Has anyone read this book?

[Keysersoze]

Its called "Future wars" by Trevor Depuy?

Basically the reason I mention it is that it actually uses a computer based model to predict conflicts and their resolution.

There is a Pak-India war in there and the result (while dated to the late 90's) were interesting to say the least.

 

[Zeeshan S.]

I haven't but would like to know more about it.

Would you like to tell us or give us an overview regarding the outcomes of Pak-India war. I must say that India in 90s was much stronger than it was in 75.

 

[Keysersoze]

Well essentially, according to the model, it would take 2 weeks for India's conventional forces to defeat Pakistan's. India's forces would take a beating (due to being the attacking force and having to attack contracting lines of defence) but would recover post war faster than Pakistan's due to the fact that Pak's infrastrcture would be damaged.

but of course this model IS based during the imbargo period so a lot of the systems for both sides are the older ones.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

On the computer, this analysis may look very interesting, but 2 weeks is not a very reasonable time, even if things go as planned-----but they normally go haywire in the first 24 to 48 hours of combat.

In the near present, the combat failure of the israeli forces in lebanon has been a big wakeup call for the indians who have been bragging about the israeli defence purchases and were really excited and thrilled to put it into practise a couple of times in the last four years.

Now, looking back at what happened to israel in lebanon, the indians might be thanking their GODS for keeping the sane heads prevail since 2002.

 

[Thunder]

I haven't but would like to know more about it.

Would you like to tell us or give us an overview regarding the outcomes of Pak-India war. I must say that India in 90s was much stronger than it was in 75.

It's not about who has better planes, or who has more planes. It's about how many of your guys are willing to fly those planes. Hezbullah-isreal conflict clearly shows that you don't need huge and hi-tech forces to win. You just need people with a morale and willing to scarifice them selves for the cause, <---something our armed forces has. "And if i don't come back, tell them that i have scarificed my today, for their tomorrow" Pak army. :flag:

 

[Keysersoze]

Thats very "moving"

In my experience, patriotism lasts right up to the moment that the first bullet wizzes past you.

Tell you what lets test your theory.....lets save some money and give the PAF some world war one bi planes!

The guys in Hezbollah were well trained, Highly motivated AND HAD THE LASTEST GENERATION ANTI TANK MISSLES!

 

[Neo]

Back to the topic now.
If the scenario is based on the status quo in the nineties, is it worth reading?

 

[Keysersoze]

Well in so far as it will help highlight potential weakspots and whether or not those areas need atention. And if those areas have been addressed by the PAK forces in the ensuing period.

As Sun Tsu said "know youself and know your enemy and you will be undefeated in a thousand battles"

 

[Thunder]

Thats very "moving"

In my experience, patriotism lasts right up to the moment that the first bullet wizzes past you.

Tell you what lets test your theory.....lets save some money and give the PAF some world war one bi planes!

The guys in Hezbollah were well trained, Highly motivated AND HAD THE LASTEST GENERATION ANTI TANK MISSLES!

Beta, we are not afraid of death, if our soldier dies, he is not consdiered dead but a shaheed<-- A very honourable stautas everyone wants but only a few get.

As for them Biplanes, did you saw what hezbullah's "sucide" UAV's did to isreali ships?? Iam not in favour of getting a few thousands WW I planes. Bu just trying to say that tactis, morale, and training plays a very important part on how battles are faught.

As for hezbullah having the latest anti-tanks, well the isrealis had the latest tanks , they also had the latest fighters like the F-16, and F-15s, they also had the latest navel tech,

 

[Keysersoze]

Well maybe you are not, but I doubt you speak for everyone.

There is no such thing as a "suicide UAV" The U in UAV is for UNMANNED. and it did it to ONE ship.

As to my point about lastest anti tank weapons....I'll say this slowly for you. All the training and motivation is worth nothing if all you have is a knife and the other man has a long range sniper rifle.

I am fully aware of how training affects combat. I have been through several training systems and had them explained in detail as to why those systems are used. I have also had field experience.

I have also talked with my uncles who have all served with PA and the PAF and somehow their view differs from yours (they all fought in the last two wars) Oh and spare me the "beta" routine. I do understand the language.....

 

[Thunder]

Well maybe you are not, but I doubt you speak for everyone.

There is no such thing as a "suicide UAV" The U in UAV is for UNMANNED. and it did it to ONE ship.

As to my point about lastest anti tank weapons....I'll say this slowly for you. All the training and motivation is worth nothing if all you have is a knife and the other man has a long range sniper rifle.

I am fully aware of how training affects combat. I have been through several training systems and had them explained in detail as to why those systems are used. I have also had field experience.

I have also talked with my uncles who have all served with PA and the PAF and somehow their view differs from yours (they all fought in the last two wars) Oh and spare me the "beta" routine. I do understand the language.....

Ok not so beta. I agree that there was only one UAV, ut the point is, you can do it. While on ther other hand we see US spending millions of testing out UCAV's, which almost does the same thing that UAV did. As for a person having a knife, well when we look at isreal and hezbullah, we see that hezbullah only had a rockets while isreal had a massive airforce, navy, army etc. Yet look what hezbullah did to the IDF.

As for being afraid of death, judgeing by what you have said about your uncles being in PA and PAF, i guess you are very well aware of what shahdeed means, i hope? Now you figure it out from there.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

The failure of the muslims is beacuse they are not afraid of death-----and I believe that it is an un-islamic thought---because Allah has said many a times to fear death and do everything possible to stay alive. But today's muslims have come up with a newer version----on the other hand the opponnents have accepted the fact that these muslims are not afraid to die so they have devised means to kill more of them------So here it is----in the lebanon conflict israel may have lost lost 25 soldiers but the deaths on the otherside were close to a thousand----in iraq the U S has lost 2800 troops---the iraqis have lost six hundred and fifty thousand souls----what stupid version of the belief are muslims talking about!!!----the whole nation of iraq has been obliterated-----just to kill a few americans a muslim nation has been destroyed just to satisfy the ego of some muslims sitting in other countries.

You people talk about death----and shahadat-----tell me if shahadat was that great the why did our prophet die a natural death or why did the caliph did not die in combat-----why did the sword of Allah not die in battle----almost the all the top names, the majority of muslim caliphs and our prophet died of a natural death or some assasinated.

Our prophet was afraid of death-----why because he had to answer to Allah for the life he was given----so when the threat to his life beacme more----he took off for another place----and to save his life he created a diversion---he also hid in a cave to save his life----when he reached his destination, he kept his profile low and prepared for war----and waited and waited till it was the right time to commit to combat----there was strategy used to fight the war and when at times they faced defeat----they went back to return and fight for another day. The prophet didnot decide to die at the first sign of combat. He chose to live---strategy--strategy---strategy.

It is amazing to see that the followers of prophet Mohammad have no clue of strategy when entering into combat----they believe in self destruction---they do not know how to save their today to for their success tomorrow .

 

[Sid]

Beta, we are not afraid of death, if our soldier dies, he is not consdiered dead but a shaheed<-- A very honourable stautas everyone wants but only a few get.

Every nation's soldier who dies fighting for his/her country is a martyr for that country. Indian soldiers dying for their country, would be considered martyrs there.

And how exactly do you know our soldiers are more death-daring that their Indian counterparts? Perhaps you should read up a bit on the Gurkhas, Juts, Sikhs and Marathas in the Indian forces?

Lets not make claims one cannot back up. Respect is due at both ends of the spectrum.

Ok not so beta. I agree that there was only one UAV, ut the point is, you can do it. While on ther other hand we see US spending millions of testing out UCAV's, which almost does the same thing that UAV did. As for a person having a knife, well when we look at isreal and hezbullah, we see that hezbullah only had a rockets while isreal had a massive airforce, navy, army etc. Yet look what hezbullah did to the IDF.

Calling another member 'beta' doesnt do much to enhance your position vis-a-vis the arguement. Secondly, not to undermine Hezbollah's achievement, but the fact of the matter is, Hezbollah didn't achieve victory over IDF, it merely celebrated the fact that it survived the IDF onslaught which isn't so much of a deal if you're employing guerilla war tactics and also using the civilian population as a buffer.

Sure IDF suffered a surprising setback in that it failed to eliminate Hezbollah completely, but a few tanks destroyed and a naval vessel damaged doesnt really amount to defeat.

 

[Thunder]

Ok i admit i was wrong. But i still stick with the part about having good tatics helps win a war

Again, iam sorry if i offended anyone.

 

[KashifAsrar]

Every nation's soldier who dies fighting for his/her country is a martyr for that country. Indian soldiers dying for their country, would be considered martyrs there.

And how exactly do you know our soldiers are more death-daring that their Indian counterparts? Perhaps you should read up a bit on the Gurkhas, Juts, Sikhs and Marathas in the Indian forces?

Lets not make claims one cannot back up. Respect is due at both ends of the spectrum.



Calling another member 'beta' doesnt do much to enhance your position vis-a-vis the arguement. Secondly, not to undermine Hezbollah's achievement, but the fact of the matter is, Hezbollah didn't achieve victory over IDF, it merely celebrated the fact that it survived the IDF onslaught which isn't so much of a deal if you're employing guerilla war tactics and also using the civilian population as a buffer.

Sure IDF suffered a surprising setback in that it failed to eliminate Hezbollah completely, but a few tanks destroyed and a naval vessel damaged doesnt really amount to defeat.

It is true that Hizbollah did not WIN the war. Agreed. But I dis-agree on some points. Your find that Hizbollah used civillians as shield is totally false. It is the argument put by the Zionists to shield thier war crimes against the civillian population. It is proved by the independent observers that Hizbollah never used the human shield for thier defence. Also thier popularity in Lebanon shows that they did not try to cover themselves behind civilian shield. the facts are quite contrary to what YOU DISCOVERED!
As far as the death count of soldiers is concerned, It is again observed that it was 1:1, almost. The total combat troops death on both sides are around 180, each. the tanks that are destroyed or damaged stood around 30. Not few!
Kashif