1965 war: How India almost lost to Pakistan

[graphican]

Almost.

Yes Almost. you can celebrate your "Almost Loss" of 1965 war. This is what you've rightfully earned.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Yes Almost. you can celebrate your "Almost Loss" of 1965 war. This is what you've rightfully earned.

Haven't we all?

 

[Tipu7]

Haven't we all?

Hi
Can you answer my question in 3rd post....?

 

[graphican]

Haven't we all?

Talk about yourself only. Pakistan won the battle and we celebrate victory day and have been celebrating since war. Not like India who recently re-wrote their past and decided to go gaga on that.

On a soft note, tell your kids in schools how you won against a 5 times smaller army and still have nothing to show them on territory or military gains. Pakistan, till today is still occupying territory which we snatched from India in Chamb Joriyan Sector. In Kargil, we snatched Tiger Hill and are still holding it.

 

[Stag112]

Talk about yourself only. Pakistan won the battle and we celebrate victory day and have been celebrating since war. Not like India who recently re-wrote their past and decided to go gaga on that.

On a soft note, tell your kids in schools how you won against a 5 times smaller army and still have nothing to show them on territory or military gains. Pakistan, till today is still occupying territory which we snatched from India in Chamb Joriyan Sector. In Kargil, we snatched Tiger Hill and are still holding it.

I think the army, air force, artillery, tanks etc were 10 times larger with India, not 5. You are disrespecting the incredible valor of white horse riding gazis. Just keeping those horses white in a warzone requires more effort than a banya can muster on his best day.

 

[graphican]

I think the army, air force, artillery, tanks etc were 10 times larger with India, not 5. You are disrespecting the incredible valor of white horse riding gazis. Just keeping those horses white in a warzone requires more effort than a banya can muster on his best day.

You can check states before expressing your frustration. India couldn't defeat a smaller country, couldn't even get Kashmir sorted out which according to India was occupied by Pakistan.

Even if go with your assumption that Pakistan was 5 times stronger because Pakistan had bigger army, artillery and air force, history wouldn't change this event for you regardless.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Talk about yourself only. Pakistan won the battle and we celebrate victory day and have been celebrating since war. Not like India who recently re-wrote their past and decided to go gaga on that.

On a soft note, tell your kids in schools how you won against a 5 times smaller army and still have nothing to show them on territory or military gains. Pakistan, till today is still occupying territory which we snatched from India in Chamb Joriyan Sector. In Kargil, we snatched Tiger Hill and are still holding it.

Shabaash.

 

[Chanakya's_Chant]

Almost!??! India WON!!! No such thing as "almost won" or "almost lost".. jeez!

In this full-scale conventional war lasting 22 days, India captured some 1,920 sq km of Pakistani territory - at the cost of nearly 3,000 casualties and the loss of almost 550 sq km of its own territory (against 3,800 Pakistani causalities).

But still it is considered a tough war for both India and Pakistan and was inconclusive with neither side gaining a decisive military advantage. Although both had their failures and successes, from purely a military point of view, the war was inconclusive with neither side gaining a decisive military advantage. Territorial gains by both sides proved inconsequential considering that the Soviet Union-brokered Tashkent Agreement involved restoration of status quo ante to pre-conflict positions along the Cease Fire Line (CFL) now known as the Line of Control (LoC).

As for Pakistan, it abjectly failed in its objective of wresting control of J&K with the Indian armed forces preventing that from happening. To that extent, Pakistan lost and India won the war. Contrary to its expectations, there was no public revolt against India in Kashmir. Neither did they anticipate India opening a new theatre of conflict in Punjab.

Despite being a member of SEATO and CENTO, Washington DC imposed an embargo on military supplies to Pakistan, which adversely impacted the latter considering that much of its defence hardware was of US-origin.

Arguably the biggest blunder on the Indian side was made by the erstwhile army chief General J.N. Chaudhuri, who agreed to a ceasefire saying that India’s front line ammunition had been expended and the Army had suffered considerable tank loss. It was later discovered that the Indian Army had only used 14 per cent of its frontline ammunition and still possessed twice the number of tanks compared to Pakistan, which in contrast had expended 80 per cent of its ammunition. Had India continued to fight, would the outcome have been more decisive in India’s favour and change the course of history is a question that experts and students of warfare need to analyse.

 

[GURU DUTT]

You can check states before expressing your frustration. India couldn't defeat a smaller country, couldn't even get Kashmir sorted out which according to India was occupied by Pakistan.

Even if go with your assumption that Pakistan was 5 times stronger because Pakistan had bigger army, artillery and air force, history wouldn't change this event for you regardless.

but ayub khan started it by sending SSG in disguise of kashmiri freedom fighters but ended the war by "saving lahore"that too after USA snubbed to be involved in Indo-pakistan deal and then ayub and bhutto ran to USSR to get a "respectable deal" which they signed in tashkent but the biggest "chooran" they sold to gullible patriotic/hub bul watan pakistanies was that they won the war even though no pakistani wants to discuss the "terms of deal" .... ever wonderred why

 

[graphican]

Shabaash.

That was all you could say? But its okay and I understand you are content deficient on the topic.

but ayub khan started it by sending SSG in disguise of kashmiri freedom fighters but ended the war by "saving lahore"that too after snubbed pakistan and ayub and bhutto ran to USSR to get a "respectable deal" which they signed in tashkent but the biggest "chooran" they sold to gullible patriotic/hub bul watan pakistanies was that they won the war even though no pakistani wants to discuss the "terms of deal" .... ever wonderred why

Ofcours you are told stories which give you some soothing on the subject. You should be talking about Ayub wearing bad dress and staying hungry but what on ground do you have to showcase your this and future generation about Indian Victory? How would you justify that India won but sorry we have no inch of land to show you that you did, even though you were fighting against much much smaller and ill-equipped army. Go on, lay foundation of your victory.. give your imagination muscles a try.

And also explain them that why you discovered your victory and decided to celebrate only 50 years later while your enemy Pakistan celebrates it every year with pride? Just a suggestion.

 

[Cry.me.a.River]

 

[GURU DUTT]

That was all you could say? But its okay and I understand you are content deficient on the topic.



Ofcours you are told stories which give you some soothing on the subject. You should be talking about Ayub wearing bad dress and staying hungry but what on ground do you have to showcase your this and future generation about Indian Victory? How would you justify that India won but sorry we have no inch of land to show you that you did, even though you were fighting against much smaller army and at least 5 times smaller country. Go on, lay foundation of your victory.. give your imagination muscles a try.

point is why did you start something which you cant finish

but lets not talk about that ayub khan wanted kashmir did he got it

then how come its a victory for pakistan as all it managed was to save its prime city which would have never been attacked had they not send SSG commandoes in indian kashmir .... baat samjh me aayyee ki nahi janab

 

[ice_man]

In this full-scale conventional war lasting 22 days, India captured some 1,920 sq km of Pakistani territory - at the cost of nearly 3,000 casualties and the loss of almost 550 sq km of its own territory (against 3,800 Pakistani causalities).

But still it is considered a tough war for both India and Pakistan and was inconclusive with neither side gaining a decisive military advantage. Although both had their failures and successes, from purely a military point of view, the war was inconclusive with neither side gaining a decisive military advantage. Territorial gains by both sides proved inconsequential considering that the Soviet Union-brokered Tashkent Agreement involved restoration of status quo ante to pre-conflict positions along the Cease Fire Line (CFL) now known as the Line of Control (LoC).

As for Pakistan, it abjectly failed in its objective of wresting control of J&K with the Indian armed forces preventing that from happening. To that extent, Pakistan lost and India won the war. Contrary to its expectations, there was no public revolt against India in Kashmir. Neither did they anticipate India opening a new theatre of conflict in Punjab.

Despite being a member of SEATO and CENTO, Washington DC imposed an embargo on military supplies to Pakistan, which adversely impacted the latter considering that much of its defence hardware was of US-origin.

Arguably the biggest blunder on the Indian side was made by the erstwhile army chief General J.N. Chaudhuri, who agreed to a ceasefire saying that India’s front line ammunition had been expended and the Army had suffered considerable tank loss. It was later discovered that the Indian Army had only used 14 per cent of its frontline ammunition and still possessed twice the number of tanks compared to Pakistan, which in contrast had expended 80 per cent of its ammunition. Had India continued to fight, would the outcome have been more decisive in India’s favour and change the course of history is a question that experts and students of warfare need to analyse.

and yet lahore a mere 50 kilometers from Amritsar was never captured the inital aim of INDIA.

rest of the bahraat Rakshaak copy pasting skills are pretty good.

point is why did you start something which you cant finish

but lets not talk about that ayub khan wanted kashmir did he got it

then how come its a victory for pakistan as all it managed was to save its prime city which would have never been attacked had they not send SSG commandoes in indian kashmir .... baat samjh me aayyee ki nahi janab

lahore a 50 kilometers from amritsar never captured in 22 days. something you set out to capture.

 

[GURU DUTT]

and yet lahore a mere 50 kilometers from Amritsar was never captured the inital aim of INDIA.

rest of the bahraat Rakshaak copy pasting skills are pretty good.



lahore a 50 kilometers from amritsar never captured in 22 days. something you set out to capture.

ok great so you stil have lahore but what did you get in taking the "panga with india" when it was not required and did you got kashmir

 

[Menace2Society]

Indian revisionist historians at work again just like how they made up most of their so called "Ancient India".