What's new

1965 | Lahore Cantonment is 'our aim'.

Ok - after half century of Pakistan's defeat, a PDF Pakistani has established victory over the hated baniya. :D

:omghaha: :omghaha: The underlined statements are hilarious. Keep 'em coming.
Then again in '65 India was firmly in the Soviet camp(read anti American camp) Enough said.

Sure... and i hope u will celebrate your victory from next year .. on 6th september 2014... unlike the past decades... :rofl:

After all u won the war right?
 
The bottom line is: if the war had continued another week, PA would have reached the walls of Delhi with 1 E Bengal in the vanguard.

Without ammunition, Pakistan would have retreated inside their own territory if much needed ceasefire hadn't come for Pakistan. 
Sure... and i hope u will celebrate your victory from next year .. on 6th september 2014... unlike the past decades... :rofl:

After all u won the war right?

Pakistan was fighting the battle for Lahore when Indians were inside Lahore District. :lol:

0273.jpg
 
Without ammunition, Pakistan would have retreated inside their own territory if much needed ceasefire hadn't come for Pakistan. 

Lmao.. india was winning ... yet wanted ceasefire... and the whole world lies abt it.. :lol:
Pakistan was fighting the battle for Lahore when Indians were inside Lahore District. :lol:

0273.jpg

Burki is a village on the border... miles away from lahore.. (even which u had to evac):lol: .......what abt these:

jj.jpg


ff.jpg


gg.jpg


ff.jpg
 
Last but not the least:

gg.jpg
 
The bottom line is: if the war had continued another week, PA would have reached the walls of Delhi with 1 E Bengal in the vanguard.


I dont know about that wet dream, but you know something that did actually happen? Indian Army storming the capital of East Pakistan, and making the whole Pakistani Army sign an instrument of surrender in their supposed capital of their Eastern Wing with the whole world watching and taking photographs :lol:

Surrender1.jpg
 
I dont know about that wet dream, but you know something that did actually happen? Indian Army storming the capital of East Pakistan, and making the whole Pakistani Army sign an instrument of surrender in their supposed capital of their Eastern Wing with the whole world watching and taking photographs :lol:

Surrender1.jpg


Thats what indians always do !! When reminded of 65 , they bring in 71 !!... But this infact is them admitting their defeat in 65 . What is the Big deal guys ? You lost in 65 , we lost in 71 . Since then we both have gone nuclear and now we fight wars on tv and internet only :)
 
Thats what indians always do !! When reminded of 65 , they bring in 71 !!... But this infact is them admitting their defeat in 65 . What is the Big deal guys ? You lost in 65 , we lost in 71 . Since then we both have gone nuclear and now we fight wars on tv and internet only :)

Lost in 65? What exactly did we lose in 65? Last time i checked, you guys are still crying to UN and USA about Kashmir :lol:
 
Lmao.. india was winning ... yet wanted ceasefire... and the whole world lies abt it.. :lol:


Burki is a village on the border... miles away from lahore.. (even which u had to evac):lol: .......what abt these:

View attachment 10513

View attachment 10514

View attachment 10515

View attachment 10516 
Last but not the least:

View attachment 10517

These pictures aren't from any major city of India unlike Lahore. I can post many pictures like this. Do you know the area of the huge swathe of Pakistani land captured by India compared to losing little to Pakistan.

Your ammunition were exhausted why would India need to seek superpower's help, it was Pakistan who had to escape the incoming humiliation through much needed ceasefire. :lol:
 
I dont know about that wet dream, but you know something that did actually happen? Indian Army storming the capital of East Pakistan, and making the whole Pakistani Army sign an instrument of surrender in their supposed capital of their Eastern Wing with the whole world watching and taking photographs :lol:

Surrender1.jpg

Your only achievement attacking East Pakistan during a civil war (sheltered,trained n equiped by india) in the last 1000 years..
 
Feels good eh?
Q. Who started 1965 war?
A. Pakistan. They had the initiative as well.

Q. What were the objectives?
A. Kashmir Valley and Akhnoor Bridge.

Q. Did Pakistan Army capture Kashmir and Akhnoor Bridge?
A. No.

Q. Was the Indian Army able to go over to counteroffensive?
A. Yes, Pakistan was forced to defend Lahore(instead of marching in Srinagar).

In short - with the dreams of holidaying in Srinagar, Pakistani soldiers ended up dying in the Ichogil Canal. The soldiers fought well though - dying in their thousands to stop the Indian advance. Opposite Lahore Front - they secured a defensive tactical victory). Only the PAF performed better than the IAF.
Thats what indians always do !! When reminded of 65 , they bring in 71 !!... But this infact is them admitting their defeat in 65 . What is the Big deal guys ? You lost in 65 , we lost in 71 . Since then we both have gone nuclear and now we fight wars on tv and internet only :)
 
:rofl: .... even now i see indian trolls boasting how india captured lahore... and these statements abt having drinks at Gymkhana club by ur general incharge of ur forces at the lahore front?





I led a party of Pakistani and foreign journalists to the Rann of Kutch area a few days later. After the G.O.C., Major General Tika Khan, had finished briefing the party, one of the foreign journalists got up and asked, "General you say you have killed 300 Indians, the Indians say they have killed 350 Pakistanis. Who would we believe." The General was not perturbed. In his usual cool manner he replied. "I am placing all my helicopters at your disposal. If you see, when you go over the battle area, that the junk of war is in front of me then the Indians are telling the truth, but if the junk of the war is behind me then I alone could be in a position to count the dead." "fair enough" replied the foreign journalist. On his return it was the same journalist who remarked "Gosh - You made them run in the Rann."
8 Infantry Division and its troops to whom the credit goes for making the Indian soldier run in the Rann, as they had never run before, were ordered the next day, "No more offensive". Common friends had realized the danger of these two countries fighting. The outcome had not been as expected. It was, therefore, incumbent to stop the shooting match. Except capturing a convoy of seven brand new Mercedies the division, after that, confined its activities to patrolling of the area immediately in its fornt.
Cease Fire came through the efforts of the British Prime Minister and the Indian Prime Minister Mr. Lal bahadur Shastri consoled his nation announcing, "We will attack at a place of our own choosing." As if Rann of Kutch had been a place of somebody else's choosing. He isno more to tell the world whose advice had resulted in this choice.

Rowle Knox,
Daily Telegraph,
London, May 5, 1965.


"Pakistan's success in the air means that she has been able to redeploy her relatively small army -- professionally among the best in Asia -- with impunity, plugging gaps in the long front in the face of each Indian thrust."

"By all accounts the courage displayed by the Pakistan Air Force pilots is reminiscent of the bravery of the few young and dedicated pilots who saved this country from Nazi invaders in the critical Battle of Britain during the last war."


Patrick Seale,
The Observer, London,
September 12, 1965.


"India is claiming all out victory. I have not been able to find any trace of it. All I can see are troops, tanks and other war material rolling in a steady stream towards the front."

"If the Indian Air Force is so victorious, why has it not tried to halt this flow?. The answer is that it has been knocked from the skies by Pakistani planes."

"These muslims of Pakistan are natural fighters and they ask for no quarter and they give none. In any war, such as the one going on between India and Pakistan right now, the propoganda claims on either side are likely to be startling. But if I have to take bet today, my money would be on the Pakistan side."

"Pakistan claims to have destroyed something like 1/3rd the Indian Air Force, and foreign observers, who are in a position to know say that Pakistani pilots have claimed even higher kills than this; but the Pakistani Air Force are being scrupulously honest in evaluating these claims. They are crediting Pakistan Air Force only those killings that can be checked from other sources."


Roy Meloni,
American Broadcasting Corporation
September 15, 1965.
"One thing I am convinced of is that Pakistan morally and even physically won the air battle against immense odds."

"Although the Air Force gladly gives most credit to the Army, this is perhaps over-generous. India with roughly five times greater air-power, expected an easy air-superiority. Her total failure to attain it may be seen retrospectively as a vital, possibly the most vital, of the whole conflict."

"Nur Khan is an alert, incisive man of 41, who seems even less. For six years he was on secondment and responsible for running Pakistan's civil air-line, which, in a country where 'now' means sometime and 'sometime' means never, is a model of efficiency. he talks without the jargon of a press relations officer. He does not quibble abobut figures. Immediately one has confidence in what he says."

"His estimates, proffered diffidently but with as much photographic evidence as possible, speak for themselves. Indian and Pakistani losses, he thinks, are in something like the ration of ten to one."

"Yet, the quality of equipment, Nur insists, is less important than flying ability and determination. the Indians have no sense of purpose. The Pakistanis were defending their own country and willingly taking greater risks. 'The average bomber crews flew 15 to 20 sorties. My difficulty was restraining them, not pushing them on.' "

"This is more than nationalistic pride. Talk to the pilots themselves and you get the same intense story."

Peter Preston,
The Guardian, London
September 24, 1965.
"One point particularly noted by military observers is that in their frist advances the Indians did not use air power effectively to support their troops. by contrast, the Pakistanis, with sophisticated timing, swooped in on Ambala airfield and destroyed some 25 Indian planes just after they had landed and were sitting on the ground out of fuel and powerless to escape (NOTE: PAF has not claimed any IAF aircraft during it's attacks on Ambala due to non-availability of concrete evidence of damage in night bombing.)"

"By the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own."

Everett G. Martin,
General Editor, Newsweek
September 20, 1965.


"India's barbarity is mounting in fury as the Indian army and Air Force, severely mauled, are showing signs of demoralisation. The huge losses suffered by the Indian Armed Forces during the last 12 days of fighting could not be kept from the Indian public and in retaliation, the Indian armed forces are indulging in the most barbaric methods."

"The Chief of Indian Air Force could no longer ensure the safety of Indian air space. A well known Indian journalist, Mr Frank Moraes, in a talk from All-india radio, also admitted that IAF had suffered severe losses and it was no use hiding the fact and India should be prepared for more losses...."

Indonesian Herald
September 11, 1965.


These are all about the air war between IAF and PAF... Also these are assessments made in 1965... That time only number of losses are counted without analysing the number of combat sorties.. If we now also analysing like that, then Taliban air force is winning over US air force because USAF losts 4 helicopters and 5 aircraft in 2013 against zero loss of Taliban air force....

Now about war, according to neutral sources India held 710 mi²(1,840 km²) of Pakistani territory and Pakistan held 210 mi²(545 km²) of Indian territory... You say who actually won???
 
These pictures aren't from any major city of India unlike Lahore. I can post many pictures like this. Do you know the area of the huge swathe of Pakistani land captured by India compared to losing little to Pakistan.

LMAO.. Sure... Burki is lahore.. and so is Gymkhana club... where this dude wanted to have a drink (later found hiding in a sugar cane plantation):


kk.jpg



"On learning that, Lt. Gen. Harbakash Singh and the corps commander drove in a Jonga (Nissan P60 Jeep) to the battlefront. Army commander found that the enemy (PAF) air attack had created a havoc on G.T. Road. (Indian) Vehicles were burning and several vehicles of 15 Division abandoned on the road, the drivers having run away, leaving some of the engines still running. Maj. Gen. Niranjan Prasad was hiding in a recently irrigated sugar cane field. As described by Harabakash Singh: "He (Prasad) came out to receive us, with his boots covered with wet mud. He had no head cover, nor was he wearing any badges of his rank. He had stubble on his face, not having shaved." Seeing him in such a stage, Harbakhash Singh asked him: "Whether he was the General Officer commanding a division or a coolie? Why had he removed badges of rank and not shaved? Niranjan Prasad had no answer."



Your ammunition were exhausted why would India need to seek superpower's help, it was Pakistan who had to escape the incoming humiliation through much needed ceasefire. :lol:

Funny yet india wanted a ceasefire n UK helped... while shastri died of a heart attack in tashkent.. :lol:



According to the document, on September 22, when the Security Council was pressing for a cease-fire, the Indian Prime Minister asked General Choudhri if India could possibly win the war, he would delay accepting the cease-fire for a little while longer. The General replied that most of India's frontline ammunition had been used up and the Indian Army had suffered tank losses.

It was revealed later that only 14% of India's frontline ammunition had been fired and India still held twice the number of tanks than Pakistan...

.............

"...a major battle the west of the Beas would end in the destruction of the Indian Army and thereafter allow the enemy (Pakistani) forces to push to the gates of Delhi without much resistance." 1965 WAR-The Inside Story by R.D. Pradhan



...........


In Line of Duty: A Soldier Remembers, Lt Gen Harbakhsh Singh reveals that not only did Gen Chowdhury play a very small role in the entire campaign, he was so nervous as to be on the verge of losing half of Punjab to Pakistan, including the city of Amritsar. Harbakhsh describes, in clinical detail, how our own offensive in the Lahore sector had come unhinged. The general commanding the division on Ichchogil canal fled in panic, leaving his jeep, its wireless running and the briefcase containing sensitive documents that were then routinely read on Radio Pakistan during the war. Singh wanted to court martial him, Chowdhury let him get away with resignation.


...........................

The London Daily Mirror reported in 1965:

"There is a smell of death in the burning Pakistan sun. For it was here that India's attacking forces came to a dead stop.

"During the night they threw in every reinforcement they could find. But wave after wave of attacks were repulsed by the Pakistanis"

"India", said the London Daily Times, "is being soundly beaten by a nation which is outnumbered by four and a half to one in population and three to one in size of armed forces."
 
Feels good eh?
Q. Who started 1965 war?
A. Pakistan. They had the initiative as well.

Q. What were the objectives?
A. Kashmir Valley and Akhnoor Bridge.

Q. Did Pakistan Army capture Kashmir and Akhnoor Bridge?
A. No.

Q. Was the Indian Army able to go over to counteroffensive?
A. Yes, Pakistan was forced to defend Lahore(instead of marching in Srinagar).

In short - with the dreams of holidaying in Srinagar, Pakistani soldiers ended up dying in the Ichogil Canal. The soldiers fought well though - dying in their thousands to stop the Indian advance. Opposite Lahore Front - they secured a defensive tactical victory). Only the PAF performed better than the IAF.

1) India crossed the international border not Pakistan . So india started the war . LoC is not accepted international border and we still dont accept it , neither does the international community

2) Indian objective was to capture lahore

3) Pakistan successfully defended Lahore and India had to retreat .

In short - with the dreams of having drinks in Gymkhana , Indians ended up in drinking mud water in barki fields
 
1) India crossed the international border not Pakistan . So india started the war . LoC is not accepted international border and we still dont accept it , neither does the international community

2) Indian objective was to capture lahore

3) Pakistan successfully defended Lahore and India had to retreat .

In short - with the dreams of having drinks in Gymkhana , Indians ended up in drinking mud water in barki fields

1. well i guess in 1965 you found out the hard way that we do consider the line of control the international border, and everytime you cross it, you will see the same response from India as in 65

2. We already got 150+million muslims, who we barely are getting along with, and are regretting the decision of gandhi and congress leaders to ask them to stay back and not migrate to pakistan. Lahore has millions more muslims, and the last thing we want in india is more muslims.

3. Yes. But India successfully defended kashmir and pak had to retreat there too.
 
1. well i guess in 1965 you found out the hard way that we do consider the line of control the international border, and everytime you cross it, you will see the same response from India as in 65

2. We already got 150+million muslims, who we barely are getting along with, and are regretting the decision of gandhi and congress leaders to ask them to stay back and not migrate to pakistan. Lahore has millions more muslims, and the last thing we want in india is more muslims.

3. Yes. But India successfully defended kashmir and pak had to retreat there too.

What a load of bull shit.. and good to see ur love for ur indian muslim countrymen..
 
Back
Top Bottom