1965 war by international & Indian observers.

[SarthakGanguly]

Indians be thinking Grandslam and Gibralter were the entire war lmao.

It is exaclty like saying that the OKH won the battles of Kiev, Sevastopol, Kerch, Vinnytsa, Minsk, Riga etc etc, but only lost Unternehmen Barbarossa and Case Blau. So Germany won the war on the Ost front?

No I think the war was a little bigger than that buddy.

You can draw your boundary conditions at your convenience. But we mark the beginning as the start of Gibralter and end as the ceasefire.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

It is exaclty like saying that the OKH won the battles of Kiev, Sevastopol, Kerch, Vinnytsa, Minsk, Riga etc etc, but only lost Unternehmen Barbarossa and Case Blau. So Germany won the war on the Ost front?

First of all I hardly know anything about German war history and second in not prepared to get into another lengthy argument with another Indian about 65 for I have already been in many of those. But my question is why celebrate it as a victory NOW? If India has always one why not celebrate since 1966?

 

[Xeric]

It is exaclty like saying that the OKH won the battles of Kiev, Sevastopol, Kerch, Vinnytsa, Minsk, Riga etc etc, but only lost Unternehmen Barbarossa and Case Blau. So Germany won the war on the Ost front?

It's actually lame of you to give this example. i mean, do you really know WW 2's history? OKH or OKL or OKM or the entire OKW and German armed forces, the analogy is actually lame if only the basic fact - that the Nazis were successful in the beginning and then met defeat, and opposingly here, as per you, Pakistanis failed initially (Gibraltar & Grand Slam) and later thrashed the shyt out of you - is taken into account.

Like i said son, we know that you guys like believe that there's a sun and then there's India (alone) in our solar system, and that you can cherry-pick whatever and whenever you like to suit your version of facts, but sorry sir, this wont happen here.

 

[Indus Falcon]

Another feel good thread. Ok all the news article says India retreated but how come this is defeat to India?

What part of the sentence you wrote, didn't you understand?

 

[SamantK]

Lol so some dumb Pakistanis with bad upbringing say that the objective of the war for India was to capture Karachi. Lol.

RIP Logic.

 

[Viking 63]

huh? The very opening line is a categorical "India emerged with fewer relative losses than Pakistan - personnel and equipment". WTH does 'it is just an overview" even mean? Pakistan had initial advantage, being the aggressor. And as usual they got their rears pushed back.
And the aggressor being Pakistan, India stopping them from accomplishing their goals for that aggression is victory.



nonsense! read the real versions posted later and weep. Meanwhile learn to talk with a vivil tougue



correct but @Horus wants to feel good about it, hook or by crook!



that's only because Indian military reports to civilian government and the civilian government, representing the people's will, is NOT interested in destroying Pakistan. Plain and simple.
You cannot understand this because your people like destruction due to hate, their government is impotent and the Pak military owns the government, the country and the people.

To all fan-boys on both side of the fence, let it go ! and move on.

 

[SQ8]

The fact remains, that Pakistan FAILED in its objectives to take Kashmir for various reasons.

And India FAILED to punish Pakistan as it so thought.

It was a Victory for the Indian side because it managed to make operation Gibraltar falter.

It was a Victory for the Pakistani side because it managed to hold off a massive attack by a much superior enemy.

If looked at from the perspective of who won in terms of both military power vis-a-vis capabilities then at the end the points skew slightly towards Pakistan(and I do mean slightly). At the end, the Indian military performed like utter fools considering the superiority they held both in quantity and quality(something they fool themselves with because it is in their national psyche to make excuses for poor performance even if they secretly admit their idiocy). They could have easily walked across Pakistan if they had better quality commanders and leadership both at military and Min Def level.

For Pakistan, it was poor leadership that lost them the opportunity to truly deliver a Israel like performance without the support that Israel had from abroad. Their fighting troops were well trained and they had a good cadre of skilled officers. But one man's dictatorial ideals and his nepotism kept many good fighters from coming onto the field. Regardless of this leadership idiocy,a Few good men managed to save the day for the entire bumbling Pakistan Army leadership by giving the ultimate sacrifice.
The same goes for the PAF, it had an excellent plan that never played out due to certain idiots in senior positions who were too cowardly(and their damage kept going beyond the years).

The fact is, India is a total fool to celebrate victory for something they really could have achieved very well had they been smarter. Had they any national concept of going through history and shame, they would realize that the 1965 was nothing less than their snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

[deckingraj]

I can understand that jingoistic fanboys will not accept defeat of either side however i am amazed at sheer ignorance on the historical facts.

India got its rumbling by China in 62 and realized what a fool we were by ignoring defence needs. Pakistan wanted to annex kashmir and honestly wanted to have a go in 62 itself. Thanks to commies vs capatalist that those nefarious plans were checked in time by Uncle SAM. In fact it is on record that Nehru wanted US to intervene in 62 however deal didn't go because US wanted some concessions for Pakistan in Kashmir.

Anyhow after India learned its lesson(unfortunately the hard way) she started working on improving her defences. Pakistan got the message that if Kashmir has to be annexed by force then it should be done before India re-build its forces. Even this "now or never" syndrome is well documented. Rann of Kutch fiasco on 65 further emboldened Pakistan and they went ahead with so called Grand Slam. Then Indian Prime Minister clearly warned that any attack on Kashmir is an attack on India, he also clearly stated that India will take the war to IB and that's exactly what India did...Now i am not sure why would anybody consider Grand Slam and 65 war as two different things??

It is like saying had Indian politicians agreed to Indian forces suggestion of opening a new front instead of taking the tough fight in Kargil then we should have said Kargil operation and 1999 war??

 

[third eye]

You Guys conveniently try to hide by twisting words. You have convinced yourselves ( not India or the world) that somehow you can do what you want in J&K and get away with it as it is ' disputed'.

India rightly feels that since J&K is a part of India any act by Pakistan there amounts to an act of war on India which therefore gives us the right to respond in kind anywhere along the Indo - Pak border and beyond at a place & time of our Choosing.

It is downright silly to think you guys can attack Chamb with tanks around 1st Sept and go on to say the war started on 6th Sept.

India paid back in kind on 6th by crossing the border towards Lahore

'Capturing' Kashmir was the "specific aim" of Operation Gibraltar, not the 1965 War!

To India Op Gibraltar was an act of war , just like crossing the LoC at Kargil was . Both were responded in kind.

When India was about to cross the Border again in Rajasthan & Punjab, NS made the famous 4th Of July trip to US.

 

[graphican]

Another feel good thread. Ok all the news article says India retreated but how come this is defeat to India?

Not opinions but international news reporting of the 1965 War. Pakistan won and we feel good.. got a problem with that?

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

These are US diplomatic cables, their sole purpose is to see the world from US perspective and how concurrent developments in a given region impact US interests.

You are confusing Diplomatic cables with intelligence assessments.

Diplomatic cables are authored by US Diplomats whereas these are authored by CIA analysts.

Diplomatic cables will always have its author mentioned in the end, unlike for intelligence assessments, which you shall rarely find the author mentioned.

 

[Psychic]

You Guys conveniently try to hide by twisting words. You have convinced yourselves ( not India or the world) that somehow you can do what you want in J&K and get away with it as it is ' disputed'.

India rightly feels that since J&K is a part of India any act by Pakistan there amounts to an act of war on India which therefore gives us the right to respond in kind anywhere along the Indo - Pak border and beyond at a place & time of our Choosing.

It is downright silly to think you guys can attack Chamb with tanks around 1st Sept and go on to say the war started on 6th Sept.

India paid back in kind on 6th by crossing the border towards Lahore

Haji Pir pass and Kargil were captured BEFORE Grand Slam, Indian troops advanced in Uri-Poonch BEFORE Grand Slam....Those operations were conducted by regular Indian troops in force BEFORE Grand Slam.
India perhaps thought that it will slowly take Pakistani Kashmir but when Pakistan responded with regular troops in Chamb they took the war to international borders. Means it's OK if REGULAR Indian troops attack our Kashmir but it becomes some kind of pure evil if Pakistan sends irregulars or regulars in Indian Kashmir.

Both were responded in kind.

You Got a thrashing in the first response. As for the second one, amassing troops on border is one thing, sending them across is another.

 

[SQ8]

You Guys conveniently try to hide by twisting words. You have convinced yourselves ( not India or the world) that somehow you can do what you want in J&K and get away with it as it is ' disputed'.

India rightly feels that since J&K is a part of India any act by Pakistan there amounts to an act of war on India which therefore gives us the right to respond in kind anywhere along the Indo - Pak border and beyond at a place & time of our Choosing.

It is downright silly to think you guys can attack Chamb with tanks around 1st Sept and go on to say the war started on 6th Sept.

India paid back in kind on 6th by crossing the border towards Lahore

To India Op Gibraltar was an act of war , just like crossing the LoC at Kargil was . Both were responded in kind.

When India was about to cross the Border again in Rajasthan & Punjab, NS made the famous 4th Of July trip to US.

I do not disagree. However, then the fact remains that either side calling it a Victory is idiocy. The fact remains that whether you divide or include the war(one can divide the Vietnam war pre US troops and Post US troops but the war is taken as a whole)... Pakistan failed at getting Kashmir but at the same time India's attempt at any payback went full flat on its face.

Sure, one can parade in Dehli over making Pakistan give up on Kashmir or Parade in Islamabad about keeping the Indians from invading the motherland... but at the end of the day, if one looks at it from a pure performance point of view, with the resources it had and the majority it held; the Indian military simply did worse than the already bad performance by the Pakistani military.
Call it historical accounting(my cost, your cost, ABC etc)...but that is how I see it. Whether the Spartans did well or not, or the entire Greek Army suffered more.. the fact remains that the Greeks kept Xerxes at bay.
The David in this story was cheekier and attacked first, but at the end Goliath was an idiot to only let him get away with a few body bruises whilst he seemingly boasted of flooring him.

 

[deckingraj]

I do not disagree. However, then the fact remains that either side calling it a Victory is idiocy. The fact remains that whether you divide or include the war(one can divide the Vietnam war pre US troops and Post US troops but the war is taken as a whole)... Pakistan failed at getting Kashmir but at the same time India's attempt at any payback went full flat on its face.

Sure, one can parade in Dehli over making Pakistan give up on Kashmir or Parade in Islamabad about keeping the Indians from invading the motherland... but at the end of the day, if one looks at it from a pure performance point of view, with the resources it had and the majority it held; the Indian military simply did worse than the already bad performance by the Pakistani military.
Call it historical accounting(my cost, your cost, ABC etc)...but that is how I see it. Whether the Spartans did well or not, or the entire Greek Army suffered more.. the fact remains that the Greeks kept Xerxes at bay.
The David in this story was cheekier and attacked first, but at the end Goliath was an idiot to only let him get away with a few body bruises whilst he seemingly boasted of flooring him.

I agree with most of your post...however i have my doubts on the "will" part. Bangladesh(then east pakistan) hardly saw any action during 65 makes me believe that task for Indian army was more to thwart PA aggression instead of capturing Lahore etc. Having said that at the end of the day it was major embarrassment for leadership on both sides..

 

[SQ8]

I agree with most of your post...however i have my doubts on the "will" part. Bangladesh(then east pakistan) hardly saw any action during 65 makes me believe that task for Indian army was more to thwart PA aggression instead of capturing Lahore etc. Having said that at the end of the day it was major embarrassment for leadership on both sides..

Oh I dont disagree, but the Eastern front has certain truths and lies in rumours attached to it along with the fact that a lot of the Indian military was not as well deployed there. Another reason could be that unlike say Lahore or Karachi, the Easten wing had little "emotional" value for the Pakistani leadership. The dictator already referred to Bengalis as dirty rotten hindus.