Cold Start Doctrine - An Indian dream to invade & divide Pakistan

[Zarvan]

i repeat there will be no invasion of pakistan via cold start.
just utter destruction of your military and industril areas in selected sites

You can't even do that and even failed attempt will lead too full scale war

 

[WishLivePak]

Whats with romanticing the idea that India breathes for the sole intention of invading Pak?
Its a very childish thought and frankly, sounds more like a flawed argument for pakistan to exists/continue to hate India.

yup, Pakistan isn't Indian cup of tea anymore. India has more problems with China and would love to sort them out. Pakistan isn't as beneficial to India as China is.

It'll take a few decades for rest of the people to understand India v Pakistan is history.

To your last sentence, India will very like much for Pakistan to stick around but fail as well (not collapse). This'd make future sikhs to think twice before 2 nation theory, or other ethnic states.

Also if Pakistan fear losing, they'd resort to nukes. Seeing this, world will push for peace and supply Pakistan army with better gadgets. Such was the case with Israel. They threatened to use nukes if they were to lose the nation.

So yes, India doesn't have any fantasy and waste a lot of their resources on Pakistan and would very much like to focus on China.

Edit: I just want to add, this thread is full of lol. So many people saying "if India does this, they won't have anywhere to run" or "they do this, we do that." Despite the COAS saying internal threat is greatest threat to Pakistan, we still think India is the actual threat. How many Pakistanis army and civilians died at hands of terrorists and how many at hands on India after 1948? @Contrarian you know?

What part of my post was unclear?
Pakistan will always be able to deploy faster than India. That does not mean Pakistan will be able to hold out. Progressively Pakistan Military will start folding as India keeps up the offensive.

Half the entire point of Cold Start is not to beat Pakistani Army to the border, Geographically that is extremely hard. The goal is
a)to beat the political constraints that GoI will impose on IA/IAF after a few days and
b)to beat the International pressure on India to avoid retaliation


On the Pakistani side, again the Goal of Cold Start is to NOT capture land and seek out Pakistani military and engage them. The entire idea was to move away from the Sundarji doctrine of capturing land and dividing Pakistan.

Who analyses these things in Pakistan, makes me think they are a bunch of 16 year olds shouting some slogans.

Once Pakistan is weak, India "will" take Kashmir. That's the land they really want anyway.

Anyway, there isn't going to be any war in next many decades. If India has the itch, they can just stop trade with Pakistan and that'd do somewhat of a damage.

 

[Zarvan]

yup, Pakistan isn't Indian cup of tea anymore. India has more problems with China and would love to sort them out. Pakistan isn't as beneficial to India as China is.

It'll take a few decades for rest of the people to understand India v Pakistan is history.

To your last sentence, India will very like much for Pakistan to stick around but fail as well (not collapse). This'd make future sikhs to think twice before 2 nation theory, or other ethnic states.

Also if Pakistan fear losing, they'd resort to nukes. Seeing this, world will push for peace and supply Pakistan army with better gadgets. Such was the case with Israel. They threatened to use nukes if they were to lose the nation.

So yes, India doesn't have any fantasy and waste a lot of their resources on Pakistan and would very much like to focus on China.

Edit: I just want to add, this thread is full of lol. So many people saying "if India does this, they won't have anywhere to run" or "they do this, we do that." Despite the COAS saying internal threat is greatest threat to Pakistan, we still think India is the actual threat. How many Pakistanis army and civilians died at hands of terrorists and how many at hands on India after 1948? @Contrarian you know?


Once Pakistan is weak, India "will" take Kashmir. That's the land they really want anyway.

Anyway, there isn't going to be any war in next many decades. If India has the itch, they can just stop trade with Pakistan and that'd do somewhat of a damage.

Mr current greatest threat is internal but India is always the main threat and Armed Forces fully believe that

 

[FNFAL]

yup, Pakistan isn't Indian cup of tea anymore. India has more problems with China and would love to sort them out. Pakistan isn't as beneficial to India as China is.
It'll take a few decades for rest of the people to understand India v Pakistan is history.
To your last sentence, India will very like much for Pakistan to stick around but fail as well (not collapse). This'd make future sikhs to think twice before 2 nation theory, or other ethnic states.
Also if Pakistan fear losing, they'd resort to nukes. Seeing this, world will push for peace and supply Pakistan army with better gadgets. Such was the case with Israel. They threatened to use nukes if they were to lose the nation.
So yes, India doesn't have any fantasy and waste a lot of their resources on Pakistan and would very much like to focus on China.

Amen to that.
Coming to Kashmir, the best plausible solution is to simply convert it to IB...India would not want more headache by trying to conquer all of Kashmir ie the Area under Pak....CHinese part, we have kissed that good bye. Also, it is not possible for Pakistan to take it from us.F this ground fact is undrstood and accepted, automatically the tensions would ease as we wont have any other point of discord.(major/source)

Would we want a failed Pak? No.Rather we would have appreciated it were more of bangladesh.They have very close ties to China and yet we exists in relative peace/harmony.Given all the constraints, they have definitely achieved a lot. Again, the source of contention is Kashmir. Unfortunately, whatever progress was made by pakistan on economic front, it was shoved into the flame of "non sate actors" playing it out in kashmir and India, instead of say , makin the railways better.

We have seen the old guardall these while//lets hope the coming generation of your country, will be more inward looking when it comes to prosperity of pakistan-ie think for the state first and then about "freeing" kashmir/destroying yindoos

 

[WishLivePak]

Amen to that.
Coming to Kashmir, the best plausible solution is to simply convert it to IB...India would not want more headache by trying to conquer all of Kashmir ie the Area under Pak....CHinese part, we have kissed that good bye. Also, it is not possible for Pakistan to take it from us.F this ground fact is undrstood and accepted, automatically the tensions would ease as we wont have any other point of discord.(major/source)

Would we want a failed Pak? No.Rather we would have appreciated it were more of bangladesh.They have very close ties to China and yet we exists in relative peace/harmony.Given all the constraints, they have definitely achieved a lot. Again, the source of contention is Kashmir. Unfortunately, whatever progress was made by pakistan on economic front, it was shoved into the flame of "non sate actors" playing it out in kashmir and India, instead of say , makin the railways better.

We have seen the old guardall these while//lets hope the coming generation of your country, will be more inward looking when it comes to prosperity of pakistan-ie think for the state first and then about "freeing" kashmir/destroying yindoos

Pakistani leaders and army agree that kashmir can no longer be taken forcefully. Sadly, the public won't agree. So they have to lie to keep public support, just as they lie about drones when it's "inside job."

It'd be interesting to see if pakistan kashmir will wish for united kashmir or india making it independent.

Failed Pakistan, i should've been clear, shouldn't be like somalia, that it becomes damaging for neighbours too. But they'd make Pakistan an example, that just because you make another nation, it doesn't mean you achieve any victory. Bangladesh is no good, Pakistan is no good and any other indian ethnic or religious nation won't be good either.

 

[FNFAL]

Pakistani leaders and army agree that kashmir can no longer be taken forcefully. Sadly, the public won't agree. So they have to lie to keep public support, just as they lie about drones when it's "inside job."
It'd be interesting to see if pakistan kashmir will wish for united kashmir or india making it independent.
Failed Pakistan, i should've been clear, shouldn't be like somalia, that it becomes damaging for neighbours too. But they'd make Pakistan an example, that just because you make another nation, it doesn't mean you achieve any victory. Bangladesh is no good, Pakistan is no good and any other indian ethnic or religious nation won't be good either.

Thanks.
I belive in that this gen and the one coming after, has or will have a more nuetral source to rely upom, and this will affect their decision making abilities.
An indepedent Kashmir(hypothetically free from both nations) would find very difficult to stay independent , even from influences of both nations and hence, it is in the best interest of the people to integrate with established nations.

On your observations on a nation, I do not know if we. both nations, can exhibit sense and sensibilities of western nations, but i know for sure, pakistan has to be amicable to not only India, but iran and afghanistan.

 

[Contrarian]

yup, Pakistan isn't Indian cup of tea anymore. India has more problems with China and would love to sort them out. Pakistan isn't as beneficial to India as China is.

It'll take a few decades for rest of the people to understand India v Pakistan is history.

To your last sentence, India will very like much for Pakistan to stick around but fail as well (not collapse). This'd make future sikhs to think twice before 2 nation theory, or other ethnic states.

Also if Pakistan fear losing, they'd resort to nukes. Seeing this, world will push for peace and supply Pakistan army with better gadgets. Such was the case with Israel. They threatened to use nukes if they were to lose the nation.

So yes, India doesn't have any fantasy and waste a lot of their resources on Pakistan and would very much like to focus on China.

Edit: I just want to add, this thread is full of lol. So many people saying "if India does this, they won't have anywhere to run" or "they do this, we do that." Despite the COAS saying internal threat is greatest threat to Pakistan, we still think India is the actual threat. How many Pakistanis army and civilians died at hands of terrorists and how many at hands on India after 1948? @Contrarian you know?

No idea. But I do know that around 45,000 Pakistanis have died in the last decade because of terrorism and turmoil.
Secondly you are right in that Pakistan is no longer our grouse. There is so much for us to do right now that its overwhelming. Our first and only priority is to get economic growth, sustain that for a decade, massively boost manufacturing. India and China will never fire a single bullet at each other. Both are focused internally on improving their country. Our armies stare at each other and share beer on different occasions, but both countries have shown that they act consistently. Both know that if we fight we benefit third countries.

Once Pakistan is weak, India "will" take Kashmir. That's the land they really want anyway.

Anyway, there isn't going to be any war in next many decades. If India has the itch, they can just stop trade with Pakistan and that'd do somewhat of a damage.

No.
No Indian wants Azad Kashmir. That is a position for negotiations only. We are under no illusion whatsoever that even if we were to take Azad Kashmir militarily, sustaining it as a part of India would be very hard. It has been India's position for long that we convert LoC to IB, that means Pakistan gets what it has and we get what we have.

Bangladesh is no good, Pakistan is no good and any other indian ethnic or religious nation won't be good either.

Wrong.
Bangladesh is doing very good. Its economic growth is much more than Pakistan and recently it has been more than India as well. Its social indicators - literacy, health, maternal mortality rate, etc are far above Pakistan and slightly above India. That speaks volumes about Bangladesh doing good for its people.

If Bangladesh continues its trajectory, there is no doubt it would become a very strong economy and country in a few decades.

 

[WishLivePak]

No idea. But I do know that around 45,000 Pakistanis have died in the last decade because of terrorism and turmoil.
Secondly you are right in that Pakistan is no longer our grouse. There is so much for us to do right now that its overwhelming. Our first and only priority is to get economic growth, sustain that for a decade, massively boost manufacturing. India and China will never fire a single bullet at each other. Both are focused internally on improving their country. Our armies stare at each other and share beer on different occasions, but both countries have shown that they act consistently. Both know that if we fight we benefit third countries.

No.
No Indian wants Azad Kashmir. That is a position for negotiations only. We are under no illusion whatsoever that even if we were to take Azad Kashmir militarily, sustaining it as a part of India would be very hard. It has been India's position for long that we convert LoC to IB, that means Pakistan gets what it has and we get what we have.


Wrong.
Bangladesh is doing very good. Its economic growth is much more than Pakistan and recently it has been more than India as well. Its social indicators - literacy, health, maternal mortality rate, etc are far above Pakistan and slightly above India. That speaks volumes about Bangladesh doing good for its people.

If Bangladesh continues its trajectory, there is no doubt it would become a very strong economy and country in a few decades.

No you're wrong at Bangladesh. Look at the last election, boycott. It's history is filled with assinations and coups.

 

[GR!FF!N]

First only few division will be able to reach border making lot easier for us to attack secondly this large movement will make soldiers more vulnerable to attacks even before reaching our border and many more reasona

few divisons??

simulate a proper deployment..

we've some 1 million soldiers(Military and Paramilitary) around Pakistani Border.we've 3 Corps in Kashmir.2 corps in Rajasthan.2 Corps under Western Command.2 Corps in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh.one of it is Strike Corps which will be usedthis entire force generally gets engaged.now include Paramilitary force which comes under IA during War.

we've 3 Strike Corps(1 Corps, 2 Corps & 21 Corps),10 Holding and Mixed Corps.

new concepts enable us about IBG.its not about combined punch in one sector anymore..its about punching across the line by using IBGs.some Semi Blitzkrieg move.avoid getting bogged down,bypass heavy enemy fortification and deployment and make move with lightning speed.

the major problem was transport.but in last few exercises,IA successfully engaged within stipulated time frame.you can see that India is also buying specific hardware,which is multiplying our transport capability.

now,lets see what Pakistan can do.they can't deploy all their force at border to nullify our "Numbers".then can let us in and choose a place where they would try to engage.but I doubt India would ever venture deep into Pakistan.or they can make some pre-emptive attack,a known tactics by Pakistan.but one thing is certain,India now has upper hand in both Transport Capability,in Numbers,in Conventional War Fighting Capability and Speed.Pakistan would be forced to fight a "Defensive War" as Pre-Emptive attack against heavy deployment is generally not an option.

 

[Zarvan]

few divisons??

simulate a proper deployment..

we've some 1 million soldiers(Military and Paramilitary) around Pakistani Border.we've 3 Corps in Kashmir.2 corps in Rajasthan.2 Corps under Western Command.2 Corps in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh.one of it is Strike Corps which will be usedthis entire force generally gets engaged.now include Paramilitary force which comes under IA during War.

we've 3 Strike Corps(1 Corps, 2 Corps & 21 Corps),10 Holding and Mixed Corps.

new concepts enable us about IBG.its not about combined punch in one sector anymore..its about punching across the line by using IBGs.some Semi Blitzkrieg move.avoid getting bogged down,bypass heavy enemy fortification and deployment and make move with lightning speed.

the major problem was transport.but in last few exercises,IA successfully engaged within stipulated time frame.you can see that India is also buying specific hardware,which is multiplying our transport capability.

now,lets see what Pakistan can do.they can't deploy all their force at border to nullify our "Numbers".then can let us in and choose a place where they would try to engage.but I doubt India would ever venture deep into Pakistan.or they can make some pre-emptive attack,a known tactics by Pakistan.but one thing is certain,India now has upper hand in both Transport Capability,in Numbers,in Conventional War Fighting Capability and Speed.Pakistan would be forced to fight a "Defensive War" as Pre-Emptive attack against heavy deployment is generally not an option.

Mr moving all your troops towards our border would take you at least a week and by than you would have lost the advantage India always had the upper hand when it comes to numbers but they can succeed the answer is big no and preemptive strikes will lead to full scale war Mr and no way you can deploy most of your forces in 48 hours not even 72 hours week is the most fastest time you may be able to achieve it

 

[Storm Force]

India Wil not touch you as long ad Pakistan causes no trouble..

Otherwise yes they have the means to hurt you badley.

Bigger resources bigger military

 

[GR!FF!N]

Mr moving all your troops towards our border would take you at least a week and by than you would have lost the advantage India always had the upper hand when it comes to numbers but they can succeed the answer is big no and preemptive strikes will lead to full scale war Mr and no way you can deploy most of your forces in 48 hours not even 72 hours week is the most fastest time you may be able to achieve it

thats what it was till a decade ago.but not now.situation changed a lot..now India expects to attack within 3 days..

Army mobilisation time: 48 hours | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

Indian Army exercise “Vajra Prahar” to trim mobilisation time to 48 hours | Frontier India

Indian Army Chief Assures Superior Army Performance and Faster Response against Threats - Defence Now

read this.....same concept,tested again and again.

 

[indiatester]

Mr moving all your troops towards our border would take you at least a week and by than you would have lost the advantage India always had the upper hand when it comes to numbers but they can succeed the answer is big no and preemptive strikes will lead to full scale war Mr and no way you can deploy most of your forces in 48 hours not even 72 hours week is the most fastest time you may be able to achieve it

What you say is true if India cannot deploy withing 48-72 hours.
Even if deployed, it won't be a walk in the park. Cold Start doctrine if at all can be considered as a quick deployment model but not sufficient to threaten Pakistan IMHO.

 

[Contrarian]

No you're wrong at Bangladesh. Look at the last election, boycott. It's history is filled with assinations and coups.

Political turmoil happens in every country. There are election boycotts in India as well. Granted that BD has suffered coups, but that stage is long gone now.

What matters is that Institutions of the country keep making the country better despite them. The way to verify these things are looking up stats like HDI, social progress, literacy, economic growth. BD is doing well despite its political challenges and is beating India in economic growth.

 

[ucmicu]

you do understand the concept of "Cold Start",right??its not full mobilization within 72 hours.its about winning the war within 72 hours.the concept is not engaging troops and gets bogged down.the concept is somewhat a "Modern Blitzkrieg".destroy the force what needed to be destroyed.let entrenched and defensive structure of enemy intact,bypass them and occupy territory(limited).you do know about fighting enemy with ground of your choosing,right??revisit 71 war again.study the tactics.only this time,it'll be far more swift,far more synchronized,far more network-centric.

only recently,one article got posted where USA simulated similar war,where Pakistan used 2 tactical nukes,while India replied with 4 or more.it showed the futility to use tactical nukes.you should study it deeply,and discover the flaw.see,be it tactical or a megaton nuke,once used,all restriction will be "OFF".its not only India who'll retaliate,expect far larger response from other world powers as well.even if Pakistan stop the Indian Offensive,they'll be the ultimate loser,as in International Community then going to isolate and impose strict sanctions.Pakistan will become post WW-I Germany,just several times worse.

Son to win a ground war on the indo pak plains -- you need more tanks -- not 'cold starting' but in the battle. How many of your tanks would be at the border by the time your border has started approaching your tanks at the same speed?! Pak simply has its cities and hence its cantonments nearer to the border: which essentially means that you will find yourself pushed back and demoralized by the time you engage your enemy. It is simply geography -- not any machoism or any 'cold starting'!

In case you disagree, why would delhi choose to have almost the same number of tanks as Pakistan? while maintaining 150% (quantitatively) the airforce -- and investing in its navy as if its the indian ocean's defence budget rather than the indian state's!