Apprentice
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2016
- Messages
- 665
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Where you Got this Idea that Western Media Praised you "The Australian News Paper" Cutting is All you got When People Asked For Facts From Pakistani's
There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —
The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.
- According to the Library of Congress Country Studies conducted by the Federal Research Division of the United States[19] –
Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.
- According to the Office of the Historian within the U.S Department of State:[106]
The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.
- TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[97] The article further elaborates,
Asia: Silent Guns, Wary Combatants - TIME
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.
- Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[20] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.
PS:If you a Genuine Researcher of History If Will Easily Find Out that Real Facts Are Some what Different What you Study in you State Manufactured Books
Where you Got this Idea that Western Media Praised you "The Australian News Paper" Cutting is All you got When People Asked For Facts From Pakistani's
There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —
The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.
- According to the Library of Congress Country Studies conducted by the Federal Research Division of the United States[19] –
Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.
- According to the Office of the Historian within the U.S Department of State:[106]
The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.
- TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[97] The article further elaborates,
Asia: Silent Guns, Wary Combatants - TIME
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.
- Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[20] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.
PS:If you a Genuine Researcher of History If Will Easily Find Out that Real Facts Are Some what Different What you Study in you State Manufactured Books
Indians love their baby Wikipedia, don't they?
many indians have said this before but i'll try one more time.
starting a war to capture kashmir and ending up successfully defending lahore by a hairs breadth is not victory.
victory is ticking the lines on your to-do list
The war started when India attempted its invasion of Lahore.
Operation Gibraltar was just a border conflict, it wasn't officially the war. In fact it was the 2nd border conflict after Pakistan's success in April 1965 in the Rann of Kutch where the first border conflict of the year occured.
War was declared when India crossed the international border.
