1971 field notes: lessons for Pakistan

[Peshwa]

No, don't be smart. FM Maneckshaw said "I did not attack until I enjoyed 15:1 advantage". He did not say it was specific to a sector but as a general referance to Eastern Command, PA. And the "phase" does not apply because when the war started Pakistan was not really in a position to send over major forces as it lacked the logistical ability.

And if you doubt me please refer to the original interview of FM Maneckshaw by Karan Thapar. The FM was asked by Thapar that "PA was incompetent" to which replied "no they fought valiantly but they had no chance. They were over 1,000 miles from their home bases, I had eight months to build up my forces and enjoyed 15:1 advantage and they had no chance".

If you doubt me please watch the interview on YT.

I added more to my previous post. Could you please give it a read and respond so I can retort to it all at once?
Thanks

As per Indian army's documents submitted by Gen. Arora total 23400 soldiers with civilian were made POWs...

Now tell me your Gen was liar?

Haven’t seen this document, so please shoot over so I can give it a read. Cant respond until I have gone through it.

 

[Maarkhoor]

I added more to my previous post. Could you please give it a read and respond so I can retort to it all at once?
Thanks



Haven’t seen this document, so please shoot over so I can give it a read. Cant respond until I have gone through it.

Google it you will find many, read Gen.Jakob's book.

 

[ProphetX]

The moment the Banglas went wild it was no more our "own" country. That is a status by consent. Once that consent is drawn it is no more de fact "our" country. The only thing remaining was the legal status - de jure to catch up with facts on the ground. This is evident by the writer wanting his wife to be sent back to "Pakistan" and imploring GHQ to pull his staff out of the sea of annoyed Banglas. As he himself says "the game was up".

Status by consent? Whose consent?

If it was by consent by the country and by extension the army, what was the fight for, should've just left rather than try hold it by force. India wouldn't even have needed to intervene and Indians would have one less reason to be hated for.

That it was evident to some like our writer here, and not to general Pakistani public, and the army that was ruling the country, just suggests people fighting to keep the country together were out of touch with reality.

That brings up another interesting thought that if it wasn't Pakistan that the Pakistani army was fighting in, it was an invader force that rightly got kicked out...isn't it?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

@Peshwa

The context of the interview is obviously East Pakistan, the PA Eastern Command and 1971 war. Therefore these comment are to be read as such. Further this comes from the person in India who would know exactly what he was facing, what he had and what happened, simply because the FM Maeckshaw was in command of the Indian forces. I think the term "out of the horse's mouth" applies here. This is primary evidence.


"Pak Army in East Pakistan fought gallantly"

"but they had no chance there"

"they were a thousand miles from their base"

"I had eight or nine months to make preparations"

"I had superiority of almost 15 to 1"

"they just had no chance"

"but they fought gallantly"

 

[Peshwa]

Google it you will find many, read Gen.Jakob's book.

Well I was hoping you would have the section or the quote handy. As someone who’s claiming evidence, the onus is on you to show the evidence, not for me to hunt for it to prove your claims correct.

 

[Maarkhoor]

Well I was hoping you would have the section or the quote handy. As someone who’s claiming evidence, the onus is on you to show the evidence, not for me to hunt for it to prove your claims correct.

I am not your daddy to spoon fed you, google it for that or prove me wrong by posting your credible sources.....

 

[Peshwa]

I am not your daddy to spoon fed you, google it for that or prove me wrong by posting your credible sources.....

I’m just going to have to assume then that your claim is rubbish since you don’t have any evidence to prove it. I repeat it is not my job to prove your claims true, that is for you to do. That’s how it’s done in the court of law as well.

My claim on the other hand is based on the very article in the OP where the author states clearly “100K troops surrendered”. Go through it.

Now please stop acting like a spoiled brat and present the evidence or quit responding because I don’t have time for this.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Status by consent? Whose consent?

In case you did not know Banglas formed the largest chunk of the population in formative Pakistan. I believe they made 55% of Pakistan's population. When such a large majority of people do not want to remain part of the status quo in effect the "consent of the majority" has been withdrawn. Thus de facto they had made it known they were not part of Pakistan anymore even if status quo forces prevented de jure to be amended as per the consent of the majority. That of course followed on soon. Even the OP says it was "game up" and that is why they all were desperate to get out and he sent his wife out as soon as got the chance because he knew collapse was about to happen and there would be hell to pay.

 

[Maarkhoor]

I’m just going to have to assume then that your claim is rubbish since you don’t have any evidence to prove it. I repeat it is not my job to prove your claims true, that is for you to do. That’s how it’s done in the court of law as well.

My claim on the other hand is based on the very article in the OP where the author states clearly “100K troops surrendered”. Go through it.

Now please stop acting like a spoiled brat and present the evidence or quit responding because I don’t have time for this.

You are rubbish from neighbourhood with extremely low I.Q no need to waste my time on you.

 

[Peshwa]

@Peshwa

The context of the interview is obviously East Pakistan, the PA Eastern Command and 1971 war. Therefore these comment are to be read as such.

No the topic of conversation there is the liberation war which was not fought only in the east.

Let’s just do a simple calculation here.

Total Indian troops that participated in the liberation war was 600K.
If we are to assume that all 600K faced east, your ratio stands at 15:1 (given 45K troops).

However, if war was fought on both sides of India and the concentration of Pakistani forces was in the west (as per your own admission of a small force in the east) how do you expect that a 15:1 ratio could have been maintained on the east while not obliterating India in the west?!!
The fact is, India gained some 15000 sq kms of Pakistani territory in the west in Punjab, Azad Kashmir and Sindh that was ceded as part of the Simla agreement. This clearly shows that India had an offensive in the west which can only be achieved by a higher ratio compared to the defensive force in the west. So pray tell how 15:1 ratio can be achieved in the east with only 600K Indian troops fighting the war in totality!

Looking forward to your response.

You are rubbish from neighbourhood with extremely low I.Q no need to waste my time on you.

Listen you turd, if you knew this from the beginning, why did you quote me to begin with?
Don’t think I invited your inbred *** into the conversation.
Ignored.

 

[Jackdaws]

"Home base" - what absurdity. The population between the two wings was evenly divided with a slight tilt in favor of East Pakistan. But if I remember reading correctly, West Pakistan had more Muslims than East Pakistan given that a significant (12-15%) of East Pakistan was Hindu. This is what ticked off West Pakistani elite even more. It is wrong to say East Pakistan withdrew consent. The Awami League participated in the electoral process - the East Pakistanis voted in the elections and the biggest party of Pakistan was denied the chance to form the Government. So clearly the consent to remain one was withdrawn by West Pakistan.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

No the topic of conversation there is the liberation war which was not fought only in the east.

I think that is what I said - East Pakistan theatre is the point of discussion here.

I can't make specific comments about what you said as non of what you said is supported with any evidence but is pure conjecture. However we do have "admissible evidence" by way of the good Field Marshall saying it loud and clear - he says it eloquently "superiority of 15 to 1".

If this came from the mouth of a squad leader, platoon commander or even a battalion colonel talking about some swampy Bangla village crossroads we could assume that the "15:1" advantage occurred at a tactical level but this is the Field Marshall, C in C of Indian Army. Therefore we have to take his words seriously and recieve his comments within the over all East Pakistan theatre. Few points to note here -

• that he knows what he is talking about
• that he is not talking about squad level fight on some crossroads but with referance to the forces he had at his disposal on the morning of the attack.
• if his figures arte not tallying with yours I am going to be forced to give his statement weight over yours
• it may by way of speculation and note I say speculation appropriate to add caveats to the FM's remarks that (a) ratio he gives might have included Bangla auxiliaries or (b) the actual Pak Army forces might even have been smaller then the figure I gave at 35k but all this is footnote to the substance which stands - that PA faced 15:1 disadvantage unless the FM was suffering from dementia/Alzhiemers disease. But that would again be idle speculation.
• after all said and done we are left with solid evidence from the man who would know more about this subject then any other person.

There is no point in me chasing this any further. I have made a solid case. I have not relied on my guts, my interpretation of celestial bodies, consulted the local fortune teller but have relied on primary evidence from the best source you can get - the Indian Field Marshal. If this does not change your views then nothing will. You are more then welcome to hold on to your propagandized mind. Good evening.

"Home base" - what absurdity

Take it up with the Field Marshal. I merely quoted him. Did you even listen to the video???


Here is the geography.

 

[Jackdaws]

I think that is what I said - East Pakistan theatre is the point of discussion here.

I can't make specific comments about what you said as non of what you said is supported with any evidence but is pure conjecture. However we do have "admissible evidence" by way of the good Field Marshall saying it loud and clear - he says it eloquently "superiority of 15 to 1".

If this came from the mouth of a squad leader, platoon commander or even a battalion colonel talking about some swampy Bangla village crossroads we could assume that the "15:1" advantage occurred at a tactical level but this is the Field Marshall, C in C of Indian Army. Therefore we have to take his words seriously and recieve his comments within the over all East Pakistan theatre. Few points to note here -

• that he knows what he is talking about
• that he is not talking about squad level fight on some crossroads but with referance to the forces he had at his disposal on the morning of the attack.
• if his figures arte not tallying with yours I am going to be forced to give his statement weight over yours
• it may by way of speculation and note I say speculation appropriate to add caveats to the FM's remarks that (a) ratio he gives might have included Bangla auxiliaries or (b) the actual Pak Army forces might even have been smaller then the figure I gave at 35k but all this is footnote to the substance which stands - that PA faced 15:1 disadvantage unless the FM was suffering from dementia/Alzhiemers disease. But that would again be idle speculation.
• after all said and done we are left with solid evidence from the man who would know more about this subject then any other person.

There is no point in me chasing this any further. I have made a solid case. I have not relied on my guts, my interpretation of celestial bodies, consulted the local fortune teller but have relied on primary evidence from the best source you can get - the Indian Field Marshal. If this does not change your views then nothing will. You are more then welcome to hold on to your propagandized mind. Good evening.



Faggot, take it up with the Field Marshal. I merely quoted him. Did you even listen to the video???


Here is the geography.

That's what happens when you give a keyboard to a Nangoo (Neelum Valley). No logic - just some tirade devoid of common sense.

Did Britain abandon even a territory as small as Falkland Islands because of geography?

Vietnam was not American territory. Heck, it was not even an American colony. East Pakistan housed over 50% of the Pakistani population. The comparison is absurd. But can't expect much else from a Nangoo.

 

[Peshwa]

I think that is what I said - East Pakistan theatre is the point of discussion here.

I can't make specific comments about what you said as non of what you said is supported with any evidence but is pure conjecture. However we do have "admissible evidence" by way of the good Field Marshall saying it loud and clear - he says it eloquently "superiority of 15 to 1".

If this came from the mouth of a squad leader, platoon commander or even a battalion colonel talking about some swampy Bangla village crossroads we could assume that the "15:1" advantage occurred at a tactical level but this is the Field Marshall, C in C of Indian Army. Therefore we have to take his words seriously and recieve his comments within the over all East Pakistan theatre. Few points to note here -

• that he knows what he is talking about
• that he is not talking about squad level fight on some crossroads but with referance to the forces he had at his disposal on the morning of the attack.
• if his figures arte not tallying with yours I am going to be forced to give his statement weight over yours
• it may by way of speculation and note I say speculation appropriate to add caveats to the FM's remarks that (a) ratio he gives might have included Bangla auxiliaries or (b) the actual Pak Army forces might even have been smaller then the figure I gave at 35k but all this is footnote to the substance which stands - that PA faced 15:1 disadvantage unless the FM was suffering from dementia/Alzhiemers disease. But that would again be idle speculation.
• after all said and done we are left with solid evidence from the man who would know more about this subject then any other person.

There is no point in me chasing this any further. I have made a solid case. I have not relied on my guts, my interpretation of celestial bodies, consulted the local fortune teller but have relied on primary evidence from the best source you can get - the Indian Field Marshal. If this does not change your views then nothing will. You are more then welcome to hold on to your propagandized mind. Good evening

Which part of my statement is conjecture?! Please specify
The fact that 600 K troops participated from the Indian side?
That is a FACT!
That the war was fought on both fronts?
FACT
That the concentration of pak forces was in the west?
FACT
That India gained 15000sq kms of territory in the west?
FACT

So how about you start there? Let’s at least list out what you find incorrect in my methodology.

Secondly, you accuse me of conjecture and speculation when your entire premise is based on the fact that the general said he amassed a 15:1 ratio but never specified if this was across east only, both fronts or specific theatre of war.
To add further credence, I did some very basic math to bust the figure “15:1 ratio” in the east. Which you have conveniently failed to address.

You can choose to field a version of the events with a lot of assumptions and caveats or can tackle fact and logic and prove my math and methodology of calculation the wrong.
Your claims remain unproven and simply your opinion rather than facts.

We can leave it here if you please or tackle the logic I have presented and take the discussion forward. Your call.

 

[Corona]

When the chips are down, 'Religion' is the first entity to go out the window.
A shared culture or other similarities might make a better unifying force but even that's not full proof.