What's new

1965 War - The complete story

Army attemps to prevent book sales


Lahore: The Army has bought all copies of a book written by a former intelligence chief fearing it may explode the myth victory in the 1965 war with India, a source has said.

The source said the General Head Quarters (GHQ) of the Pakistan Army bought up 22,000 copies of the book by Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed, fearing that its contents could malign its image.

The book titled The Myth of 1965 Victory, which was published by the Oxford University Press, was found to be "too sensitive" by none other than the Army Chief General Pervez Musharraf.

The sources said that General Mahmood Ahmed had submitted the manuscript of his book to the GHQ as per the rules in vogue.

Manuscript

However, after going through the contents, the GHQ referred the manuscript to General Musharraf who noted on the file that Mahmood should review some sensitive parts of the book as well as the title especially use of the word myth in relation to the 1965 war.

As General Mahmood was subsequently suggested some major deletions by the GHQ, he refused to oblige, saying that it was already in the printing stage.

Under these circumstances, the sources said, the GHQ directed the Army Book Club to immediately buy all the 22,000 copies worth millions of rupees directly from the publishers to stop it from being marketed.

When some leading distribution houses contacted the Oxford University Press, they were informed that the book has already been sold out.

Even otherwise, the sources said, there was a binding on the publishers under a revised contract not to provide it for general distribution.

The sources said that Gen Mahmood, who is considered a hawkish pan-Islamist himself, tried to get a few hundred copies for his own library but could not get permission from the GHQ.

Being a former ISI chief, Mahmood is already at the centre of a controversy for having quoted former American Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage of threatening to "bomb Pakistan back to stone age" in September 2001.

Interviews

Musharraf recently made a mention of Mahmood's book in one of his interviews to foreign press in the US while describing his former aide's post-retirement activities and referring to it as unpublished yet.

The sources said Mahmood has already joined the Tableeghi Jamaat after being relieved of his post-retirement assignment to head Fauji Fertiliser Corporation.


Gulfnews: Army attemps to prevent book sales
 
.
Musharraf buys all copies of sensitive '65 war book


ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Army general headquarters has purchased all 22,000 copies of a sensitive book by a former Inter Services Intelligence(ISI) chief on the myth of the victory claimed by the Pakistan Army in the 1965 war against India.

The army felt The Myth of 1965 Victory by Lieutenant General Mahmood Ahmed would malign the armed forces' image.

According to GHQ sources, army chief General Pervez Musharraf found the book, published by Oxford University Press, 'too sensitive'.

The sources said Mahmood had submitted the manuscript to the GHQ as per rules. However, after going through the manuscript, the GHQ referred it to Musharraf, who noted on the file that Mahmood should review sensitive parts of the book and the title, especially the use of the word 'myth' in relation to the 1965 war.

Mahmood refused to make suggested major deletions, claiming the book was in print.

Under the circumstances, the sources said, the GHQ directed the Army Book Club to immediately buy all copies, worth millions of rupees, directly from the publishers, to stop it from being marketed.

When leading distribution houses contacted Oxford, they were told the book had been sold out. Even otherwise, the sources said, it was binding on the publishers, under a revised contract, not to provide it for general distribution.

The sources said Mahmood, considered a hawkish pan-Islamist, tried to get a few hundred copies for his library but could not get the GHQ's permission.

Mahmood is at the centre of a recent controversy for having quoted former American deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage on issuing him a blunt warning in September 2001 that Pakistan could be bombed back to the Stone Age unless it cooperated in the United States-led war on terror, as stated by Musharraf in an interview in Washington recently.

Musharraf recently mentioned Mahmood's book in an interview to the foreign press in the US, while describing his former aide's post-retirement activities and referring to it as unpublished.

The sources said Mahmood joined the Tableeghi Jamaat after being relieved of his post-retirement assignment to head the Fauji Fertilizer Corporation. He is one of seven generals who carried out the coup against Nawaz Sharif in 1999. He was Corps Commander, Rawalpindi, at that time, but was rewarded for his loyalty to Musharraf and made director general, ISI.

However, soon after the 9/11 terror attacks, he was retired prematurely and sent home, amid speculation that he had been too soft on the Taliban to suit changing circumstances.


Musharraf buys all copies of sensitive '65 war book
 
.
WASHINGTON, Sept 6: A new book on Pakistan, scheduled to be released worldwide on Sept 11, gives out a detailed account of how the Pakistan Army planned a military operation to capture Akhnur in August 1965 which ultimately led to the India-Pakistan war and how mysterious decisions led to its failure, a la the Kargil fiasco of 1999.

The book Pakistan's Drift Into Extremism: Allah, The Army, And America's War On Terror, written by Hassan Abbas, a former police officer from Pakistan and currently a Research fellow at the Harvard Law School and a PhD. candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, provides a befitting backdrop to the 1965 war, the 39th anniversary of which is being observed in Pakistan today.

The book, already among the top 100 bestsellers at Barnes and Nobles, also examines the rise of religious extremism in Pakistan and analyzes its connections to Pakistan Army's policies and the fluctuating US-Pakistan relations. It includes profiles of leading Pakistani Jihadi groups and gives details of the conspiracy behind General Zia-ul-Haq’s plane crash in 1988, a botched military coup by fundamentalists in army in 1993-94 and lastly about how General Musharraf handled the volatile situation after the 9/11 attacks.

Leading writers and intellectuals including Stephen P Cohen of the Brookings Institution, Harvard University Professor Jessica Stern, Peter Bergen, Terrorism Analyst, CNN and author of The Holy War Inc and Arnaud de Borchgrave, Editor-at-Large of The Washington Times and UPI, have praised the book in glowing terms.

It raises an oft repeated but a pertinent question about the conduct of the top Pakistan Army brass in 1965 when Pakistani troops were just three miles from Akhnur and its capture was imminent, the military commander was changed and so much time was deliberately wasted that a successful war was turned into a defeat.

Following excerpt of the book throws more light on how, on this day, the Pakistan Army wrote an inglorious epitaph to a glorious plan which it failed to execute:

“When the Pakistan Army inflicted a short, sharp reverse on the Indians in the Rann of Kutch in mid-1965, Ayub’s spirits got a boost. More important, the international arbitration that followed the Kutch dispute (resulting in favor of Pakistan) put Pakistan under the assumption that if the Kashmir problem was to be solved, the Rann of Kutch route would have to be replicated - a limited clash in Kashmir leading to a threat of all-out war, and then an intervention and arbitration by the great powers.

Hence at this point there was considerable confidence among the Pakistanis about the strength of their own arms, which was bolstered by their newfound friendship with China. Utter frustration over Indian intransigence on Kashmir coupled with sympathy for the gathering hopelessness of the Kashmiris and concern over the rapid rearmament of the Indian armed forces on account of Western military aid, were factors that played a crucial role in Pakistan’s drift toward considering a military solution of the Kashmir issue.

Bhutto, in his letter to Ayub of May 12, 1965, drew his attention to increasing Western military aid to India and how fast the balance of power in the region was shifting in India’s favor as a result. He expanded on this theme and recommended that “a bold and courageous stand” would “open up greater possibility for a negotiated settlement.”

Ayub Khan was won over by the force of this logic, and he tasked the Kashmir Cell under Foreign Secretary, Aziz Ahmed, to draw up plans to stir up some trouble in Indian-held Jammu and Kashmir, which could then be exploited in Pakistan’s favor by limited military involvement.

The Kashmir Cell was a nondescript body working without direction and producing no results. It laid the broad concept of Operation Gibraltar, but did not get very far beyond this in terms of coming up with anything concrete. When Ayub saw that the Kashmir Cell was making painfully little headway in translating his directions into a plan of action, he personally handed responsibility for the operation over to Major General Akhtar Hussain Malik, commander of the 12th Division of the Pakistan Army. This division was responsible for the defense of the entire length of the Cease-fire Line (CFL) in the Kashmir region.

General Akhtar Malik was a man of towering presence and was known for his acuteness of mind and boldness of spirit. He was loved and admired by his subordinates, but was far too outspoken to be of any comfort to most of his superiors. His professional excellence, however, was acknowledged both in military and civilian circles.

The plan of this operation (Gibraltar) as finalized by General Malik and approved by Ayub Khan was to infiltrate a sizable armed force across the CFL into Indian Kashmir to carry out acts of sabotage in order to destabilize the government of the state and encourage the local population to rise up against Indian occupation.

In order to be able to retrieve the situation in case this operation got into trouble, to give it a new lease on life, or to fully exploit the advantage gained in the event of its success, Operation Grand Slam was planned.

This was to be a quick strike by armored and infantry forces from the southern tip of the CFL to Akhnur, a town astride the Jammu-Srinagar Road. This would cut the main Indian artery into the Kashmir valley, bottle up the Indian forces there, and so open up a number of options that could then be exploited as the situation demanded. According to some Pakistani Army officers, it was foreseen then that the value of Operation Gibraltar would be fully enchased after Grand Slam succeeded in wresting control of Akhnur.

There was not enough time to fully prepare and train the men who were to infiltrate, and the three-month deadline given was considered to be not nearly enough for this, but the 12th Division was told that, because of certain considerations, no further time could be given.

Most of the men to be trained belonged to the Azad Kashmir Regular Forces, which meant that they would have to be withdrawn from the defensive positions along the CFL. The denuded front lines therefore had to be beefed up by other elements. Having no reserves for this purpose, General Malik decided that the only option for him was to simultaneously train a force of Azad Kashmiri irregulars (mujahids) for this purpose.

But when he called the C-in-C, General Musa, to ask for weapons to equip this force, the latter refused. General Malik then made a call to Ayub, apprised him of the difficulty he was having with the C-in-C, and concluded that if the Kashmiris were not to be trusted, they were not worth fighting for. Ayub then called Musa, told him why the new Mujahid Companies needed to be armed and equipped, and ended with the same note, that is, people who cannot be trusted were not worth fighting for. Soon General Malik got a call from Musa: “Malik, people who cannot be trusted are not worth fighting for - go ahead, arm them.”

Operation Gibraltar was launched in the first week of August 1965, and all the infiltrators made it across the CFL without a single case of detection by the Indians. This was possible only because of the high standards of Pakistan’s security measures, as acknowledged by a senior Indian Army general. The pro-Pakistan elements in Kashmir had not been taken into confidence prior to this operation, and there was no help forthcoming for the infiltrators in most areas.

Overall, despite lack of support from the local population, the operation managed to cause anxiety to the Indians, at times verging on panic. On August 8 the Kashmir government recommended that martial law be imposed in Kashmir. It seemed that the right time to launch operation Grand Slam was when such anxiety was at its height. But it was General Malik’s opinion that this be delayed till the Indians had committed their reserves to seal off the infiltration routes, which he felt was certain to happen eventually.

On August 24, India concentrated its forces to launch its operations in order to seal off Haji Pir Pass, through which lay the main infiltration routes. That same day General Malik asked General Headquarters (GHQ) permission to launch Operation Grand Slam. The director of military operations, Brigadier Gul Hassan, passed on the request to General Musa, and when he failed to respond, reminded him again the following day.

But Musa could not manage to gather the confidence to give the decision himself and sent ZA Bhutto to obtain the approval from Ayub Khan, who was relaxing in Swat, 200 miles away - strange way to fight a war with the C-in-C unwilling to give decisions and the supreme commander unable to do so.

The decision finally arrived on August 29, by which time the Indians had bolstered their defenses in the sector where the operation was to be launched with the induction of three infantry units and an artillery regiment. Still a few more precious hours were wasted by the GHQ, and the operation went to the early morning of September 1, more than a week after the commander in the field had first asked for the go-ahead.

By early afternoon of the first day all the objectives were taken, the Indian forces were on the run, and Akhnur lay tantalizingly close and inadequately defended. “At this point, someone’s prayers worked” says Indian journalist, MJ Akbar: “An inexplicable change of command took place.”

What happened was that, in a surprising turn of events, General Musa landed in the theater of operations and handed the command of the 12th Division over to General Yahya Khan, whom he had brought along. General Malik was asked to get into the helicopter and was flown away by Musa.

For nearly 39 years now the Pakistan Army has been trying to cover up this untimely and fateful change of command by suppression and falsification of history.

Loss of time is inherent in any such change, but for reasons that cannot be explained but by citing the intrusion of ego, Yahya insisted on changing Malik’s plan and therefore lost even more time. Whereas Malik had basically planned to invest and bypass the strongly defended localities, subordinating everything to reaching and capturing Akhnur with the least delay, Yahya took a different route - he crossed river Tawi and went straight into Troti, in which crucial time was lost. And this was enough for the Indians to bolster the defenses of Akhnur and launch their strike against Lahore across the international frontier between the two countries.

This came on September 6 while the Pakistani forces were still three miles short of Akhnur. This was the contrived end of an operation, which had been meticulously planned and had promised a lot.

On September 6, after the Indian attack across the international border, Ayub and Bhutto tried to invoke the 1959 US-Pakistan bilateral agreement, to ask for American help against Indian aggression, but to no avail.

Instead, President Johnson suspended military aid to both India and Pakistan. Pakistan immediately turned to China for help. These efforts brought about a strong Chinese condemnation of India’s aggression against Pakistan, and this was followed by a Chinese warning against Indian intrusions into Chinese territory.

And then on September 16 they sent a note to India to say that as long as Indian aggression against Pakistan continued, it would not stop supporting Pakistan in its just struggle. On September 19, Ayub and Bhutto flew to Beijing for a top secret meeting with the Chinese leadership. China promised Pakistan all the help, but told Ayub that he should be quite prepared to withdraw his army to the hills and fight a long guerrilla war against India.

For this neither the Sandhurst-trained Ayub nor the Berkeley-educated Bhutto was quite prepared. On the international scene there was already considerable concern that any direct Chinese involvement in the conflict may escalate and broaden the war involving other countries. Pakistan was pressed by the Western ambassadors to not encourage the Chinese to step up their engagement any further.

Pakistan knew it did not have the wherewithal to break through the stalemate on the battlefront. Thus it knew this was the end. Now Pakistan was prepared to accept a cease-fire. The guns fell silent on the afternoon of September 23. As to the final outcome of the war, Dennis Kux aptly says that India “won simply by not losing.”

Immediately after the war, on the Pakistan side the major controversy that occupied the minds of many was the change in command of Operation Grand Slam. The “view both in India and even amongst ‘sensible army officers’ in Pakistan was that Malik’s sudden replacement led to the failure of Grand Slam.”

But the “sensible” Pakistani Army officers were restrained from discussing this subject. It was taboo to do so in the army messes and officers’ gatherings, though in private this was most passionately debated. It was only after General Malik’s death in 1969 that GHQ gingerly started putting together a theory to justify this change and to propagate it.

It was now claimed that the change was preplanned and that this plan laid down that General Malik would command the first phase of the operation up to the river Tawi, and thereafter the command would be assumed by General Yahya Khan. However, there is not a shred of evidence to support this. The operation itself was a set-piece attack for which the operation orders are a part of the historical record, and there is no such mention in these.

And any doubts there might have been on the issue were laid to rest by General Gul Hassan, who was Director of Military Operations during the war and the one person who would have known of such a change. He has specifically denied having any knowledge of the same.

Indeed, not a single army officer except Musa and General Yahya seem to have known about this change, which shifted the initiative from Pakistan to the Indian Army. It now seems fair to speculate that the change in command was preplanned only in the sense that it was a conspiracy between Ayub, Musa, and Yahya; that if the operation got into trouble, Malik could keep the command and also the blame that would accrue as a result, but that if it held promise of success, Yahya would be moved in to harvest it.

Lieutenant General Harbaksh Singh, one of the very respected senior Indian military commanders, was one of the few to have appreciated the full military value of Operation Gibraltar as a part of Grand Slam rather than seeing the two in isolation. According to him, “The plan of infiltration was brilliant in conception,” and as for Grand Slam, he thought it was “aptly named Grand Slam for had it succeeded, a trail of dazzling results would have followed in its wake, and the infiltration campaign would have had a fresh lease of life,” and that “it was only the last minute frantic rush of reinforcements into the sector . . . that prevented this debacle from deteriorating into major catastrophe.”

It seems therefore that but for the change of command at a critical time during Operation Grand Slam, the aim of Gibraltar was well within realization, that is, to “de freeze the Kashmir problem, weaken Indian resolve, and bring India to the conference table without provoking general war.”

It would be highly educative to read General Akhtar Malik’s views on the subject. This unpublished letter from General Malik to his younger brother, Lieutenant General Abdul Ali Malik, is a new source of information on the subject, and for this purpose is quoted here in full:

Pakistan’s Permanent Military Deputy
Embassy of Pakistan
Ankara
23-11-67

My Dear brother,

I hope you and the family are very well. Thank you for your letter of 14 Oct. 67. The answers to your questions are as follows:

a. The de facto command changed the very first day of the ops [operations] after the fall of Chamb when Azmat Hayat broke off wireless communications with me. I personally tried to find his HQ [headquarters] by chopper and failed. In late afternoon I sent Gulzar and Vahid, my MP [military police] officers, to try and locate him, but they too failed. The next day I tore into him and he sheepishly and nervously informed me that he was ‘Yahya’s brigadier’. I had no doubt left that Yahya had reached him the previous day and instructed him not to take further orders from me, while the formal change in command had yet to take place. This was a betrayal of many dimensions.

b. I reasoned and then pleaded with Yahya that if it was credit he was looking for, he should take the overall command but let me go up to Akhnur as his subordinate, but he refused. He went a step further and even changed the plan. He kept banging his head against Troti, letting the Indian fall back to Akhnur. We lost the initiative on the very first day of the war and never recovered it. Eventually it was the desperate stand at Chawinda that prevented the Indians from cutting through.

c. At no time was I assigned any reason for being removed from command by Ayub, Musa or Yahya. They were all sheepish at best. I think the reasons will be given when I am no more.

d. Not informing pro-Pak Kashmiri elements before launching Gibraltar was a command decision and it was mine. The aim of the op was to de freeze the Kashmir issue, raise it from its moribund state, and bring it to the notice of the world. To achieve this aim the first phase of the op was vital, that is, to effect undetected infiltration of thousands across the CFL [cease-fire line]. I was not willing to compromise this in any event. And the whole op could be made stillborn by just one double agent.

e. Haji Pir [Pass] did not cause me much anxiety. Because [the] impending Grand Slam Indian concentration in Haji Pir could only help us after Akhnur, and they would have to pull out troops from there to counter the new threats and surrender their gains, and maybe more, in the process. Actually it was only after the fall of Akhnur that we would have encashed the full value of Gibraltar, but that was not to be!

f. Bhutto kept insisting that his sources had assured him that India would not attack if we did not violate the international border. I however was certain that Gibraltar would lead to war and told GHQ so. I needed no op intelligence to come to this conclusion. It was simple common sense. If I got you by the throat, it would be silly for me to expect that you will kiss me for it. Because I was certain that war would follow, my first choice as objective for Grand Slam was Jammu. From there we could have exploited our success either toward Samba or Kashmir proper as the situation demanded. In any case whether it was Jammu or Akhnur, if we had taken the objective, I do not see how the Indians could have attacked Sialkot before clearing out either of these towns.

g. I have given serious consideration to writing a book, but given up the idea. The book would be the truth. And truth and the popular reaction to it would be good for my ego. But in the long run it would be an unpatriotic act. It will destroy the morale of the army, lower its prestige among the people, be banned in Pakistan, and become a textbook for the Indians. I have little doubt that the Indians will never forgive us the slight of 65 and will avenge it at the first opportunity. I am certain they will hit us in E. Pak [East Pakistan] and we will need all we have to save the situation. The first day of Grand Slam will be fateful in many ways. The worst has still to come and we have to prepare for it. The book is therefore out.

I hope this gives you the gist of what you needed to know. And yes, Ayub was fully involved in the enterprise. As a matter of fact it was his idea. And it was he who ordered me to by-pass Musa while Gibraltar etc. was being planned. I was dealing more with him and Sher Bahadur than with the C-in-C. It is tragic that despite having a good military mind, the FM’s [Foreign Minister Z.A. Bhutto’s] heart was prone to give way. The biggest tragedy is that in this instance it gave way before the eruption of a crisis. Or were they already celebrating a final victory!!

In case you need a more exact description of events, I will need war diaries and maps, which you could send me through the diplomatic bag.

Please remember me to all the family.

Yours,
Akhtar Hussain Malik


It is quite obvious what had happened. In the words of Justice Muhammad Saraf: “Had Akhtar been continued in his duty... he would have been the only General in Pakistan with a spectacular victory to his credit and it would then have been very difficult for President Ayub to ignore his claim to the office of the Commander-in-Chief, after the retirement of Musa, which was quite near.”

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, one of the main players of this game, also later argued that, “Had General Akhtar Malik not been stopped in the Chamb-Jaurian Sector, the Indian forces in Kashmir would have suffered serious reverses, but Ayub Khan wanted to make his favorite, General Yahya Khan, a hero.”

However, the very idea of Operation Gibraltar was controversial in itself. The military initiative robbed Pakistan of its moral high ground vis-à-vis the Kashmir conflict. In retrospect, it would have been better if Pakistan had focused more on continuing its efforts toward the resolution of the dispute through UN or third-party mediation. Ayub and his top generals also misread how far Kashmiris (in India) were willing to cooperate with Pakistan in this kind of adventure.

(After the war) the army also underwent major though subtle changes in personnel. Musa retired soon after the war, to be replaced by General Yahya Khan as C-in-C of the army. This was not a popular choice, but as Yahya settled in, he subtly started to gather power by promoting and placing his own loyalists in critical spots. A sick and disheartened Ayub was too careworn to notice this. And besides, he had implicit faith in Yahya’s loyalty.

He may also have been quite certain that his new choice of army chief came with the kind of baggage that would foreclose the possibility of his gaining the sort of following that could eventually threaten Ayub’s position. Ayub was wrong. He could not see that Yahya could collect any number of equally discredited officers around him. Among the first to be swept off the stage was General Akhtar Malik. He was posted out to CENTO in Ankara, Turkey.

Yahya told him that Pakistan needed a sensible and mature officer there, and Malik had replied: “Being a sensible and mature officer, I quite realize why I am needed there.” Concurrently with this, all officers considered to be Malik loyalists were sidelined. This was a major step along the road inaugurated by Ayub himself, of promoting the interests of personal loyalty over those of competence and professionalism. Professional pride progressively gave way to servile behavior.

Already the army had embarked on a crash program of making up shortages in the ranks of the officer class. To meet the target, standards were consciously and conspicuously lowered, thus making it a self-defeating exercise.

Also, in the aftermath of the war, one would have expected the army to analyze its performance. Not only was such an appraisal not carried out beyond the merest whitewash, the attempt deliberately falsified the record to save reputations, because after the war many of those were promoted whose reputations needed to be saved.

But the formality of a war analysis had to be fulfilled, and most ironically the task was entrusted to General Akhtar Malik. He did this in two parts; one dealt with the performance of junior leadership, and the other with that of the higher command.

Brigadier Mohammad Afzal Khan, who read the latter in manuscript form, and Major Qayyum, under whose supervision it was typed, both commented upon the scathing criticism to which this document subjected the prosecution of the war at higher levels. After the death of the general, no one has seen the record of this document in the army GHQ."
 
Last edited:
. .
well the book contained "sensitive" material...ok it could mean maybe it had our strategies detailed something we can use later....god knows well...but everyone knows one thing we had reached a STALEMATE....and like i said my friend you can't expect CUBA to defeat USA or Taiwan to beat CHINA....but holding your own against an enemy 6times your size and keeping it occupied for 60 years is a success story!! in fact if we had defeated you i think the indians should have committed mass suicide for failing to beat an enemy 1/6 its size!

and as for PAK ARMY whenever we have been able to establish a hold in a small concentrated area such as kashmir india uses the strategy of opening a broader front.... and that stratgy has always helped india and is FAIR GAME.....

however, pakisan army should stop believing that by conducting war in KASHMIR we will be able to bring india to negotiations is a mistake because every time we pressurize india in kashmir to blow off the steam india would open up the international border....

the best thing is to convince the public opinion as well as world opinion to support the KASHMIR cause!!


we never lost 65 we reached a stalemate....71 was a back stabbing by india and getting involved in our internal matter....99 was again a threat from india to open the international border and we knew if that happened our ARMY chief had failed to discuss the matter with other forces as to their level of readiness!! if only NAWAZ had not paniced ad realized that india was only threatening but would have never attacked things would have been very diffrent!!

CONCLUSION

in 65 india released the pressure from KASHMIR and then got embarrassed by only being able to get a stalemate!!

in 71 india back stabbed and got involved in our internal matter and for that we need to keep getting involved in indias matter in ASSAM and wherever we can because hey everything is fair in WAR!!

in 1984 gain india entered SIACHEN and we thought you would leave by youself OUR MISTAKE!!

in 1999 we entered KARGIL and thought you would act like we did in the case of SIACHEN....we were wrong SIACHEN was alot more strategically important....our Prime Minister got scared of an all out war!!!

2002 & 2008 well india kept threatening but again sense prevailed both countries would have annihilated each other!!
 
.
"Lieutenant General Harbaksh Singh, one of the very respected senior Indian military commanders, was one of the few to have appreciated the full military value of Operation Gibraltar as a part of Grand Slam rather than seeing the two in isolation. According to him, “The plan of infiltration was brilliant in conception,” and as for Grand Slam, he thought it was “aptly named Grand Slam for had it succeeded, a trail of dazzling results would have followed in its wake, and the infiltration campaign would have had a fresh lease of life,” and that “it was only the last minute frantic rush of reinforcements into the sector . . . that prevented this debacle from deteriorating into major catastrophe.” "

Most plans made by Pk Generals have been bold to a point that any soldier would have liked to be a part of the execution team. Some instances are ( to name a few):

1. Longewala.
2. Kargil.
3. Grand slam - only in selected bits/ parts not complete.

However, what would confound a military mind is that how on earth could anyone even think of putting such plans into motion without war - gaming them through to their logical end keeping in mind ALL possible options / implications / reactions.

No disrespect meant to anyone but how could anyone be so monocular to assume :

1.That an attack on J&K will not be replied in kind across the entire Indo - Pak border ? Pk considers J&K to be disputed hence feels it is within its right to nibble at the LOC , not taking into consideration that India does not feel that J&K is disputed hence any attack on J&K is an attack on India which needs to be retaliated against in full measure - at will anywhere across its W borders. To this end there was no change in the thinking and approach of Ayub & Mush. 34 yrs -no change.

2. Sending an armored column into enemy territory across the desert with no air cover & indifferent logistics !!

A soldier can only give his life, its for the Generals to extract the best value for it. Pk Generals have been found to be lacking here.
 
Last edited:
.
That what Indians good at propaganda. All war fought with Pakistan are not won military but through propaganda.
 
.
3 millions pored into Pakistan from Afghanistan did we attack Afghanistan?

20,000 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees rushed into Southern india you idnt attack them.

There are a total of 25.1 million refugees in the world currently how many of them compelled their host nations to attack the sender nation?

32 countries are facing problems as regards to refugees, how many time did they attack someone?

Here's some stats:
5566ffa88b73a36bb2d7e4ed2f1e4651.jpg



Here are the countries hosting the refugees in the end 2007:
4fc1da6123dec27bd8eca5e7261bc90a.jpg


How many of these ATTACKED the other country!!

Go take a walk!!

Anywhere between 200,000 and 3 mil killed.
8mil to 10 mil displaced to India. Count the total number of refugees above and compare the number. Still you are talking!!
Also we are talking about 1971 when India was much more backward wrt infrastructure. Added to that the areas the refugees hit are not that developed relative to other parts of India then.
And there are flavors to the violence religious, sexual...
 
.
well the book contained "sensitive" material...ok it could mean maybe it had our strategies detailed something we can use later

Read the article carefully, it clearly suggests that the book is about the MYTH of the victory claimed by the Pakistan Army in 1965. Musharraf even wanted the name of the book changed to exclude the world MYTH. It cant be more lucid than that.

As for your point regarding the book containing some strategy that can be used later, anyone with even a little experience in defense matters will only laugh at that. Its like the Americans banning a book that contained operational details of the D-Day landings at Normandy, so that they can utilize the same plan later on!!!!


....god knows well...but everyone knows one thing we had reached a STALEMATE....and like i said my friend you can't expect CUBA to defeat USA or Taiwan to beat CHINA....but holding your own against an enemy 6times your size and keeping it occupied for 60 years is a success story!! in fact if we had defeated you i think the indians should have committed mass suicide for failing to beat an enemy 1/6 its size!

Dude in 1965 a vast number of Indian troops where deployed on the Chinese border(due to the 1962 Indo-Chinese war), leaving Indian capabilities on the western front severely constrained. So the Myth of the Pakistan Army fighting an enemy 6 times its size, never happened. And Pakistan had better equipment at its disposal compared to India due to massive American aid. Pakistan had Sabers, Pattern tanks,the only submarine between the two navies and scores of other equipment provided by the Americans, this enabled Pakistan to have a qualitative edge over India.
 
.
According to the United States Library of Congress Country Studies:

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy--on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1965#Consequences_of_the_war
 
.
Read the article carefully, it clearly suggests that the book is about the MYTH of the victory claimed by the Pakistan Army in 1965. Musharraf even wanted the name of the book changed to exclude the world MYTH. It cant be more lucid than that.

You are basing your argument on the fact that Musharraf allegedly requested the title of a book to be changed?

Grow up.
The war was militarily inconclusive...

That much is true, unlike the claims of 'victory' from Indians and Pakistanis alike.
 
.
Anywhere between 200,000 and 3 mil killed.
8mil to 10 mil displaced to India. Count the total number of refugees above and compare the number. Still you are talking!!
Also we are talking about 1971 when India was much more backward wrt infrastructure. Added to that the areas the refugees hit are not that developed relative to other parts of India then.
And there are flavors to the violence religious, sexual...

gibberish ..... :rolleyes:

At the end of the day, maneklshaw and Indian analysts who wrote books documenting RAW activities admitted that RAW was destabilizing EP starting from the sixties. Covert support to insurgents in EP preceded any 'refugee crises', and the latter therefore cannot be used as justification for India's intervention.
 
.
You are basing your argument on the fact that Musharraf allegedly requested the title of a book to be changed?

Grow up.


Weather Musharraf allegedly requested the title of the book to be changed or not, one thing is for certain that that the Pakistan Army is certainly trying to hide something by keeping the book out of pubic circulation.

If indeed 1965 was a military victory as claimed by the PA then why shy away from releasing the book in public??
 
.
gibberish ..... :rolleyes:

At the end of the day, maneklshaw and Indian analysts who wrote books documenting RAW activities admitted that RAW was destabilizing EP starting from the sixties. Covert support to insurgents in EP preceded any 'refugee crises', and the latter therefore cannot be used as justification for India's intervention.

Care to name the books written by so called military analyst.

Btw, it was Pakistani Intelligence which was providing support to insurgents in India's North East since the mid 1950's. I can name the book if you want.
 
.
A soldier can only give his life, its for the Generals to extract the best value for it. Pk Generals have been found to be lacking here.
Indeed, this sentence has summarized everything.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom