How Indian Insiders Saw 1965 War?

[karan.1970]

Every one has its own opinion for the reasons they express. Operation this or operation that may not be as successful for some as for others - but the question is, did India manage to achieve its objectives. No it didn't - period. And that is what you should be bothered about.

reflects on the state of history education in Pakistan really.. It was Pakistan that initiated the hostilities via Operation Gibraltar and then got in such dire straits that it still celebrates the fact that it managed to defend Lahore and Sialkot when India opened additional fronts

Spin it any way you want

 

[Ticker]

What happened was that famed patton s got so much mauled by inferior AMX and centurions that USA MIC couldnt show its face to anyone and Pattons simply vanished after that...............

Apnay jernalon ka naam to barbad kiya hi saat main bechare patton jaise jernail ka naam bhi barbaad karwa diya.

Na centurion raha, AMX cycle ban gya, aur na hi patton raha.

Kiyun apnay damagh ko over drive mein dala hua hai ...... relax

reflects on the state of history education in Pakistan really.. It was Pakistan that initiated the hostilities via Operation Gibraltar and then got in such dire straits that it still celebrates the fact that it managed to defend Lahore and Sialkot when India opened additional fronts

Spin it any way you want

No, it reflects the state of falsification of history by Indian writers.

Operation Gibralter was launched in a disputed territory which was and is under illegal Indian occupation.

India attacked mainland Pakistan and therefore initiated hostilities and aggression. Did India succeed in attaining her objectives - NO - it didn't.

 

[rockstarIN]

reflects on the state of history education in Pakistan really.. It was Pakistan that initiated the hostilities via Operation Gibraltar and then got in such dire straits that it still celebrates the fact that it managed to defend Lahore and Sialkot when India opened additional fronts

Spin it any way you want

Bread and butter for a bunch of people..., leave it.

Na centurion raha, AMX cycle ban gya, aur na hi patton raha.

Kiyun apnay damagh ko over drive mein dala hua hai ...... relax




No, it reflects the state of falsification of history by Indian writers.

Operation Gibralter was launched in a disputed territory which was and is under illegal Indian occupation.

India attacked mainland Pakistan and therefore initiated hostilities and aggression. Did India succeed in attaining her objectives - NO - it didn't.

If that is the case, India can launch any attack on p0k(incl. GB), which is also disputed (even as per UN definitiation of J&K), which is not Pakistan's mainland.

 

[karan.1970]

No, it reflects the state of falsification of history by Indian writers.

Operation Gibralter was launched in a disputed territory which was and is under illegal Indian occupation.

India attacked mainland Pakistan and therefore initiated hostilities and aggression. Did India succeed in attaining her objectives - NO - it didn't.

Actually it did.. The idea of opening more fronts was to relieve pressure from Kashmir theater and thats exactly what happened..

 

[Joe Shearer]

Na centurion raha, AMX cycle ban gya, aur na hi patton raha.

Kiyun apnay damagh ko over drive mein dala hua hai ...... relax




No, it reflects the state of falsification of history by Indian writers.

Operation Gibralter was launched in a disputed territory which was and is under illegal Indian occupation.

India attacked mainland Pakistan and therefore initiated hostilities and aggression. Did India succeed in attaining her objectives - NO - it didn't.

Is this worth refuting in detail?

Bread and butter for a bunch of people..., leave it.



If that is the case, India can launch any attack on p0k(incl. GB), which is also disputed (even as per UN definitiation of J&K), which is not Pakistan's mainland.

That is the position, according to the interpretation offered.

However, presumably India will not breach the rules of war as Pakistan did.

 

[Pride]

The problem with 1965 and 1999 war initiated by Pakistan is Strategically failed as they undermined the capability of Indian decisions. India, though took a very daring decision in 1965, I must say, seeing after humiliating defeat from China. Pakistan being an ally of US & China, This risk was increased multifold but what happened is history.

 

[notsuperstitious]

The problem with 1965 and 1999 war initiated by Pakistan is Strategically failed as they undermined the capability of Indian decisions. India, though took a very daring decision in 1965, I must say, seeing after humiliating defeat from China. Pakistan being an ally of US & China, This risk was increased multifold but what happened is history.

Also while its easy to find faults with Indian thinkers and its been done to death, one must admire the quick learning Indian thinkers gained and implemented from 1962 to 1965 and then from 1965 to 1971 - in terms of not neglecting armed strength, airforce training, navy's role, improvement in technological capabilities and most importantly in international politics.

1965 India had no friends, in 1971 the achievement would not have been possible without friends. We learned, and going by Kargil, its obvious pakistani daredevils did not, even after decades.

 

[INDIC]

1965 India had no friends, in 1971 the achievement would not have been possible without friends. We learned, and going by Kargil, its obvious pakistani daredevils did not, even after decades.

You should have mentioned Siachin also.

 

[Contrarian]

Well, if the studies they teach at PMA about Hindu India are something to go by they will never learn!

Read India: A Study in Profile, a mandatory reading in PMA for all officers!

There they talk about how Hindu's are weak and will never respond to any fight. They will accept whatever is dished out to them!

Same thing really, Pakistan always assumed India would not respond in '65, '99. Both times we responded and well - lets just say Pakistan goes back to the drawing board with a little less from what it had before they started

 

[Pride]

You should have mentioned Siachin also.

Shhh.. Siachin was our strategic success

 

[EzioAltaïr]

Sorry to say that your points are based on emotional responses.

Pak army did cross IB once Indians initiated war across it. Indian generals brought in their troops and armor like mad elephants of Porus thinking that they can simply roll into Lahore and other key areas.

This is perhaps why they suffered humiliation at the hands of 7-10 times smaller but superior and better trained Pak military. Thanks to our modern airforce (of the time) Pak military turned out to be much more nimble and agile than what Indian planners were thinking.

So please read up a bit.

Thank you.


p.s. I look at wars from neutral POV. I'll call the mistakes of Pak generals, AND Indians.

If you looked at wars from neutral PoV, you'd perhaps call your own mistakes a well.

India had 700,000 troops, Pak had 250,000, and that is not a 7:1 ratio. Pakistan had 750 tanks, and India only had 700.

Pakistan failed to cross the IB, the only victory they got was defending Lahore successfully, but that was on their own side of the IB, not ours. Even after Lahore was defended, India was still maintaining a presence in Sialkot, and in case of a second attack, Pakistan stood no chance.

Who says I don't call mistakes of Indian leadership? I point out our own mistakes and losses too, such as sending Vampires without escorts, reaching Lahore, but waiting a day to allow the troops to rest.

 

[EzioAltaïr]

No, it reflects the state of falsification of history by Indian writers.

Operation Gibralter was launched in a disputed territory which was and is under illegal Indian occupation.

India attacked mainland Pakistan and therefore initiated hostilities and aggression. Did India succeed in attaining her objectives - NO - it didn't.

Operation Gibraltar was launched in territory that is disputed because Pakistan initiated the 1948 war, and refused to accept it as an independent state. India has the instrument of accession, so we legally control it, while Pakistan illegally tries to take it. That put things into perspective eh?

Op Gibraltar was supposedly done by freedom fighters, so let's leave it at that. What about Grand Slam? This was not an insurgency, this was a full scale assault across the LoC. So technically Pakistan initaited hostilities.

Did India achieve it's objective? Yup, it did. It's objective was to open up a second front, and relieve pressure on Kashmir. Instead, it ended up gaining territory, even though it was a defender. So yeah, it fared fairly well.

 

[karan.1970]

Did India achieve it's objective? Yup, it did. It's objective was to open up a second front, and relieve pressure on Kashmir. Instead, it ended up gaining territory, even though it was a defender. So yeah, it fared fairly well.

The irony of it all.. Its Pakistan which celebrates the DEFENSE DAY

 

[RiazHaq]

You are so biased with your BS , if you are going to post quotes from neutral sources, how about actually show some neutrality. How about these non-Indian journalists on 1965 war (not to mention the fact that you has Iran and China supporting you):
.

"...a major battle the west of the Beas would end in the destruction of the Indian Army and thereafter allow the enemy (Pakistani) forces to push to the gates of Delhi without much resistance." 1965 WAR-The Inside Story by R.D. Pradhan

If simply quoting Indian insiders who saw 1965 war up close makes me biased in your eyes, then so be it.

Haq's Musings: Indian Insiders' View of 1965 War

 

[Muradk]

This is such an interesting thread Oh My God I can't believe it that you guys are still fighting who won and who lost. Let me tell all of you I was a part of it. NO ONE WON. we all lost our loved ones on both sides so coming back landing and saying I shot a IAF fighter Yeahhhhh few seconds later found out my brother got shot. So the IAF pilot must be saying yeahhh I shot a PAF fighter. Does that sounds like winning. Anyone???????????????????????????????.