1965 war by international & Indian observers.

[illusion8]

THE BOTTOM LINE

Pakistan started the 1965 war by launching Operation GIBRALTAR for the specific aim of capturing Kashmir.

It FAILED.

Therefore it comes about that if one side fails in its objectives the other side is deemed to have won!

Summary

Pakistan lost the 1965 war as it failed in its objective to capture Kashmir.

It was a war that India got into reluctantly, the war was hoisted on India by the jarnails of pak fauj following a china India war. The objective was to gain a ceasefire and effect a withdrawal of pakistanis from the Kashmir theater. That objective was successfully achieved.

Pakistani's projecting it as a victory is hilarious, while a small bunch of sane pakistani's know the reality.

 

[Psychic]

You are both reading & quoting selectively

Check this out from the same source :



On August 5, two infiltrators in green salwar kameez approached a youngster near Gulmarg and offered him money for some information. The individual immediately reported the matter to Tanamarg Police Station. The same day a few infiltrators approached a local man in Mendhar area for some information. The local reported the matter to the nearby brigade headquarters. The alerted Indian Army captured two officers on August 8 near Narain. Their interrogation revealed the whole plan. Some incidents of firing and subversive activities were reported between August 10 to 12.

Gibraltar was a failed operation and Indians made advances in Pakistani held Kashmir in response, didn't it?
That's how it happened:

1- Failed operation Gibraltar.

2- Indian occupation of Pakistani held territories in Kashmir.

3- Pakistani advances in Indian held Jammu/ Kashmir.

4- Outbreak of an all out war (which remained militarily inconclusive).

I never denied op Gibraltar or Grand slam...merely pointed out the fact that attacks in Kashmir were made by both sides on each other, while one can say that Gibraltar started it all but ignoring the Indian response in force is dishonesty. Indians themselves wanted to give response of Gibraltar in a localized conflict but when they failed in doing that because of Grand Slam, they started an all out war (time and place of their own choice without a formal declaration of war).

 

[third eye]

Gibraltar was a failed operation and Indians made advances in Pakistani held Kashmir in response, didn't it?
That's how it happened:

1- Failed operation Gibraltar.

2- Indian occupation of Pakistani held territories in Kashmir.

3- Pakistani advances in Indian held Jammu/ Kashmir.

4- Outbreak of an all out war (which remained militarily inconclusive).

I never denied op Gibraltar or Grand slam...merely pointed out the fact that attacks in Kashmir were made by both sides on each other, while one can say that Gibraltar started it all but ignoring the Indian response in force is dishonesty. Indians themselves wanted to give response of Gibraltar in a localized conflict but when they failed in doing that because of Grand Slam, they started an all out war (time and place of their own choice without a formal declaration of war).

You are correct.

Op Gibraltar was an act of war which set the ball rolling

 

[Kompromat]

FYI - CIA has a station in every country, including yours. These assessments and cables are produced by the CIA itself.

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]

Op Gibraltar was an act of war which set the ball rolling

Depends on one's point of view.

Op Gibraltar was an act of war

One can say the same about Indian incursion in Raan of Kutch.

 

[illuminatidinesh]

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

Of course U won, Y should i feel for it. infact u won all the wars.
When there is defeat then u conveniently blame ur leadership( Civilian and military).

 

[graphican]

Of course U won, Y should i feel for it. infact u won all the wars.
When there is defeat then u conveniently blame ur leadership( Civilian and military).

Thanks for sharing your observation.

 

[Tipu7]

Don't talk like an a$$ when you know squat of military history. That's the problem with civilians like you who depend on the mind blowing propaganda spewed out by your mullahs and your text books!

Kitty.......

None of your above mentioned points describe me rightly.......

Every one knows who is the product of propaganda...... you are acting like a brainwashed person....... that's why instead of countering my argument with logic you are doing, utter bakwas

Be-akal insaan. I am amazed at the amount of brainwashing your school books have done on you. I wont argue with you.

Just go and read all news sources about who started 1965 war. I am not gonna spoonfeed you. I CHALLANGE you to show me a neutral source which states that India started 1965 war!!

If you can't then STFU!

Hi

I want answers from you not bongiaan......
Got some?

 

[ayesha.a]

Kitty

(A) Who violated international border first....?

(B) What is difference between covert operation and full flagged assault.....?

What was happening before Op Gibraltar?

(C)1962 war ended 3 years ago. After 3 years India was still "weak".....?

How can GREAT INDIA become week by fighting for few days at limited scale? With out losing navy or air force....?

(A) Pakistan. By sending SSG commandos across the border, in the delusion that the local population will joyously receive them.

(B) Google is your friend.

(C) Three years is simply not long enough to recover from the effects of war. Besides, even before 1962, the Indian military was weak and and ill equipped. Before 1962, there was no serious effort to raise a powerful and efficient military. The soldiers were armed with WW2 era weapons, and the funding for defence was paltry. 1962 was a rude wake-up call. It was only after 1962 that the need for moernizing the military was felt. And military modernization takes a long time.

In contrast, the Pak military was pretty well equipped, armed with cutting edge American weapons. (Tanks, aircrafts etc.)

"GREAT" or not, India was a desperately poor country at the time.

Indian logic:

India won the war because Pakistan failed in its objective to capture Kashmir.

Going by same logic what they miss is that themselves failed in their objectives to capture Lahore and Sialkot and there army chief had to give explanations later why they didn't capture Lahore.

You shouldn't talk about logic when you don't have any.

It's not like India started a war with the objective of capturing Lahore and Sialkot. It was Pakistan that started the war. The objective of a war only exists for the starter of the war.

It's not like India, since 1948, has a stated national objective of capturing or "liberating" Lahore and Sialkot. It is Pakistan who has had that obsession from birth, about Kashmir.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

while a small bunch of sane pakistani's know the reality.

Their military more or less knows it. Even in 1971, they silently suffered India's insults till 3rd December, 1971.
They went to war openly only when they could take the provocations no longer...

 

[ayesha.a]

India won the war but forgot to celebtate it until recently

"Recently" was the 50th anniversary of that war, in which we successfully defended Kashmir from invaders. Such milestones are celebrated. In cricket, batsmen celebrate when they get a 50 or 100, but not if they get a 7 or 43.

We did celebrate at the end of the war, because we thwarted Pakistan's attempt to take Kashmir.

Indians think they won the war.... Celebrate it after 50 years as a "victory" for the first time in their history

View attachment 253323

Of course, we won the war. You tried to take Kashmir, we prevented you from doing it. It's that simple.

As for why we are celebrating this year, read my previous post.

We defended our land exceptionally well and kicked out the enemy which outnumbered us significantly. Indians can never claim it won the war because they were beaten up badly by a small army.The best they can express is that the war was was a draw (which is incorrect in the light of facts). The world knows who punched the enemy and who got its face punched. May we continue to succeed in the future. (Ameen)

Your aim in starting the war was to capture territory from India. Failing that, and desperately defending your own land is considered FAILURE.

It's really ludicrous, to hear you boasting about defending your own land, after starting a war to take the enemy's land.

 

[untitled]

@ayesha.a

By that logic why do you celebrate republic day every year. India is not 100 yet

India should celebrate its first republic day in 2050

 

[ayesha.a]

India is 7 times larger then Pakistan it has been militarily pathetic

If you have gone toe to toe with a nation 7 times smaller than yourself for over 60 years then you really have major issues

We haven't. We cut the 7 times smaller nation into two, if you don't remember. Maybe they skipped that part in your school, and only taught you that it was always toe-to-toe.

 

[Tipu7]

Pakistan. By sending SSG commandos across the border, in the delusion that the local population will joyously receive them.

Don't you know difference between LOC and border?

Google is your friend.

I am asking him ....... not from you Kitty.

Three years is simply not long enough to recover from the effects of war. Besides, even before 1962, the Indian military was weak and and ill equipped. Before 1962, there was no serious effort to raise a powerful and efficient military. The soldiers were armed with WW2 era weapons, and the funding for defence was paltry. 1962 was a rude wake-up call. It was only after 1962 that the need for moernizing the military was felt. And military modernization takes a long time.

Why it happened? in 1947 Indian army was far far superior to Pak army. With four already operational Ordnance factory.
and three years are not enough to recover from border war?? How much ''damaged'' India was after 1962? Were they under sanction..........? NO .......... then why India was doing in past these three years? ''JHAAK''...........?

 

[ayesha.a]

You idiots need to understand the difference between and Operation, Campaign, Battle and War.

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

So stop acting stupid and understand that it was "Operation Gibraltar" that failed to achieve its aim.

The thrashing you guys received in the actual war is infact the victory we celebrate.

Was 'capture' of Kashmir Operation Gibraltar's mission or that of 1965 War?

It's like saying Pakistan lost the 1971 War because (East) Pakistan couldnt prevent 8 million refugees from spilling into India despite the fact that we lost it because we surrendered! Did we lose '71 because we lost Dhaka or did we lose the war because we allowed refugees to go inside India?
Grow up!

It is "Operation Gibraltar" that led to the war.

As far as India is concerned, technical distinctions like "operation" and "campaign" and "war" don't matter. Pakistanis entered India to capture Indian territory, and India responded by attacking on several fronts. End results, Pakistan couldn't capture any territory from India.

India's aim in widening the conflict was to make Pakistan forget Kashmir and desperately defend Lahore instead. We succeeded eminently.

It's not like India started the war to capture Lahore, as an idiot has claimed on the thread. (I don't normally do name-calling, but since you did in your first sentence, I suppose I can as well.)

India's aim was to make it unaffordable and infeasible for Pakistan to attempt to take Kashmir. Pakistan learned the hard way, that India considers Kashmir to be as much a part of India as Punjab or TN, and starting a conflict in Indian Kashmir would elicit a response across the whole boundary. The lesson was that Pakistan could not hope for a limited conflict in Kashmir, and that if Indian Kashmir is attacked, no Pakistani city would be safe from reprisals.

Since then, Pakistan has not overtly tried to take Kashmir. "Strategic assets" and soldiers in mufti (Kargil) are the best you have since tried. (And failed.)

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

No, it was the beginning of the war. The aim of the war starters was to take Indian Kashmir. The result was that Kashmir remained Indian.

Starting a war to take enemy territory, and ending up desperately clinging on to your own, is called losing.