flight of the Falcon, to name the aggressor. He retired as an air commodore in the Pakistan Air Force. A fighter pilot to the bone, he does not know how to mince words: “Ayub perpetrated the war.”

In April, skirmishes had taken place in the Rann of Kutch region several hundred miles south of Kashmir. In that encounter, the Pakistanis prevailed over the Indians. Haider says that the humiliation suffered by the Indians brought Prime Minister Shastri to the conclusion that the next round would be of India’s choosing.

The Indian army chief prepared for a war that would be fought in the plains of Punjab. Under ‘Operation Ablaze’, it would mount an attack against Lahore, Sialkot and Kasur. Of course, the trigger would have to be pulled by the Pakistanis.

On May 12, says Haider, an Indian Canberra bomber flew over the Pakistan border on a reconnaissance mission. To quote him: “The PAF scrambled interceptors which got within shooting range of the intruder. Air Marshal Asghar Khan’s permission was sought to bring down the intruder. He sought clearance from the president on the newly installed direct line but Ayub denied permission fearing Indian reprisal.” Laments Haider, “If this was not an indication of Indian intentions, what else could have been?”

Oblivious to what had just taken place in the skies above Punjab, and failing to anticipate how India was gunning to equalise the score, Ayub gave the green light to Operation Gibraltar on the advice of his foreign minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (later president and prime minister). Bhutto had sought out the opinion about Indian intentions from Chinese Foreign Minister Chen Yi during a meeting at the Karachi airport and concluded from the latter’s body language that India would not respond.

So Ayub gave the green light to send 8,000 infiltrators into Indian-held Kashmir. These, says Haider, were mostly youth from Azad Kashmir who had less than four weeks of training in guerrilla warfare. The entire plan was predicated on a passive Indian response, evoking Gen Von Moltke’s dictum: “No war plan survives the first 24 hours of contact with the enemy.”

It is also worth recalling what the kaiser said to the German troops that were heading off to fight the French in August 1914: “You will be home before the leaves have fallen off the trees.” The three-month war turned into the Great War which lasted for four years.

Operation Grand Slam abruptly ground to a halt. An Indian general cited by Haider says in his memoirs: “Akhnur was a ripe plum ready to be plucked, but providence came to our rescue.” The Pakistani GHQ decided to switch divisional commanders in the midst of the operation. The new commander, Maj-Gen Yahya (subsequently army chief and president), claimed later he was not tasked with taking Akhnur.

I asked Haider whether the Pakistani military was prepared for an all-out war with India, a much bigger country with a much bigger military. He said it was the army’s war, since the other services had been kept in the dark. The army was clearly not prepared for an all-out war since a quarter of the soldiers were on leave. They were only recalled as the Indian army crossed the border en route to Lahore, a horrific sight which Haider recalls seeing from the air as he and five of his falcons arrived on the outskirts of Lahore.

Maj-Gen Sarfraz was the general officer commanding of the No.10 Division which had primary responsibility for the defence of Lahore. Along with other divisional commanders in the region, he had been ordered by GHQ to remove all defensive landmines from the border. None had been taken into confidence about the Kashmir operation. The pleas of these generals to prepare against an Indian invasion were rejected by GHQ with a terse warning: “Do not provoke the Indians.”

Haider notes that the gateway to Lahore was defended by the 3rd Baloch contingent of 100 men under the intrepid Major Shafqat Baluch. He says, “They fought to the last man till we (No.19 Squadron) arrived to devastate the invading division. There could have been no doubt even in the mind of a hawaldar that an Indian attack would come. But the ostriches at the pulpit had their heads dug in sand up to their necks.”

In the 1965 war, the Pakistani Army repeated the mistakes of the 1947-48 Kashmir war, but on a grander scale. No official history of the 1965 war was ever written even though President Ayub wanted one. Gen Yahya, his new army chief, just sat on the request until Ayub was hounded out of office by centrifugal forces triggered by the war.

Pakistan’s grand strategy was flawed. None of its strategic objectives were achieved. And were it not for the tactical brilliance of many mid-level commanders, the country would have been torn apart by the Indians. Ironically, in Ayub’s autobiography, one would be hard pressed to find any references to the war of 1965. One is reminded of De Gaulle’s history of the French army which makes no reference to the events that took place in Waterloo in 1815.

War, as Clemenceau put it, is too serious a business to be left to the generals.

The writer has authored Rethinking the National Security of Pakistan.

AhmadFaruqui***********
 
The fact that India was in a position to dismember Pakistan is that the point whether Shastri signed the ceasefire agreement under some duress and was killed thereafter. The question is why would the Russians do so?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom