How India’s QR-SAM has poured Cold water on Pakistan’s NASR

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yes, Pakistan could have used, Indian claim of strikes across LOC to strike across the LOC, but it did not, Why ?

Because what occurred was nothing extraordinary or out of the norm for both sides across the LoC. Some Indian & Pakistani journalists (one Indian gentleman who used to work for the Hindu, can't recall his name right now) have written about these exchanges for decades. The two countries will send small units across the LoC to attack targets. Tit for tat continues, much of it not always reported.

 

[JohnWick]

Because what occurred was nothing extraordinary or out of the norm for both sides across the LoC. Some Indian & Pakistani journalists (one Indian gentleman who used to work for the Hindu, can't recall his name right now) have written about these exchanges for decades. The two countries will send small units across the LoC to attack targets. Tit for tat continues, much of it not always reported.

He is just trolling now!

 

[Osiris]

Because what occurred was nothing extraordinary or out of the norm for both sides across the LoC. Some Indian & Pakistani journalists (one Indian gentleman who used to work for the Hindu, can't recall his name right now) have written about these exchanges for decades. The two countries will send small units across the LoC to attack targets. Tit for tat continues, much of it not always reported.

Firstly, explain your narrative, in an earlier post, you wrote, surgical strikes across the LOC never happened.

Can't use a non-existent event as an example.

Here you writing, strikes did happen, but are a routine occurrence across the LOC(which btw I agree with, only difference was the scale of these strikes compared to the earlier ones.) and hence Pakistan did not acknowledge it or react to it.

 

[GumNaam]

Yes, Pakistan could have used, Indian claim of strikes across LOC to strike across the LOC, but it did not, Why ?

your own government says that Pakistan routinely pumps in BAT teams and floods in "atanvaadis". your own government says that the infiltration has increased 10 folds after your furzical strikes...what does that tell ya.

listen chanda...buk buk band karo aur zara ghaur say baroan ki baatein suna karo. what india has shot itself in its own bunghole by make fake claims of weapons and strikes. These are actually lessons taught across the globe in all strategic schools where generals graduate from. Do you know what those lessons are beta? these lessons are:
1. you strike or make a weapon and PROVE that you have struck or made a weapon.
2. you strike or make a weapon but keep absolutely quiet with pin drop silence, neither confirming nor denying.
3. you NEVER EVER in a million BILLION years claim that you have struck when you haven't or made a weapon that you haven't.

#3 is taught to all generals in all countries worth mentioning for one simple reason; this will ALWAYS expose your weakness to the enemy that has deep intel in your country and therefore, the enemy will exploit your weakness to the max. And as you can tell from the fact that infiltration has gone up 10 folds after your claims of the fake surgical strikes, they were right but unforunately (for you) the indian students were either playing hooky or sleeping during class.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Firstly, explain your narrative, in an earlier post, you wrote, surgical strikes across the LOC never happened.

Nothing occurred beyond the norm. If you want to call what happened 'surgical strikes', then you'd also have to admit that Pakistan has been carrying out cross-LoC surgical strikes against Indian forces for decades.

Here you writing, strikes did happen, but are a routine occurrence across the LOC(which btw I agree with, only difference was the scale of these strikes compared to the earlier ones.) and hence Pakistan did not acknowledge it or react to it.

There was no difference in scale - it was just a whole bunch of hot air and exaggeration by the BJP government to pander to its constituencies.

There can be no difference in scale because the larger such an operation becomes, the more susceptible to detection and counter strikes it becomes. There is a reason these kinds of strikes by both countries have been limited to the scale that they are, because in such a heavily militarized and monitored area it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to launch larger attacks without detection.

 

[JohnWick]

your own government says that Pakistan routinely pumps in BAT teams and floods in "atanvaadis". your own government says that the infiltration has increased 10 folds after your furzical strikes...what does that tell ya.

listen chanda...buk buk band karo aur zara ghaur say baroan ki baatein suna karo. what india has shot itself in its own bunghole by make fake claims of weapons and strikes. These are actually lessons taught across the globe in all strategic schools where generals graduate from. Do you know what those lessons are beta? these lessons are:
1. you strike or make a weapon and PROVE that you have struck or made a weapon.
2. you strike or make a weapon but keep absolutely quiet with pin drop silence, neither confirming nor denying.
3. you NEVER EVER in a million BILLION years claim that you have struck when you haven't or made a weapon that you haven't.

#3 is taught to all generals in all countries worth mentioning for one simple reason; this will ALWAYS expose your weakness to the enemy that has deep intel in your country and therefore, the enemy will exploit your weakness to the max. And as you can tell from the fact that infiltration has gone up 10 folds after your claims of the fake surgical strikes, they were right but unforunately (for you) the indian students were either playing hooky or sleeping during class.

Actually its a dream!

 

[Osiris]

i like cold start concept but again this is the same indian army which initiated operation brasstacks,operation parakram.as i have said earlier,india have no experience.also if you even capture a small part of pakistan,pakistan might retaliate but after capturing indian part in some distant location.obviously we don't wait for india to vacate our part.i think we will initiate our own attack on some distant location.in this way,we can recapture lost territory.i don't think that pakistan will even send more army men to recapture.we will hit our own territory with missiles and you know,we will not allow india to come closer to a city because of the population.we will do it on plains,deserts.i still feel that india have more disadvantage in this doctrine.

And we, totally expect, Pakistan to attack on a different front all together and not just try to capture the territory lost but try to capture Indian territory as well.

Here is where, Indian advantage in numbers comes into play. Only very small gains can be made against a defending enemy, which also has numerical and some case technoligical advantage over you.

 

[JohnWick]

And we, totally expect, Pakistan to attack on a different front all together and not just try to capture the territory lost but try to capture Indian territory as well.

Here is where, Indian advantage in numbers comes into play. Only very small gains can be made against a defending enemy, which also has numerical and some case technoligical advantage over you.

O can’t even do a shit thats all!

 

[GumNaam]

And we, totally expect, Pakistan to attack on a different front all together and not just try to capture the territory lost but try to capture Indian territory as well.

Here is where, Indian advantage in numbers comes into play. Only very small gains can be made against a defending enemy, which also has numerical and some case technoligical advantage over you.

there is no indian advantage in numbers any more sure to the following 3 reasons:
1. 700k of the indian army bogged down on the streets of Kashmir.
2. the hostile border with China that needs to be manned.
3. The NASR missile that wipe out divisions in one go.

this qrsam bluff isn't gonna save india from the impending humiliation she has destined herself for.

 

[Osiris]

Nothing occurred beyond the norm. If you want to call what happened 'surgical strikes', then you'd also have to admit that Pakistan has been carrying out cross-LoC surgical strikes against Indian forces for decades.

There was no difference in scale - it was just a whole bunch of hot air and exaggeration by the BJP government to pander to its constituencies.

There can be no difference in scale because the larger such an operation becomes, the more susceptible to detection and counter strikes it becomes. There is a reason these kinds of strikes by both countries have been limited to the scale that they are, because in such a heavily militarized and monitored area it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to launch larger attacks without detection.

Wether you accept it or not there was difference in scale compared to earlier cross LOC operation.

The difference was, this was a simultaneous attack on multiple points across the LOC, earlier cross LOC ops were centered around single target or a single post.

Another difference was because number of India troops involved in this operation(as it was attack on multiple fronts across the LOC) and number enemy combatants killed in it. Never have, 30 enemy combatants been killed in a single cross LOC strike.

Another difference was, on foot recon of target days prior to the attack.

Detection was avoided because of the element of surprise and it was not a large number of troops attacking a single target, but small troops of soldier attacking multiple targets.

 

[Arsalan 345]

And we, totally expect, Pakistan to attack on a different front all together and not just try to capture the territory lost but try to capture Indian territory as well.

Here is where, Indian advantage in numbers comes into play. Only very small gains can be made against a defending enemy, which also has numerical and some case technoligical advantage over you.

off course we know that india have numerical advantage.but this is another era.it's not 65 and 71.in 65 and 71,both india and pakistan were without dangerous missiles like cruise missiles,nuclear missiles,advanced artillery,attack helicopters,drones.this is modern era and there are techniques and strategies to stop a larger army without even sending your army to fight.i think pakistan is using military satellites and pakistan have every type of missile right now.it will be deadly for any army to cross loc just to get closer to population.indian objective is so get closer and closer to population and pakistan will not wait for india.pakistan will make it's own decisions based on situations.grabbing indian land isn't easy but it can be achieved using continuous monitoring of certain indian areas.i think we will not send equal men to defend against indian army ibgs.we will first fire everything before IA gets closer to population.even with 20% success rate of hitting indian army,the results will be dramatically change.IA will fall back.they can't leave the dead men behind and continue advancing further into pakistan.also main focus of pakistani attack is indian air force and supply lines.in this scenerio,there is an indian air force concept of attacking pakistani air bases first. even crossing into pakistani territory,they will have to face sams first then pakistani fighters so more downed jets for india even before start of the mission from ibgs.as i said earlier,it's not easy.it can trap IA ibgs.and yes there is another factor.resources.you can't deploy every fighter on pakistani front because china is also your enemy so advantage pakistan.

 

[GumNaam]

Wether you accept it or not there was difference in scale compared to earlier cross LOC operation.

The difference was, this was a simultaneous attack on multiple points across the LOC, earlier cross LOC ops were centered around single target or a single post.

Another difference was because number of India troops involved in this operation(as it was attack on multiple fronts across the LOC) and number enemy combatants killed in it. Never have, 30 enemy combatants been killed in a single cross LOC strike.

Another difference was, on foot recon of target days prior to the attack.

Detection was avoided because of the element of surprise and it was not a large number of troops attacking a single target, but small troops of soldier attacking multiple targets.

your own people don't accept your claims. why don't you convince them first and then talk to us.

 

[Basel]

You should feel sorry for Pakistan citizen who will die in Nasr nuclear attack in Pakistan.

Your post shows you have no clue about what is going on on both side of border and how both may fight a future war.

 

[ranadd]

As a whole (looking at the entire military infrastructure - conventional+unconventional/nuclear), India lacks a decisive edge to enter into a major conflict with Pakistan and emerge victorious and largely intact (Pakistan will suffer just as much). Having a deterrent is about discouraging the other party from entering into a conflict because the other party will suffer significant enough losses to overshadow any potential gains from said military conflict.

Pakistan has achieved that deterrence for the following:

1. Full scale war: A combination of conventional and un-conventional (nuclear) capabilities
2. Small scale conflict: Pakistan has enough conventional capabilities that India cannot do another Siachen or Pakistan version of Kargil because to do so would result in escalation (see point one).

Now whatever spin you want to put on India's inability to escalate a military conflict with Pakistan, despite a plethora of hysterical, war mongering statements from the BJP government and Indian military, the fact is that India lacks the capabilities for a decisive victory over Pakistan without suffering horrible losses herself. Those potential losses are, at the moment, too significant to justify any kind of military conflict with Pakistan - deterrence.

Your part of Pakistani deterrence is correct.

 

[Basel]

Yes, Pakistan could have used, Indian claim of strikes across LOC to strike across the LOC, but it did not, Why ?

Because there was no surgical strike from India and world knew that, so if Pakistan wanted to use it in its favor then those countries specially US, EU, Japan, Australia etv. may have put sanctions on Pakistan.