Disclosing Kargil casualties would affect morale of troops: CIC

[Mav3rick]

If only people would bother to read the article before posting, we would have, slightly less dumber posts.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...d-affect-morale-troops-cic-4.html#post4123855

If only you had the sense to understand that no other force would have actual figures of loss of life in Kargil other then Indian Army. And since Indian Army has not released the info, nobody would really know. The simplest of things to ponder is, why did India get so desperate so as to order coffins all the way from the US.

 

[Mav3rick]

"Dil ko behlane ko Ghalib ye khayal achha hai"

Out one 140 peaks that Pakistan held at one time, it holds but 1 peak and two ridge line, that too right on LOC.
The said peak is surrounded by Indian peaks on three sides.

One and half decades after Kargil...India still has Siachen..the real objective of your Kargil misadventure(in case you have forgotten)

Ignoring the significance of the peak we still hold, can you by any means answer why India with all her military might was unable to retake that peak? It does tell us wonders of what really enabled Indian Military to retake the other peaks........answer: retreat of Pakistani fighters due to political reason.

 

[Mav3rick]

Obviously you would never ever admit that Pakistan was ever defeated in war against Hindooooooos.

So much for false pride which gets thrashed in wars but hey you can live like a Alice in Its own wonderland.

Your top generals admitted Kargil was blunder but here you start yet yet yet another Kargil thread claiming victory when its gone down in history as yet yet yet another shameful defeat for Pakistan.

As I said earlier, in which dream can India thrash Pakistan in a war??? In 1965 we had thrashed you black and blue to the point where you called out for a cease fire, signed the document a day earlier then Pakistan and had exhausted 80% of your ammunition! Not just that, you refused neutral arbitration to, most likely, protect the morale of soldiers....whatever of it was left! Now remember, this was done to you by a country that is 1/7th your size and 1/3rd your military.

Also, as I had said earlier, when could have India ever defeated Pakistan in a war, unless Pakistan was at war with itself......hint: Bangladesh!

When you actually had the chance to prove your worth, Kargil & even more importantly in 2001/02, you lost air the moment you saw Pakistani response.....probably the haunting memories of 1965 came flooding back as the country was no longer at war with itself!

 

[Bang Galore]

As I said earlier, in which dream can India thrash Pakistan in a war??? In 1965 we had thrashed you black and blue to the point where you called out for a cease fire, signed the document a day earlier then Pakistan and had exhausted 80% of your ammunition! Not just that, you refused neutral arbitration to, most likely, protect the morale of soldiers....whatever of it was left! Now remember, this was done to you by a country that is 1/7th your size and 1/3rd your military.

Ya Ya, another canard about 1965. Tell us this; if Pakistan won the war & India was the loser, why is it that the Indian leader at that time - Shastri is revered in India & the Pakistani leader at the time, Ayub Khan bore the brunt of people's anger in Pakistan and never recovered his image? Funny what "victory" does to your leaders?

It does tell us wonders of what really enabled Indian Military to retake the other peaks........answer: retreat of Pakistani fighters due to political reason.

It does, does it? In which case, you are a nation of not just military hotheads, you are imbeciles of the highest order to give up a "winning" position...... No matter how you look at it, you are never going to come out of it creditably.

 

[Mav3rick]

Ya Ya, another canard about 1965. Tell us this; if Pakistan won the war & India was the loser, why is it that the Indian leader at that time - Shastri is revered in India & the Pakistani leader at the time, Ayub Khan bore the brunt of people's anger in Pakistan and never recovered his image? Funny what "victory" does to your leaders?

Shastri is revered as a hero for saving his country the humiliation of impending defeat while Ayub Khan is not regarded a hero as he is considered the person who signed a ceasefire when Pakistan was in a position to liberate all of Kashmir.

It does, does it? In which case, you are a nation of not just military hotheads, you are imbeciles of the highest order to give up a "winning" position...... No matter how you look at it, you are never going to come out of it creditably.

You can call us incompetent etc. but that does not change the fact. If you did not have such a diplomatic influence in the world, things would most likely have been different.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Ignoring the significance of the peak we still hold, can you by any means answer why India with all her military might was unable to retake that peak? It does tell us wonders of what really enabled Indian Military to retake the other peaks........answer: retreat of Pakistani fighters due to political reason.

the decision to ignore the peak 5353 comes after careful analysis.
1. if one has to reach the peak you have to come from Pakistani side of the border, a frontal attack was not possible.

2. capturing that peak with heavy casualty was not worth it because it give no significant advantage because from free surrounding peaks Indian army can successfully neutralize any pak firing.
3. war was never not about capturing small areas or peaks, the barren land gives no benefits unless it is at strategic point (or filled with natural resources )which gives a advantage over enemy, from Indian point of view our objective was to defend the NH, which carries supplies, we met the objective, so we called it a over.

you are not able to see the big picture because you see it as boundary dispute between two individuals, families where even one spure foot of fertile land is important, between countries with hilly borders like India pak or indo China, it is measured in kilometers and evaluated in the light of strategic importance.

 

[Mav3rick]

the decision to ignore the peak 5353 comes after careful analysis.
1. if one has to reach the peak you have to come from Pakistani side of the border, a frontal attack was not possible.

2. capturing that peak with heavy casualty was not worth it because it give no significant advantage because from free surrounding peaks Indian army can successfully neutralize any pak firing.
3. war was never not about capturing small areas or peaks, the barren land gives no benefits unless it is at strategic point (or filled with natural resources )which gives a advantage over enemy, from Indian point of view our objective was to defend the NH, which carries supplies, we met the objective, so we called it a over.

you are not able to see the big picture because you see it as boundary dispute between two individuals, families where even one spure foot of fertile land is important, between countries with hilly borders like India pak or indo China, it is measured in kilometers and evaluated in the light of strategic importance.

1. Frontal attack was quite difficult on most of the peaks too yet Indian Army attempted to regain them time and again, despite suffering heavy casualties.

2. According to India, the peaks belonged to India so reclaiming captured territory is a default must and not an option based on whether it is worth it or not.....especially when one self declares itself the winner.

3. It was never really a war as I think war was never officially declared. Furthermore, conflicts limited to a certain part cannot really be considered a war especially when Pakistan Military was not involved (it was NLI non regular forces and Mujahideen).

Anyway, the truth is.....we will continue to fight unless all matters are solved amicably and with a solution that is acceptable to all parties involved.

 

[Bang Galore]

Shastri is revered as a hero for saving his country the humiliation of impending defeat while Ayub Khan is not regarded a hero as he is considered the person who signed a ceasefire when Pakistan was in a position to liberate all of Kashmir.

This "imbecelic" behaviour then must be a deeply ingrained trait & passed on down through generations since you guys (according to you) did the same even in 1999. Not much hope for you chaps then......

You can call us incompetent etc. but that does not change the fact. If you did not have such a diplomatic influence in the world, things would most likely have been different.

...and how does one get that diplomatic influence? After all "Diplomacy is just war by other means", is it not?

 

[Mav3rick]

This "imbecelic" behaviour then must be a deeply ingrained trait & passed on down through generations since you guys (according to you) did the same even in 1999. Not much hope for you chaps then......

You know the difference b/w you and us? We are not blessed with National leaders as you are. Ever since creation, we have lacked true leaders and lost the ones that we had. You, on the other hand, have had the liberator as your leader for many years. Those early days set the right things in motion, unfortunately the same never happened here.

An international vendor shared a valuable piece of information. He said that officials from both Pakistan and India take bribes but there is a major difference. He said that in India, officials would ensure compliance, quality, investment, ToT (where possible) and local production facilities with local staff and only then would they speak of their own commission. In Pakistan, officials wanted only their commission to give the vendors a free hand.

But.....there is always hope.

...and how does one get that diplomatic influence? After all "Diplomacy is just war by other means", is it not?

I agree.

 

[Bang Galore]

The simplest of things to ponder is, why did India get so desperate so as to order coffins all the way from the US.

Even more simple is when you figure out that the caskets ordered from the U.S. post dates the Kargil incident. There was never any shortage of coffins during the Kargil war because the army till then did what it always did, fabricate coffins using carpenters.

Another Canard.

"500 Caskets were not bought. Only 150 caskets were ordered and these have not been used as yet. They have been kept in a store. The caskets came after the Kargil incident. These were not used for the Kargil martyrs," Fernandes said.
Govt open to probe into coffin scam: Fernandes - Express India

 

[Bang Galore]

You know the difference b/w you and us? We are not blessed with National leaders as you are. Ever since creation, we have lacked true leaders and lost the ones that we had. You, on the other hand, have had the liberator as your leader for many years. Those early days set the right things in motion, unfortunately the same never happened here.

You know the main difference is that you guys, even those endowed with fairly decent brains like yourself, prefer to wallow in the past. What point in trying to re-win a war that happened nearly 50 years ago? Wars are not an end by themselves, the objective is what is important. That you didn't achieve (by any accounts -yours or ours), so what use all this breast beating? The same with Kargil. You can continue to blame/rue your bad luck or you can draw lessons from it & move on to play the game with the cards that you have been dealt with, not the cards that you believed you should have had.

An international vendor shared a valuable piece of information. He said that officials from both Pakistan and India take bribes but there is a major difference. He said that in India, officials would ensure compliance, quality, investment, ToT (where possible) and local production facilities with local staff and only then would they speak of their own commission. In Pakistan, officials wanted only their commission to give the vendors a free hand.

This looks like something suspiciously similar to something mouthed on a talk show (the one with a guy lecturing, a funny guy & a woman who either laughs or tut-tuts)

 

[GoodBoy]

Out of 100, if india cannot vacated 99 then we defeated , and Pakk which occupied 100 and driven out from 99 then manage to held one because then its victory .

wow man lot of question marks..

I always give a small example when Pakistanis rant all over internet over the small battles they won in WARS which they lost.

A small boy always take panga with a big boy and challenges him for a fight all the time and hits first.As a reaction the big boy beats up the small boy black and blue and makes him bite the dust.

The small boy later claims victory as he says one of his punch landed on the big boy as well and he "won".

The fact of the matter is that Pakistanis are really really disillusional about their identity and their ONLY identity is their misguided hatred towards India which is actually its parent country.For this they try their best to make up falsified stories which brainwash their janta and we can see it on here in abundance.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

1. Frontal attack was quite difficult on most of the peaks too yet Indian Army attempted to regain them time and again, despite suffering heavy casualties.

yes true for many peaks, and the assessment was, India need 15 soldier against each pak soldiers because of that. we had to give the price because those peaks occupied by pak army was a threat to national highway and siachin supply line. in the case of point 5353 it was not true as I said earlier

2. According to India, the peaks belonged to India so reclaiming captured territory is a default must and not an option based on whether it is worth it or not.....especially when one self declares itself the winner.

this is where you are entirely wrong, like I said earlier borders like this are often not cut and dry lines, one or two hills on LOC are peanuts unless the location of it posess a threat to Indian defence lines or supply routes.

3. It was never really a war as I think war was never officially declared. Furthermore, conflicts limited to a certain part cannot really be considered a war especially when Pakistan Military was not involved (it was NLI non regular forces and Mujahideen).

that's a big big lie, which only ignorant fools can continue to believe, good luck with that.
.

Anyway, the truth is.....we will continue to fight unless all matters are solved amicably and with a solution that is acceptable to all parties involved.

yes you can choose to fight continuously, truth is pak army is not capable of taking back the Kashmir by force.. pak economy can't support pak army to keep up with Indian army's modernization race, so power and endurance both favours Indian army. do you agree ?
second option is a diplomatic pressure and media campaign and bring back UN and other international powers to Kashmir and force India to do a plebiscite on entire undivided Kashmir.

UN clearly said if only both parties ask for help then only they will intervene, so will be other powers. on media and diplomatic front India weigh more than Pakistan, do you agree ?
only option remaining and still continuing is support cross border terrorism, unfortunately for Pakistan it has done much damage to Pakistan than to India..India is quiet capable of continuing this game today, in fact we are much more capable and prepared than we were before, do you agree ?


only settlement I am seeing is converting LOC into border with minor give and take, the sooner you do it, the better for Pakistan from a bargaining point of view because of growing disparity between two countries.

 

[IND151]

Since you have also admitted that all peaks aren't vacated. Your mission also ended with a lot question marks and was incomplete.

@Capt.Popeye @Joe Shearer> He doesn't agree with I meant in post number 129, that we won in Kargil, on ground that 2-3 peaks are still under Pak control

please answer him.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Capt.Popeye @Joe Shearer> He doesn't agree with I meant in post number 129, that we won in Kargil, on ground that 2-3 peaks are still under Pak control

please answer him.

There is no point.

Succeeding generations of Pakistani apologists have embellished the actual events of 1965, for instance, to the point that some idiots among them think that they won. They are not aware of

1. The fiasco of the original Operation Gibraltar, where Pakistani SSG troops trained by General Meetha were slaughtered to a man, and the consequent fighting took Indian troops into the Haji Pir Pass;
2. The even greater fiasco of the opening moves of Operation Grand Slam, where Ayub got the Divisional commander of 12 Division replaced by Yahya Khan in mid battle, leading to the loss of momentum, and the opportunity for General Harbaksh Singh to reinforce the soft spot in the Indian defences;
3. The penetration of 3 Jat to Batapur, and their withdrawal due to orders from division level;
4. The true story behind the stopping of 1 Armoured Div at Gadgor, and how General K. K. Singh snatched defeat from the jaws of victory;
5. The smashing of Pakistani armour at Asal Uttar.

It was largely the staving off by 23 Cavalry of the 1 Armoured Div that cheers up Pakistani analysts of the war. Nothing else in their performance was creditable.

As a result, they snatch at straws like Shastri's untimely death to make some convoluted point. What they mean I have never been able to understand, but they also ignore the evidence of their own military annals, for instance, the trenchant criticism by Major A. H. Amin, and fall back on myths of their own concoction. Some myths are that the Indian Army ran out of ammo.; only 35% had been consumed, while in contrast, Pakistani supplies were abysmally low, but a conservative Chief of Staff insisted that the Indian political leadership should seize the gains, and capitalize on the victory at Asal Uttar, and allow the Russians to make peace.

It is the same dreary story with Kargil.

We are given different explanations for why the hare-brained scheme was floated, we are told that it was a masterstroke betrayed by their own political leadership, ignoring the clear evidence that their military leaders themselves had gone to Nawaz Sharif asking for a relieving of the pressure. We are never given any explanation for the steadfast denial of the purely military provenance of the occupying forces, initially claimed to be mujahedin, and only grudgingly acknowledged to be NLI, slaughtered to make a bid for fame by the military leadership. Finally, this nonsense about the peaks that were taken back or not taken back. As if one peak made a difference, when the entire line was vacated, and as if this one peak allows them to claim victory.

There is no point in arguing with those who evade facts, and place hypothetical possibilities in front of the facts as given events.

That is what you friend is doing, and he has no objective in view other than the laudable one of salvaging some remnants of pride from a dismal record of failure for over 60 years.