1965 War - The complete story

[BATMAN]

Indeed, this sentence has summarized everything.

Indians failed to entered Gymkhana, Lahore and this summarize the whole war.

 

[Kasrkin]

The 1965 war has been studied and written on by many observers and military professionals. General Ahmed may have written about things from a certain...perspective that the GHQ deemed inappropriate but that in itself is a weak argument if you're wishing to dispute our views of the event. We are very aware of what happened and what didn't, and so is the nation and even those who are not tend to have negative views.

Pakistani military men have written hundreds of books in regards to the war. Apparently no Indian has ever treasured any of those but this little affair over General Ahmed’s supposed book certainly seems to have been over-blown by elements in the Indian media and has our Indian friends dancing with glee. If you wish to talk about the war, we can start with the specifics or any part of the documentary Xeric posted that you found unbalanced or untrue. You can talk about stuff that you think was missing, etc.

There is a lot of independent commentary around (no I am not talking about wikipedia) so why obsess with this general’s book when you’ve already rubbished books written by his colleagues?

 

[qsaark]

There is a lot of independent commentary around (no I am not talking about wikipedia) so why obsess with this general’s book when you’ve already rubbished books written by his colleagues?

I guess it is not about the obsession, but all about curiosity. The book may have nothing new but the fact that they tried to stop that book to reach in public’s hands makes it something highly desirable. I have read a number of books on this subject from extreme pro-Pakistan to extreme pro-Indian point of view. I have finally reached to a conclusion that indeed it was a stalemate until the ceasefire. However, if the war had lingered on for another one week, we could have lost at least a couple of cities. When approached to Chinese, that is exactly what they advised him, no to go for a ceasefire, fight for a few more weeks before China intervene actively. Unfortunately, FM (self-proclaimed) Ayub Khan did not have nerves to execute any such plan. Ayub Khan was one such unfortunate leader who was let down not only by his Generals but also by his FM, Z.A. Bhutto.

 

[sergente rehan]

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.

Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First of ll your source is not realible.

Second you forget to mention the losses on indian side!

 

[qsaark]

Thakur Sahab,

This is your very first post and the language you have used is completely unacceptable. What do you mean by **** Generals, **** Army?

You will get answers but first learn how to participate in a debate.

One last thing, your rant about sending Pakistan to the Stone Age using nukes….. Please consult your meteorologists and learn if technically it is even possible to send Pakistan into Stone Age while at the same time keeping yourself safe from the aftereffects.

 

[Renegade]

The 1965 war has been studied and written on by many observers and military professionals. General Ahmed may have written about things from a certain...perspective that the GHQ deemed inappropriate but that in itself is a weak argument if you're wishing to dispute our views of the event.

The very fact that GHQ tried to suppress the book, makes it clear that the PA has something to hide about the 1965 fiasco. That's the point i am trying to make. The rest is up to you weather you want to buy it or not. The article clearly states that the book if published could have burst the MYTH of PA's victory in the 1965 war.

We are very aware of what happened and what didn't, and so is the nation and even those who are not tend to have negative views.

That's precisely why i posted the article.

 

[Renegade]

First of ll your source is not realible.

Dude that statement is an extract from the - United States Library of Country Studies. Do you even know what that is!!??

Second you forget to mention the losses on indian side!

Never denied that there where losses on the Indian side. But this statement that i came across talked about Pakistani losses. What can i do about that??

 

[Zob]

at people who claim pakistan had the upper hand in 1965 technologically....

well indians had MIG21S that our famous pathankot raid destroyed on the ground!!

secondly the minute war broke out USA stopped all military aid to pakistan!!!

now as for the book well no matter what general ahmed had to say what about alot of other accounts that alot of other armed men of the time wrote what about the book CHUCK YEAGER wrote....?? ooooh i forgot CHUCK YEAGER was bias as well because he wrote in pakistans favour.....

so let me get one thing straight anything written in favour of pakistan is UNFAIR and anything written AGAINST us is fair!!!!


some links for you my friends

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tan-air-force-international-media-quotes.html

The day the PAF got away! -: Air Marshal S Raghavendran [www.bharat-rakshak.com]

your own guy admits our first squadron of MIG21s was operational!!!

 

[Renegade]

at people who claim pakistan had the upper hand in 1965 technologically....

The PAF had nearly 120 (8 operational squadron's), F-86 Sabers at the start of the 1965 war, another 90 aircraft where inducted immediately afterward. The Sabers then where the best dog fighting aircraft available. The PAF having had the Sabers for nearly a decade before the start of the war had all the time in the world to develop the tactics and understand the operational limits of their Sabers (the Sabers where inducted in the PAF as early as 1954). So its beyond doubt that the PAF like its sister wings the PA and the PN had a huge qualitative edge over the Inidan Armed Forces in the 1965 war.

well indians had MIG21S that our famous pathankot raid destroyed on the ground!!

In the article by Air Marshal S Raghavendran it is clearly stated that the first squadron of Mig-21's was just getting operational when the war broke out. Now, it is common sense that before a weapons system can be utilized to its full limit it has to be tried and tested and tactics developed for its best usage, but as the Mig-21's squadron was just getting operational the IAF clearly didnt have the time to exploit the full potential of the Mig-21, unlike the PAF which had nearly a decades time to learn about the F-86 Sabers and fine tune their tactics. And also that the Mig's where just present in a squadron strength compared to the PAF which had more than 8 Squadrons of F-86 Sabers which was tried and tested platform for the PAF fighter pilots to exploit. To add to that the PAF pilots had been given extensive training by the Americans in conducting air warfare.

Thus to sum up it is beyond doubt that the PAF had a huge qualitative edge over the IAF in the 1965 war, thanks to American training and equipment.

secondly the minute war broke out USA stopped all military aid to pakistan!!!

True that the Americans cut aid as soon as the war broke out, but the cutting up of American aid did not mean that all the equipment provided by the Americans was immediately rendered useless. The Sabers continued to be used till the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation war, same applies to the rest of the equipment provided by the Americans. Iran continues to use its fleet of F-14 till this day in spite of American sanctions since 1979. So it is only false to presume that the Pakistan's military capability was crippled immediately due to American sanctions, the Pakistan military clearly continued to enjoy the qualitative edge even after the sanctions.

 

[Screaming Skull]

at people who claim pakistan had the upper hand in 1965 technologically....

well indians had MIG21S that our famous pathankot raid destroyed on the ground!!

secondly the minute war broke out USA stopped all military aid to pakistan!!!

now as for the book well no matter what general ahmed had to say what about alot of other accounts that alot of other armed men of the time wrote what about the book CHUCK YEAGER wrote....?? ooooh i forgot CHUCK YEAGER was bias as well because he wrote in pakistans favour.....

so let me get one thing straight anything written in favour of pakistan is UNFAIR and anything written AGAINST us is fair!!!!


some links for you my friends

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tan-air-force-international-media-quotes.html

The day the PAF got away! -: Air Marshal S Raghavendran [www.bharat-rakshak.com]

your own guy admits our first squadron of MIG21s was operational!!!

Well, I really didn't want to enter this thread for obvious reasons, but by quoting 'CHUCK YEAGER' and claiming him to be neutral you have really forced me to post here.

Here is some news you may not like-

"It was the morning after the initial Pakistani strike that Yeager began to take the war with India personally. On the eve o f their attack, the Pakistanis had been prudent enough to evacuate their planes from airfields close to the Indian border and move them back into the hinterlands. But no one thought to warn General Yeager. Thus, when an Indian fighter pilot swept low over Islamabad's airport in India's first retaliatory strike, he could see only two small planes on the ground. Dodging antiaircraft fire, he blasted both to smithereens with 20 -millimeter cannon fire. One was Yeager's Beechcraft. The other was a plane used by United Nations forces to supply the patrols that monitored the ceasefire line in Kashmir.

I never found out how the United Nations reacted to the destruction of its plane, but Yeager's response was anything but dispassionate. He raged to his cowering colleagues at a staff meeting. His voice resounding through the embassy, he proclaimed that the Indian pilot not only knew exactly what he was doing but had been specifically instructed by Indira Gandhi to blast Yeager's plane. ("It was,' he relates in his book , "the Indian way of giving Uncle Sam the finger.')

The destruction of the Beechcraft was the last straw for Yeager. He vanished from his office, and, to the best of my knowledge, wasn't seen again in Islamabad until the war was over. It wasn't a long peri od; the Indians took only two weeks to trounce the Pakistanis. East Pakistan, known as Bangladesh, became an independent country, and Yahya resigned in disgrace. He was so drunk during his televised farewell speech that the camera focused not on him but on a small table radio across the room."

Reference: Edward C. Ingraham, "The right stuff in the wrong place" - Chuck Yeager's crash landing in Pakistan, Washington Monthly, Oct, 1985

The right stuff in the wrong place - Chuck Yeager's crash landing in Pakistan | Washington Monthly | Find Articles at BNET

So, there goes your neutral 'CHUCK YEAGER'. Got anything else?

Oh yeah the Mig-21. Well if you read the article that you have cited, it says-

"At this time the first MiG-21 squadron was just becoming operational...".

Hope you understand what 'just becoming operational' means?

And as for the other thread about PAF that you have cited, it too starts off with Mr. neutral CHUCK YEAGER's quote. Anyway, for all the quotes that are there in that thread, I can cite twice as many neutral quotes in favor of IAF but this is not the thread for it. I will reserve hem for the IAF thread.

Chao!

 

[Kasrkin]

The very fact that GHQ tried to suppress the book, makes it clear that the PA has something to hide about the 1965 fiasco.

Not really, its way more probable that GHQ finds parts of the books insensitive and more trouble than its worth. Those who've studied the war know that there is no 'big secret' being jealously guarded which is going to reveal our ‘undeniable defeat’. Its probably the context of the book which they found insensitive or too distorted. Many military men have written books that go very deeply into the mistakes we made during the war and are highly critical of the leadership at the time (read Flight of the Falcon by Sajad Haider) and no one cares about them but General Ahmed’s book has caught their attention because, as you can see by the title, its from a fairly narrow prospective only.

The article clearly states that the book if published could have burst the MYTH of PA's victory in the 1965 war.

Well, I think the article saying that was from an Indian press site so I wouldn't take it too seriously, and just because a book purports to something doesn't make it true. For all we knew the book could turn out to be of fairly weak quality and that could be one of the reasons GHQ is discouraging it.

However, if the war had lingered on for another one week, we could have lost at least a couple of cities.

Its obvious that you have read some text in regards to the war but I would point out that more thorough research would prove this not to be the case. For one thing the Indians didnt know we were ridiculously low on ammo, and even if they did it would've been highly unlikely that they be able to turn around the course of the war within 7 days. Pakistani defences were stubborn, aid from China was coming and we still had more than our share of tricks up our sleeve. I happen to have had a long discussion about the war with a Pakistani general and he assured me that we could've 'dealt with India for good' had the ceasefire not taken place and he went on to elaborate on a number of planned offenses cancelled by American pressure. The point being its all about prospective, so someone in GHQ might've found Gen Ahmed prospective all too unfair, and given that Gen Ahmed was an army-man, decided to put his foot down. Now obviously over-blown and sensationalized by some of our Indian friends here.

Dude that statement is an extract from the - United States Library of Country Studies. Do you even know what that is!!??

Actually, its from Wikipedia claiming it to be from said source. There is a difference. The link doesn't seem to be working.

 

[paritosh]

at people who claim pakistan had the upper hand in 1965 technologically....

well indians had MIG21S that our famous pathankot raid destroyed on the ground!!

secondly the minute war broke out USA stopped all military aid to pakistan!!!

now as for the book well no matter what general ahmed had to say what about alot of other accounts that alot of other armed men of the time wrote what about the book CHUCK YEAGER wrote....?? ooooh i forgot CHUCK YEAGER was bias as well because he wrote in pakistans favour.....

so let me get one thing straight anything written in favour of pakistan is UNFAIR and anything written AGAINST us is fair!!!!


some links for you my friends

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tan-air-force-international-media-quotes.html

The day the PAF got away! -: Air Marshal S Raghavendran [www.bharat-rakshak.com]

your own guy admits our first squadron of MIG21s was operational!!!

wasn't chuck yeager...training your pilots in pakistan the time war broke out?
isn't that a reason big enough for him suporting you?

 

[Zob]

hahahaha i love the way INDIANS Squeal when we say CHUCK YEAGER.....well the world thought he was neutral and still does and the world respects the man....INDIANS however might have other thoughts.....as for his plane being blown up well just because you blew up his plane you think he turned against you...now this is something that i don't want to get into.... i mean the guy writes bad stuff about you just because you blew up his plane...lol not everyone is an INDIAN my friend....

anyhow i think this news is not written by CHUCK YEAGER

"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.

yeager or no yeager....saber debut was back in 48...by 65...it was an old aircraft....but having said that fine we had an advantage in quality of fighters....however we destroyed most of the airforce on the ground... now that is QUALITY of planning my friend.... and as for MIG21 back then well it was becoming operational but we never even gave it a chance to get up and flying....besides if it did it would have been a RAFALE of the time....so we did what could have been an ideal move destroy the enemy on the ground...no QUALITITVE edge there my friend!!

moving away from airforce we also bombed DWARKA....ofcourse the claims from both sides are diffrent...we claim to have made it into a HIROSHIMA & you claim that our bombs were a DUD!! because after all pakistani bombs are PAISTANI BOMBS...discounting the fact that we didn't even make them!!

in a war that lasts 23 DAYS....and india being 5 times our size comes out with a stalemate...well....is NOT AN INDIAN VICTORY!!!

 

[Renegade]

hahahaha i love the way INDIANS Squeal when we say CHUCK YEAGER.....well the world thought he was neutral and still does and the world respects the man....INDIANS however might have other thoughts.....as for his plane being blown up well just because you blew up his plane you think he turned against you...now this is something that i don't want to get into.... i mean the guy writes bad stuff about you just because you blew up his plane...lol not everyone is an INDIAN my friend....

You gotta be kidding me with a statement like that. Any further argument trying to convince you Yeager's bias is pointless. You have already made up your mind. It is no worth explaining stuff to someone just doesn't want to understand.

yeager or no yeager....saber debut was back in 48...by 65...it was an old aircraft....but having said that fine we had an advantage in quality of fighters....however we destroyed most of the airforce on the ground... now that is QUALITY of planning my friend.... and as for MIG21 back then well it was becoming operational but we never even gave it a chance to get up and flying....besides if it did it would have been a RAFALE of the time....so we did what could have been an ideal move destroy the enemy on the ground...no QUALITITVE edge there my friend!!

You are contradicting your self here - just when in post No-53 in this very thread you claimed that Pakistan had no upper hand in technology in 1965 war.

Grow up kid. At least show some consistency in what you say.

 

[Renegade]

Well, I think the article saying that was from an Indian press site so I wouldn't take it too seriously, and just because a book purports to something doesn't make it true. For all we knew the book could turn out to be of fairly weak quality and that could be one of the reasons GHQ is discouraging it.

Look carefully at post No-31 the article posted is from Gulf News which is not an Indian News Agency.