COAS Gen Bajwa intends to cut army strength of 5,38,000 substantially over next 5 years

[waz]

Thank you, it's what I've been saying in the other thread on the conflict the flood of advanced arms and Intel is inflicting the blows on the Russians but we got two American Professionals who are so stuck up not point in talking to them. Had that not been the case it would've been a difference story. What Bajwa is getting wrong about a smaller modernized force defeating a larger one is the attrition will wear down the smaller force much quicker, you will not be able to replace man power that quickly, you'll be over run.

100% the war has massive support from Western powers hence the successes they are having. You're right in our case it will be attrition which we can ill afford with our major cities so close the border.

 

[Signalian]

It’s not the numbers, it’s the type. Our APCs are ancient, we've been trying to find a replacement to no avail. We don’t have modern ATGMs, 1/3rd of our tank fleet is obsolete, yes we will slowly see replacement programs, but it will take decades to replace every single M113 and Bakhtar Shikan, and we might not even have enough money to do that.


And neither will hordes of men, but a balance of both will win, a balance that I do not see in the PA.


The ORBAT needs to change to consider changes in geopolitics and doctrine. A better equipped force can handle a larger area with a smaller number of men and be more effective at it, particularly our offensive cores need better technology. Better IFVs instead of old APCs that are vulnerable to everything but small arms. We still have several Hundred first generation tanks that are nearly death traps in any sort of environment. Better ATGMs, better gunships. Again, we are trying to procure all of them, but how slow is the procurement process? And how long will it take to equip all the regiments with modern equipment? We also haven’t found a suitable rifle replacement because it’s extremely difficult to buy over a million rifles.

Realistically, Army wants APC, this is why Talha was built as APC, not IFV, while tanks were being up gunned up armored (AZ) and newer modern tank (AK) was inducted. Talha is a variant of M113, while in case of IFV, Army would be inducting a new armored vehicle (IFV) in small numbers and then procuring more and needing money for it. Doctrine would change too. So far Army has not selected a new IFV neither changed doctrine.

Your hordes of men statement seems like a human wall without weapons or cannon fodder. PA isn't like that. There are two Strike Corps only. The rest Corps HQs have other responsibilities, which means not all Corps need to be armed with high ratio of armor or mechanized forces compared to infantry, still the Strike Corps have the best compliment of armor and infantry. Other Corps usually have 2 Divisions and then additional brigades including armor. If all the Corps had 3 divisions, then it would have been suitable to disband 1 division and reinforce other 2 Divisions with armor and mechanized forces. In the current ORBAT, how will the Corps or Divisions get downsized ?
It makes sense if infantry battalions of 870 troops are being converted to armor battalions of 450 -550 troops and that is how troop number is decreasing but firepower and mobility is increasing through raising more armor regiments by buying more tanks. The drawback is that armor cannot hold ground. PA had 20 gunships in past, now PA has 48 gunships. If PA gets 50+ gunships of two types or just 1 type, will it need lesser pilots of more ? Same for UCAVs. Air assets cannot hold ground.

In the past PA had inducted ATGMs, SAMs, etc and raised new formations for same. Now to induct modern weapons, PA will reduce number of troops seems illogical. The older generation weapons can also be sold to different countries to generate revenue. HIT is producing weapons that are being sold to other countries.

Training men for combat and then arming them to teeth, later sending them home to join CORO and reserves and then inducting lesser men in next intakes is probably what is happening. Army will start saving money on training also since syndicates will shrink probably. They stopped NCC decades for same reason.

I think it also has got to do with the missile strikes (cruise and ballistic) in future skirmishes and full fledged wars. Military will rely on missile strikes instead of sending troops to destroy enemy targets. Recent incursion of Brahmos has also shown that Missile can somehow make its way into enemy territory and strike targets. Maybe a new bargaining chip is now in place tactically instead of capturing territory and holding ground.

Lastly, the WOT for Pakistan has not finished. If PA regulars are reduced, then MOI with its FC, Rangers, FC, Reserve police and other LEAs will have an uphill task ahead of them especially in Baluchistan. I reckon its FC in both provinces which needs modern weapons, modern sensors and gadgets, UCAVs, helicopters and MRAPs since WOT is currently a war Pakistan is fighting. If however Pakistan Army is paying the bill for MOI to get all these by downsizing, then I don't have much words to say anymore. FC is also doubled already, weapons should have been in place for new FC troops already considering the expansion.

 

[Great Janjua]

internet people equate strength with numbers. however, in the real world, a million ill-equipped, badly trained and under-paid men can be slaughtered by an army of 100k or less

Army size for a country as big as Pakistan with its vast domains from deserts to mountains size of 600k soldiers is not cutting it.

The only reason I can see why Pakistan would downsize its forces is due to economic strain.

 

[Signalian]

They’re conscripts bro hence their failures….

A valid point. Russian troops are conscripts, while Pakistan spends a lot on training of its troops.

 

[Great Janjua]

Realistically, Army wants APC, this is why Talha was built as APC, not IFV, while tanks were being up gunned up armored (AZ) and newer modern tank (AK) was inducted. Talha is a variant of M113, while in case of IFV, Army would be inducting a new armored vehicle (IFV) in small numbers and then procuring more and needing money for it. Doctrine would change too. So far Army has not selected a new IFV neither changed doctrine.

Your hordes of men statement seems like a human wall without weapons or cannon fodder. PA isn't like that. There are two Strike Corps only. The rest Corps HQs have other responsibilities, which means not all Corps need to be armed with high ratio of armor or mechanized forces compared to infantry, still the Strike Corps have the best compliment of armor and infantry. Other Corps usually have 2 Divisions and then additional brigades including armor. If all the Corps had 3 divisions, then it would have been suitable to disband 1 division and reinforce other 2 Divisions with armor and mechanized forces. In the current ORBAT, how will the Corps or Divisions get downsized ?
It makes sense if infantry battalions of 870 troops are being converted to armor battalions of 450 -550 troops and that is how troop number is decreasing but firepower and mobility is increasing through raising more armor regiments by buying more tanks. The drawback is that armor cannot hold ground. PA had 20 gunships in past, now PA has 48 gunships. If PA gets 50+ gunships of two types or just 1 type, will it need lesser pilots of more ? Same for UCAVs. Air assets cannot hold ground.

In the past PA had inducted ATGMs, SAMs, etc and raised new formations for same. Now to induct modern weapons, PA will reduce number of troops seems illogical. The older generation weapons can also be sold to different countries to generate revenue. HIT is producing weapons that are being sold to other countries.

Training men for combat and then arming them to teeth, later sending them home to join CORO and reserves and then inducting lesser men in next intakes is probably what is happening. Army will start saving money on training also since syndicates will shrink probably. They stopped NCC decades for same reason.

I think it also has got to do with the missile strikes (cruise and ballistic) in future skirmishes and full fledged wars. Military will rely on missile strikes instead of sending troops to destroy enemy targets. Recent incursion of Brahmos has also shown that Missile can somehow make its way into enemy territory and strike targets. Maybe a new bargaining chip is now in place tactically instead of capturing territory and holding ground.

Lastly, the WOT for Pakistan has not finished. If PA regulars are reduced, then MOI with its FC, Rangers, FC, Reserve police and other LEAs will have an uphill task ahead of them especially in Baluchistan. I reckon its FC in both provinces which needs modern weapons, modern sensors and gadgets, UCAVs, helicopters and MRAPs since WOT is currently a war Pakistan is fighting. If however Pakistan Army is paying the bill for MOI to get all these by downsizing, then I don't have much words to say anymore. FC is also doubled already, weapons should have been in place for new FC troops already considering the expansion.

Why not merge the FC and Rangers into National Guard. And create from them a singular elite force unit trained in all land domains. It would also reduce the logistical headache of operating different forces every time we step into a different province.

Then the army can focus on modernising whilst the national guard is defacto acting like a second army for internal and external ops.

 

[SQ8]

A valid point. Russian troops are conscripts, while Pakistan spends a lot on training of its troops.

Compared to Russia perhaps but overall the quality of the non-commissioned isn’t exactly so much better than the primary threat.

A better approach may be to push a larger percentage in reserves and have them being called into regular training at different intervals. It may lead to AWOL situations at times but monetary incentives can be provided in that case.

 

[Bratva]

In that case, would give me more time for write-ups....maybe some books as well....would miss the action though.


...flip side....i will be out of a job....really it scares me alot....if today my job is terminated, where will i go? Gives me nightmares.

nice house in DHA ? or open some fancy franchise?

 

[Signalian]

nice house in DHA ? or open some fancy franchise?

$15000 USD/month - Blackwater

 

[PakFactor]

In that case, would give me more time for write-ups....maybe some books as well....would miss the action though.


...flip side....i will be out of a job....really it scares me alot....if today my job is terminated, where will i go? Gives me nightmares.

Come work with me in the states

 

[Sayfullah]

I think it also has got to do with the missile strikes (cruise and ballistic) in future skirmishes and full fledged wars. Military will rely on missile strikes instead of sending troops to destroy enemy targets. Recent incursion of Brahmos has also shown that Missile can somehow make its way into enemy territory and strike targets. Maybe a new bargaining chip is now in place tactically instead of capturing territory and holding ground.

But that would almost certainly guarantee a nuclear war.
Which targets do you strike with these missiles? Some targets if hit might lead to a nuclear war. Other targets if hit won’t make much of a difference because fro example air bases or other bases you’d need to fire dozens to put it out if service and it won’t be permanently.
Also how many missiles would it take to put for example a base out of service? Usa used more then a hundred on a single base in Syria and still didn’t do much damage and the base was up and running in no time.
Usa used thousands of cruise missiles on Iraq, it still had to send in massive number of allied troops to hold some areas. Also because of lower amount of soldiers in some areas, usa suffered heavy when insurgencies started in Iraq like Fallujah.
Usa used many cruise missiles on Afghanistan even used b52’s to carpet bomb many villages with suspected Taliban. Usa had drones always in the skies and other surveillance assets monitoring always. Usa still lost.
A better example is Russia Ukraine war. Russia in the beginning of the war used many missiles to hit tons of critical military and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. Ukraine still is defending be it with western aid but point is Russians missiles didn’t affect Ukrainians much and Russian have used thousands of missiles already.

How many ballistic and cruise missiles does Pakistan have? Can it afford to shoot dozens at a single target like usa or Russia can?

Best would be combination of sending troops in while using missiles to suppress targets which could be used against your troops. Use missiles to destroy critical targets and suppress bases and send in troops to capture the area before enemy gets a chance to rebuild and repair the targets put out of service.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Realistically, Army wants APC, this is why Talha was built as APC, not IFV, while tanks were being up gunned up armored (AZ) and newer modern tank (AK) was inducted. Talha is a variant of M113, while in case of IFV, Army would be inducting a new armored vehicle (IFV) in small numbers and then procuring more and needing money for it. Doctrine would change too. So far Army has not selected a new IFV neither changed doctrine.

Your hordes of men statement seems like a human wall without weapons or cannon fodder. PA isn't like that. There are two Strike Corps only. The rest Corps HQs have other responsibilities, which means not all Corps need to be armed with high ratio of armor or mechanized forces compared to infantry, still the Strike Corps have the best compliment of armor and infantry. Other Corps usually have 2 Divisions and then additional brigades including armor. If all the Corps had 3 divisions, then it would have been suitable to disband 1 division and reinforce other 2 Divisions with armor and mechanized forces. In the current ORBAT, how will the Corps or Divisions get downsized ?
It makes sense if infantry battalions of 870 troops are being converted to armor battalions of 450 -550 troops and that is how troop number is decreasing but firepower and mobility is increasing through raising more armor regiments by buying more tanks. The drawback is that armor cannot hold ground. PA had 20 gunships in past, now PA has 48 gunships. If PA gets 50+ gunships of two types or just 1 type, will it need lesser pilots of more ? Same for UCAVs. Air assets cannot hold ground.

In the past PA had inducted ATGMs, SAMs, etc and raised new formations for same. Now to induct modern weapons, PA will reduce number of troops seems illogical. The older generation weapons can also be sold to different countries to generate revenue. HIT is producing weapons that are being sold to other countries.

Training men for combat and then arming them to teeth, later sending them home to join CORO and reserves and then inducting lesser men in next intakes is probably what is happening. Army will start saving money on training also since syndicates will shrink probably. They stopped NCC decades for same reason.

I think it also has got to do with the missile strikes (cruise and ballistic) in future skirmishes and full fledged wars. Military will rely on missile strikes instead of sending troops to destroy enemy targets. Recent incursion of Brahmos has also shown that Missile can somehow make its way into enemy territory and strike targets. Maybe a new bargaining chip is now in place tactically instead of capturing territory and holding ground.

Lastly, the WOT for Pakistan has not finished. If PA regulars are reduced, then MOI with its FC, Rangers, FC, Reserve police and other LEAs will have an uphill task ahead of them especially in Baluchistan. I reckon its FC in both provinces which needs modern weapons, modern sensors and gadgets, UCAVs, helicopters and MRAPs since WOT is currently a war Pakistan is fighting. If however Pakistan Army is paying the bill for MOI to get all these by downsizing, then I don't have much words to say anymore. FC is also doubled already, weapons should have been in place for new FC troops already considering the expansion.

Your and other peoples opinions on this topic do make me rethink if downsizing is the best way to achieve modernization in the PA, it however only further reinforces my belief that the current rate of replacement and modernization in PA is too slow and something needs to be done to increase it’s speed, if that’s not downsizing, then it has to be something else.

The army wanted* an APC. When exactly was Talha inducted? It is so hopelessly outdated that we might as well send the soldiers in on foot. A single small caliber explosive weapon, IED or heavy machine gun (it cannot withstand 12.7MM in most cases) can take it out. And we haven’t been able to replace a single one because the program would be far too costly to do on any sort of large scale. If the army gets IFVs in a small number, that’s still the same because 90% of the force will be going into war akin to how we started the war on terror, with troops riding into battle on hiluxs. The army has trialed several IFVs and APCs and hasn’t been able to pick any, we’re very very late to start replacing them, they should have been the highest priority if they were going to be delivering every single infantryman. I know the doctrine is to use them as battle taxis and deploy them behind the armor, but this doesn’t mean they won’t come under fire.

The Type 59s and type 69s are still in service, over 600 of them, at the current stage we should have been retiring the Al-Zarrars and type 85s. All of these are very poorly armored and india has good ATGMs and AT weapons, a single penetration and the entire crew is likely lost due to ammo cook off. These tanks have no provision to protect against ammo cook off. I am aware the war on terror slowed down the replacement of these tanks, but at the current rate it’s going to take over a decade to retire these, I’m afraid we might eventually hit a point where existing regiments are awaiting new armored vehicles with their older ones being retired as they could not be serviced further, hence sitting idle. This is something we’ve already seen with the PAA and it’s gunships. Currently they’re just operating on the hope that a conflict doesn’t start before they get their new gunships, and they’ve been sitting with this hope ever since the T129 deal hit trouble. Our mechanized and armored regiments are in danger of being put in this situation.

I am unfortunately not versed well enough in ORBAT to discuss with you how downsizing could or could not work in the forces, but I will assume you’re presenting a totally fair point as you have been so far, but to my eyes our 2 offensive cores aren’t equipped well enough either. In my opinion the conditions of war between india and Pakistan have or is slowly changing from an all out conflict to smaller, concentrated skirmishes where technology will matter more than numbers. I’m not saying downsizing is our only option to improve our technology, if there is another option that we can use, I’m all up for taking that, but as it stands I don’t see another, and the rate at which we are replacing things is definitely not fast enough, more things will start to need replacement before we can get rid of the current ones, our Al-Zarrars will be as dangerously outdated as our Type 59s and Type 69s before we can get to replacing them, our M113s are already at that stage with no replacement in sight. And PA is still using either G3s or Older model AKs which don’t allow you to equip sights in the proper place because they won’t hold zero (over the dust cover).

PA doesn’t have 48 gunships, many of the cobras have been retired and we’re well aware of their age. Now the T-129B deal was obviously not the army’s fault entirely, but we’re yet to see a replacement, something the army has been working on, but that’s an advantage we lost and will likely not regain over india due to how slow things are going, and again I feel money is playing a role here because the army has to prioritize what it spends on first, but for a few years, we’ve been basically operating without proper gunships, and will be for a few more years, If a conflict had started any time in between this, we’d have a handful of obsolete gunships covering our entire armored advance. UCAVs are a recent welcome addition however, PA/PAF has gained advantage over IAF in this field.

On an unrelated note, most of the heavier UCAVs seem to be going to the PAF, how will they use these to cover the PA properly, is there enough inter-service coordination to pull this off?

IMO PA cannot sell a lot of its older weapons to other countries, most of the stuff that needs replacing is so old that nobody will buy it or it is better off being placed in reserve. In the Russia-Ukraine conflict even WW2 weaponry is being pulled out of reserve to equip troops because they don’t hs be enough modern rifles and weapons.

The rest I agree with, my point therefore is no longer that we absolutely have to downsize, but that we need to increase the rate at which the forces are modernizing, the weaponry Pakistani does buy is generally comparable or even better than whatever india gets due to the smarter purchasing practices of the PA, however our economic situation dictates that we cannot get as many as them as fast enough as our adversary, one of the solutions I see to this is downsizing, maybe Gen Bajwa agrees and hence made the comment, but if that’s not a realistic option, another one must be found, of course improving the economy is an obvious one, but with the current state of things I don’t know if that one’s realistic either.​

 

[S.Y.A]

internet people equate strength with numbers. however, in real world, a million ill-equipped, badly trained and under-paid men can be slaughtered by an army of 100k or less

how do you know the opposition is badly trained and under-equipped?

 

[S.Y.A]

Your and other peoples opinions on this topic do make me rethink if downsizing is the best way to achieve modernization in the PA, it however only further reinforces my belief that the current rate of replacement and modernization in PA is too slow and something needs to be done to increase it’s speed, if that’s not downsizing, then it has to be something else.

The army wanted* an APC. When exactly was Talha inducted? It is so hopelessly outdated that we might as well send the soldiers in on foot. A single small caliber explosive weapon, IED or heavy machine gun (it cannot withstand 12.7MM in most cases) can take it out. And we haven’t been able to replace a single one because the program would be far too costly to do on any sort of large scale. If the army gets IFVs in a small number, that’s still the same because 90% of the force will be going into war akin to how we started the war on terror, with troops riding into battle on hiluxs. The army has trialed several IFVs and APCs and hasn’t been able to pick any, we’re very very late to start replacing them, they should have been the highest priority if they were going to be delivering every single infantryman. I know the doctrine is to use them as battle taxis and deploy them behind the armor, but this doesn’t mean they won’t come under fire.

The Type 59s and type 69s are still in service, over 600 of them, at the current stage we should have been retiring the Al-Zarrars and type 85s. All of these are very poorly armored and india has good ATGMs and AT weapons, a single penetration and the entire crew is likely lost due to ammo cook off. These tanks have no provision to protect against ammo cook off. I am aware the war on terror slowed down the replacement of these tanks, but at the current rate it’s going to take over a decade to retire these, I’m afraid we might eventually hit a point where existing regiments are awaiting new armored vehicles with their older ones being retired as they could not be serviced further, hence sitting idle. This is something we’ve already seen with the PAA and it’s gunships. Currently they’re just operating on the hope that a conflict doesn’t start before they get their new gunships, and they’ve been sitting with this hope ever since the T129 deal hit trouble. Our mechanized and armored regiments are in danger of being put in this situation.

I am unfortunately not versed well enough in ORBAT to discuss with you how downsizing could or could not work in the forces, but I will assume you’re presenting a totally fair point as you have been so far, but to my eyes our 2 offensive cores aren’t equipped well enough either. In my opinion the conditions of war between india and Pakistan have or is slowly changing from an all out conflict to smaller, concentrated skirmishes where technology will matter more than numbers. I’m not saying downsizing is our only option to improve our technology, if there is another option that we can use, I’m all up for taking that, but as it stands I don’t see another, and the rate at which we are replacing things is definitely not fast enough, more things will start to need replacement before we can get rid of the current ones, our Al-Zarrars will be as dangerously outdated as our Type 59s and Type 69s before we can get to replacing them, our M113s are already at that stage with no replacement in sight. And PA is still using either G3s or Older model AKs which don’t allow you to equip sights in the proper place because they won’t hold zero (over the dust cover).

PA doesn’t have 48 gunships, many of the cobras have been retired and we’re well aware of their age. Now the T-129B deal was obviously not the army’s fault entirely, but we’re yet to see a replacement, something the army has been working on, but that’s an advantage we lost and will likely not regain over india due to how slow things are going, and again I feel money is playing a role here because the army has to prioritize what it spends on first, but for a few years, we’ve been basically operating without proper gunships, and will be for a few more years, If a conflict had started any time in between this, we’d have a handful of obsolete gunships covering our entire armored advance. UCAVs are a recent welcome addition however, PA/PAF has gained advantage over IAF in this field.

On an unrelated note, most of the heavier UCAVs seem to be going to the PAF, how will they use these to cover the PA properly, is there enough inter-service coordination to pull this off?

IMO PA cannot sell a lot of its older weapons to other countries, most of the stuff that needs replacing is so old that nobody will buy it or it is better off being placed in reserve. In the Russia-Ukraine conflict even WW2 weaponry is being pulled out of reserve to equip troops because they don’t hs be enough modern rifles and weapons.

The rest I agree with, my point therefore is no longer that we absolutely have to downsize, but that we need to increase the rate at which the forces are modernizing, the weaponry Pakistani does buy is generally comparable or even better than whatever india gets due to the smarter purchasing practices of the PA, however our economic situation dictates that we cannot get as many as them as fast enough as our adversary, one of the solutions I see to this is downsizing, maybe Gen Bajwa agrees and hence made the comment, but if that’s not a realistic option, another one must be found, of course improving the economy is an obvious one, but with the current state of things I don’t know if that one’s realistic either.​

may sound like a noob statement, but cant the army get in touch with industrialists, saiths and investors who can bankroll some purchases directly? you know, appeal to their sense of patriotism and nationalism? the army can also request them to pour money into RnD, for localization? but i know, that this plan is a stupid one.

the army can provide certain services abroad for dollars though. the services may include training, posting, setting up of military industrial complexes, trainings in standards, and, of course, export of weapons and stuff. they need to hire business development, marketing experts and lobbyists asap for that to happen.

...also most of the stuff sold by fauji foundation group is sold in-house, i dont think it exports anything. turn it over to a CEO and make him independent and responsible (like privatization of ptcl), and task them to increase exports. that could fetch some money as well for the army. cut back on DHAs, farm houses etc. and initiate a contribution based pension scheme. this will, at the very least, stop some money from leaking. the procurement process also needs to improve, what a common man can get for 10rs, the army gets for 25rs, and most of the tenders are awarded to ex-armymen or bhanja,bhatijas. this needs to end.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

I'm in total disagreement with the down sizing. The solution is not to cut head count to put money into tech, better of improving the economy would be the solution. Regardless if India will do small skirmishes or not, its best to be ready for an eventual "Total War" concept. As for thousands of troops doing nothing, send them of for military exercises with other nations to absorb new information and tactics of warfare.

This approach of down sizing creates long-term headaches and strain on the regulars. As you've pointed out as well why would later on people join if there are better paying jobs or opportunities overseas? Your seeing it in UK and EU now, even with overwhelming tech advantage the lack of manpower creates issues for them and they are now trying to fill the gap.

Eventually, tech has its limitations once your run out you'll need the numbers to hold the line if not you will be stream rolled.

This strategy is being "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish", and this thinking never gets ahead.

Human war fighting is heading towards it's natural progression, or logical conclusion. The blade or bullet knows no soul, nor bravery of its victim(s)... no one writes or panders to the instrument of death, so it becomes immaterial on who or what pulls the trigger.
Axiom at play is bringing a knife to a gunfight. Gunpowder achieved what used to take huge militaries... Mogul entry in India for example or Brits later. Nimble and effective fire power at a distance affecting maximum damage. Which is why it is imperative to reduce the human footprint in confluence with modern context and capacity.
Russian method of war isn't dead nor western, however we're starting to see the effectiveness of technology shift on modern battlefields being undone by the lowest common denominator. Such as, minimalist approach as in Afghanistan and maximalist one as seen in Azerbaycan.
While Talib approach was employing a crude, mix of sophisticated and unsophisticated yet effective but primitive methods of increasing cost along with no large formations as in a classical insurgency however in response to a huge disparity in technology and manpower. In Azerbaycan, they responded to the conventional with precision, high tech, low maintenance, low casualty and high impact response. The results were clear, Armenians had no recourse or answers... they hadn't prepared for this kind of conflict.

Such is modern war... as evident in Ukraine - Russia conflict... Russia as evident is paying a heavier price because it simply cannot reorient it's response to either sub-conventional high impact conflict on the flip of a dime though simultaneously affecting maximum damage(but Ukraine chose that for lack of a choice). The answer will either be overwhelming or underwhelming because you're behind the curve here... the opponent is setting the field...

It doesn't mean that the days of conquest are over... it means the methods have changed and it is best to change with it...
The Chinese A2/AD hits the spot... it is distant, high impact, high accuracy and low casualty. Besides being conventional... it is highly solution oriented. Denial itself is part victory.

Coming full circle... the huge population disparity or Indian advantage in numbers... simply meaningless! It's big ticket items and bigger footprint are both a necessity and it's biggest weakness. The cost benefits scenario weighs heavily on Indians... for example, it's S400s are a liability from get-go! Will they endeavor more towards protecting these "assets" or risk them for their alleged benefits? Just one of many such examples...

If of course holding population centers is the objective... which is highly demanding and requires not only huge resources but a great deal of manpower, requires a parallel strategy. That being said in an impersonal attrition, logical response is to accept the outcome. The other answer is to draw the impertinent without delving in...

At the end of the day, it is about survival. And survivor is the winner.

 

[Reichmarshal]

Bajwa just needs to retire n go home, before he f@#$ks things up any further.