Did India really 've OFFENSIVE doctrines??

[Stephen Cohen]

@levina

Madam
Indian armed forces were NOT having offensive doctrines till the 80s
The great man General Sundarji changed everything

And also Rajiv Gandhi must get credit for " expansion " in size of Indian Armed forces

He wanted Indian Armed forces NOT to rely on nukes but have very strong
conventional capabilities SO AS to rule out things like 1962 and 1965

In 80s Pakistan was getting a lot of US aid to beef up its military
But India wanted Pakistan to understand that the 1965 option was impossible

Hence Brasstacks against Pakistan and Operation Chequerboard against China

Post Brasstacks Pakistan adopted its Proxy war in Kashmir in 1989
Not a direct war mind you because that option was closed

 

[Kompromat]

the matter here for India is to stop the proxy war, If I were India, I will slowly drop the threshold limits on the casus belli. going from status quo to lowering the tone and tenor. if I were Pakistan, I would not let that status quo go.

In the recent events where India has denied talking to Pakistan on pretext of Pak consulting separatist forces, India is doing a China of the early 2000s (remember they stopped talking to any one hosting the Dalai Lama?). The path being taken by India seems similar.

India's new govt wants to look 'tough'. The last time they lost face to the Chinese when they punched tents inside their territory while Premier Xi was visiting, they ended up opening guns on the border with Pakistan. In India media is ready to blame Pakistan from spy pigeons to secret service trained camels and the population readily accepts whatever they are told about Pakistan without questioning it. Our narrative is straight forward. We won't start a war but if India does then all bets will be off.

 

[Levina]

a vast military exercise in Rajasthan,

So finally you proved me right, it was indeed an exercise.

Zia decided to deliver a threat that would force India to back down. A.Q. Khan was to be the messenger and it should have been his finest hour. Zia asked Khan to arrange an interview that would play loudly in India,

Right!
Zia had decided to "threaten" India, because Pakistan's premier nuclear scientist Abdul Qadir Khan revealed in a March 1987 interview that Pakistan had manufactured a nuclear bomb. Although Khan later retracted his statement, India stated that the disclosure was "forcing us to review our option."
Brass Tacks

But Khan had to remain ambiguous enough for Washington to continue funding Pakistan.

In which case he would not 've said "we have manufactured the bomb". In short the statement was made only to threaten India.

What?

That reminds me you still have not produced Rajiv Gandhi’s special adviser Behramnam's article.was that really a drama that I read??

Btw this is what Gen Zia had to say when he came to India "Cricket for peace is my mission".
War Talk Evaporates on First Pitch : Zia's Cricket Diplomacy Gets High Score in India - Los Angeles Times

You 've yet to produce something that proves that India was being offensive, the Behramnam article, and that Zia threatened Rajiv.
And let me make it clear that if India wanted to be offensive then it would've asked for Azad Kashmir but India has settled for LOC as IB. Au contraire Pakistan still demands entire kashmir.

Google search lists only the Pakistani media outlets!
A search on India Today, reveals nothing!
Even the name "Behramnam" takes us to various Pakistani propaganda sites. (One is the Zaid Hamid website!)
OTOH, This gives a very different idea of the Macho-Man:

War Talk Evaporates on First Pitch : Zia's Cricket Diplomacy Gets High Score in India - Los Angeles Times

Thanks for that one.

@levina

2 70 % of our Armed forces are on Pakistani border for deterrence purpose
That is why ever since 1990 When Kashmir issue became hot ; Pakistan has been
unable to intervene directly like in 1965 and has to go for Kargil like operations
which was a plea for global support and attention on Kashmir cause

Right!
Our army is there for deterring them but that doesnt mean we attack them.

4 Sundarji doctrine was also aggressive and offensive but NOT suited in a Nuclear environment

I have proved that popular misconception wrong already

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Horus Sir

In several Kashmir discussions you are always proclaiming the inevitability
of India's " defeat " and withdrawl from Kashmir AND in other threads you
are found to be expressing Concern on India's conventional strength and aggressive doctrines

These two things are mutually contradictory

If we are so strong ; how will you be able to throw us out of Kashmir

 

[Sliver]

India's new govt wants to look 'tough'. The last time they lost face to the Chinese when they punched tents inside their territory while Premier Xi was visiting, they ended up opening guns on the border with Pakistan. In India media is ready to blame Pakistan from spy pigeons to secret service trained camels and the population readily accepts whatever they are told about Pakistan without questioning it. Our narrative is straight forward. We won't start a war but if India does then all bets will be off.

consider this:
- India stopped talking to Pak at present citing Pakistan's talks with separatists and redrawing new red lines.
- Keep china out of the current thread, its not really in the scope of the discussion here
- Kargil was a war started by pakistan (given army regulars infiltrating into Indian areas) and so the last battle between the two was "started" by Pakistan so you cannot really say "we wont start a war" when you actually did start the last one
- Pakistan want to claim that India is "about to start a war" with Pakistan which may or may not be true, we will only know in hindsight, it is in India's interests to keep Pakistan on the edge with such posturing.

OTOH
- India does cite Pakistan as the reason for more aggressive postures (65 war - sundarji's brasstacks, Attack in the captial leads to cold start doctrine).
- Pakistan will continue to call this an "aggressive" action and mount ever increasing "MAD" weapons to create the edge to prevent any attacks

Over all, this is really a vicious cycle that may not break any time soon, India and hence Indians are rightly going to believe they have not started any wars, Pakistan will rightly see any and all action by India with suspicion.

as much as @levina and @Horus want to convince each other, its a pretty deep perception difference. Reuqest you guys (being among the more aner members here) to call it off as a "agree to disagree" mode from here - my two cents.

 

[Kompromat]

consider this:
- India stopped talking to Pak at present citing Pakistan's talks with separatists and redrawing new red lines.
- Keep china out of the current thread, its not really in the scope of the discussion here
- Kargil was a war started by pakistan (given army regulars infiltrating into Indian areas) and so the last battle between the two was "started" by Pakistan so you cannot really say "we wont start a war" when you actually did start the last one
- Pakistan want to claim that India is "about to start a war" with Pakistan which may or may not be true, we will only know in hindsight, it is in India's interests to keep Pakistan on the edge with such posturing.

OTOH
- India does cite Pakistan as the reason for more aggressive postures (65 war - sundarji's brasstacks, Attack in the captial leads to cold start doctrine).
- Pakistan will continue to call this an "aggressive" action and mount ever increasing "MAD" weapons to create the edge to prevent any attacks

Over all, this is really a vicious cycle that may not break any time soon, India and hence Indians are rightly going to believe they have not started any wars, Pakistan will rightly see any and all action by India with suspicion.

as much as @levina and @Horus want to convince each other, its a pretty deep perception difference. Reuqest you guys (being among the more aner members here) to call it off as a "agree to disagree" mode from here - my two cents.

It will stay that way till our people in Kashmir get their right to deterimine their own fate. Until then India will not be allowed to remain in peace nor realize its true economic or political potential.

 

[furqanusafzai]

a fool will engage a country in full scale offense knowing they have 100 to 200 nuclear arsenals and the means to deliver them when and where they want.Post 98-99,there is no more room for Indo-Pak full scale war.The two countries must resolve the Kashmir Issue,come out of subcontinent theatre and play an active role on Global Level.They should make sure their say is valued in Middle East,central Asian and African Politics.

 

[Levina]

consider this:
- India stopped talking to Pak at present citing Pakistan's talks with separatists and redrawing new red lines.

After 67 years we still have not concluded anything,to get this to fruition India had to take the extreme step.India didnt have too many options, we can not fight trained terrorists on one side and continue talks for peace on the other. Our previous government was patsy and soft.

- Keep china out of the current thread, its not really in the scope of the discussion here

You're right.

- Kargil was a war started by pakistan (given army regulars infiltrating into Indian areas) and so the last battle between the two was "started" by Pakistan so you cannot really say "we wont start a war" when you actually did start the last one
- Pakistan want to claim that India is "about to start a war" with Pakistan which may or may not be true, we will only know in hindsight, it is in India's interests to keep Pakistan on the edge with such posturing.

I'm sure @Horus would deny or ignore this part.

Over all, this is really a vicious cycle that may not break any time soon, India and hence Indians are rightly going to believe they have not started any wars, Pakistan will rightly see any and all action by India with suspicion.

as much as @levina and @Horus want to convince each other, its a pretty deep perception difference. Reuqest you guys (being among the more aner members here) to call it off as a "agree to disagree" mode from here - my two cents.

I dont 've an issue but I'm sure Horus wont agree. Our doctrines 've been defensive most of the time, and if we did retort to something pernicious then that was because India was pushed to the wall.

It will stay that way till our people in Kashmir get their right to deterimine their own fate.

If they thought they were Pakistanis then this would not have happened
Kashmiris defy boycott call, winter cold to vote in large numbers (Roundup) - Firstpost

Until then India will not be allowed to remain in peace nor realize its true economic or political potential.

This exactly what I was trying to prove.Thanks for accepting it so honestly.

 

[Kompromat]

After 67 years we still have not concluded anything,to get this to fruition India had to take the extreme step.India didnt have too many options, we can not fight trained terrorists on one side and continue talks for peace on the other. Our previous government was patsy and soft.

You're right.

I'm sure @Horus would deny or ignore this part.


I dont 've an issue but I'm sure Horus wont agree. Our doctrines 've been defensive most of the time, and if we did retort to something pernicious then that was because India was pushed to the wall.

If they thought they were Pakistanis then this would not have happened
Kashmiris defy boycott call, winter cold to vote in large numbers (Roundup) - Firstpost


This exactly what I was trying to prove.Thanks for accepting it so honestly.

I don't disagree with carrying out Kargil, i just disagree with not doing it properly.

@Horus Sir

In several Kashmir discussions you are always proclaiming the inevitability
of India's " defeat " and withdrawl from Kashmir AND in other threads you
are found to be expressing Concern on India's conventional strength and aggressive doctrines

These two things are mutually contradictory

If we are so strong ; how will you be able to throw us out of Kashmir

I have never denied Indian conventional superiority. However it doesn't really translate into strength and victory in battle. Once you go to war, all bets are off, no plan works. Gigantic armies have been defeated by small armies over and over again.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

It will stay that way till our people in Kashmir get their right to deterimine their own fate. Until then India will not be allowed to remain in peace nor realize its true economic or political potential.

This threat was first delivered by General Musharraf that unless India solves Kashmir
it will be unable to prosper

Our answer is a BIG ; NO Thanks
India's economic potential is NOT dependent on Pakistan's goodwill

You can see the Growth rate of India in the entire 15 years period post the Kargil conflict

If we have slowed down recently it is because of OUR own mistakes ; corruption and inertia

Pakistanis are totally unable to appreciate the resolve of Hindus to
keep Kashmir

If we did not budge in 1990 when there was NO Soviet Union and we were BANKRUPT
then now in 2014 you are just day dreaming

We are economically TEN times stronger than we were in 1990
And our forex reserves are 300 Times more than in 1990

 

[Kompromat]

This threat was first delivered by General Musharraf that unless India solves Kashmir
it will be unable to prosper

Our answer is a BIG ; NO Thanks
India's economic potential is NOT dependent on Pakistan's goodwill

You can see the Growth rate of India in the entire 15 years period post the Kargil conflict

If we have slowed down recently it is because of OUR own mistakes ; corruption and inertia

Pakistanis are totally unable to appreciate the resolve of Hindus to
keep Kashmir

If we did not budge in 1990 when there was NO Soviet Union and we were BANKRUPT
then now in 2014 you are just day dreaming

We are economically TEN times stronger than we were in 1990
And our forex reserves are 300 Times more than in 1990

Then we will have sword decide between us.

 

[ni8mare]

Until then India will not be allowed to remain in peace nor realize its true economic or political potential.

now change india with pakistan ...it is actually happening to pakistan now

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

And our forex reserves are 300 Times more than in 1990

300 times?

How much foreign exchange reserves does India have?

 

[Levina]

I don't disagree with carrying out Kargil, i just disagree with not doing it properly.

so deft!!
how should that be interpreted??
That during kargil Pakistan did send in its soldiers in the guise of militants and that the infiltration was facilitated by PA??
I might be wrong but I do want to know how your statement should be interpreted.
Though I've already posted Capt Sambal's confession so I guess I might've got it right.
But then now you've been repeatedly proving me right and I think soon we will get to a conclusion.

 

[Kompromat]

300 times?

How much foreign exchange reserves does India have?

Kid got carried away