What's new

In the event of war with india do we need a strong navy to attack all indian ports

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have this thinking that we need to have a strong navy we cant be defensive all the time
In case of war with india we should be able to attack on indian navel installment ( all of them )it will be difficult for us to only defend as they are huge in number and they have large number of miltary and civilian bases they can block us easily we should have stratgy and equipment to block their main ports
army can only do the damage near the border areas 100 or 200 miles( messiles does not give you the control) in side the enemy teritory but with strong navy we can send forces or deploy subs from arabian sea and bay of bangal and they can inflict greater damage
:pakistan:

Don’t know why we keep coming up with wishful thinking as if Pakistan had unlimited resources. IMO we should always keep some sense of proportion in our discussions. It is absurd to ignore ground realities. Ground reality is that Pakistan needed $7.5-billion loan from the IMF to avoid going bankrupt.

One needs physical presence on the ground to occupy captured territory that is why priority should be and is correctly, on the land forces. WW2 showed that in the absence of appropriate air defence, ground forces are an easy prey to the air based weapon systems. Thus second on the priority list come air defense assets and the Air Force for counter attack.

If we were an island nation such as UK or and had an archipelago such as southern Greece, a strong navy was also essential. But with Pakistan with land links with friendly countries such as China and Iran; Navy quite rightly comes third on the priority list.

Finally, primary task of the Navy is to keep see lanes clear. Therefore acquisition of a squadron of mine hunters, a fleet of LMR planes plus a squadron of missile firing land based attack aircrafts comes before the funds should be allocated to major surface vessels. Next in list come stealth weapon systems such as submarines which can ambush enemy ships trying to blockade Pakistani ports. All of the above factors have already been taken into consideration in the Pakistan’s strategic naval planning.

Pray tell me; have you considered the assets requirement before even attempting to think of attacking all Indians ports! FYI, according to Indian ports association website India has 11 major sea ports and total number of major and non major Indian ports number about 200! Besides, Indians are not going to stand still, your ships are going to come under attack from the enemy sea going vesels as well as land based aircrafts and guns. Argentinean Air Force sunk 8 major UK vessels in the Falklands war and they were attacking 400 miles away from the bases! Thus PN must have sufficent number of ships that PN remains a deterrent force even after absorbing the loss of many expensive naval vessels which is almost certain.

IMO even the mighty US Navy would think ten times before embarking on such a bold venture.

Wouldn’t it be far more cost effective to attack all major Indian cities by land based missiles?
 
Last edited:
I heard from an army brig who was posted to PNS Shifa that during the Kargil conflict many PN officers tried to declare themselves unfit to avoid going out to war, they felt death was certain even in a defensive role. It may be ten years from that incident but expecting offensive capability from a navy which is not even equipped properly to defend the coast is not a good idea.
 
PAK navy is not even strong enough to defend its coast how can they think to attack indian assets
:hitwall:
 
Well from the paksitani point of view the best thing would be to avoid a full scale war with India and enjoy atleast two decade of peace and calm to get their economy sorted out and to develop their naval industries to atleast cater to the maintainence of most of their ships.
 
Well from the paksitani point of view the best thing would be to avoid a full scale war with India and enjoy atleast two decade of peace and calm to get their economy sorted out and to develop their naval industries to atleast cater to the maintainence of most of their ships.

well you are right however....a friendly ADVISE.....always be aware of an enemy who has nothing left too lose.....no economy in case of a war just means every pakistani is pissed off and has nothing to lose....but in india's case all the big billionaires will be scared of losing business for as long as the war lasts etc.....

just like the recession hasn't really affected pakistan because pakistan wasn't doing better when it hit.....

another example is afghanistan every SUPER POWER that entered afghanistan has always bled while afghanis never had anything to lose no infrasturcutre nothing except humans...humans who have no value of life for them....



anyhow PAKISTAN and AFGHANISTAN are very diffrent countries but in case of war pakistanis will have very less to lose...the indians should realize this for their own good!!
 
well you are right however....a friendly ADVISE.....always be aware of an enemy who has nothing left too lose.....no economy in case of a war just means every pakistani is pissed off and has nothing to lose....but in india's case all the big billionaires will be scared of losing business for as long as the war lasts etc.....

just like the recession hasn't really affected pakistan because pakistan wasn't doing better when it hit.....

another example is afghanistan every SUPER POWER that entered afghanistan has always bled while afghanis never had anything to lose no infrasturcutre nothing except humans...humans who have no value of life for them....



anyhow PAKISTAN and AFGHANISTAN are very diffrent countries but in case of war pakistanis will have very less to lose...the indians should realize this for their own good!!
I don't believe in underestimating the Pakistani capabilities.
Zob bro...I am against war...of any sort...and at times I wonder what my purpose is in a defense forum...but trust me no man's stronger than a bullet.
 
humans who have no value of life for them....

i hate this notion.The Pakistani army is not made of mujahideen's and suicide bombers...every soldier killed is remembered by those he leaves behind.My interactions with someone close to me from the IA taught me that the army needs people who don't get high on the belief that they will sacrifice their lives for their nation as the army needs people who maintain their sanity and think clearly even with bullets being sprayed around them.The purpose is to kill the other guy and protect the guy next to you.
 
i hate this notion.The Pakistani army is not made of mujahideen's and suicide bombers...every soldier killed is remembered by those he leaves behind.My interactions with someone close to me from the IA taught me that the army needs people who don't get high on the belief that they will sacrifice their lives for their nation as the army needs people who maintain their sanity and think clearly even with bullets being sprayed around them.The purpose is to kill the other guy and protect the guy next to you.

hey you got me wrong there bro i didn't say that PAKISTAN ARMY is made up of SUPERMAN,BATMAN,SPIDERMAN,THE HULK etc


i was talking about afghanistan & the mentality of its MEN....there men if they valued life they would have not been fighting for the past 200 years!!!

for them the greatest honor is die FIGHTING!! so no i wasn't talking about pakistanis or indians....but afghanis....so don't take it as an anti-india statement!! :)
 
Doctrines:

PN = Sea Denial role
IN = Power Projection and sea dominance

These are two different doctrines. They are both effective ones. The former is more effective as it is cost effective. The PN and IN are not going to fight in the Oceans. It is going to be a littoral water war. So I guess Pakistani navy is defensinve and is mainly aimed at denying the IN to blockade your ports.
 
i dont think that IF a war breakout we will be using our navy to attack indian land!
i have said it earlier that for me the naval attack is not a wise option because all the indian territory is well within our reach of our missiles and planes flyink from Pakisani soil!
Yes the navy will play a very important role but it wont be offensive. navy will have to keep our trade routs open and safe and this can be acheived with a good fleet of missile boats, supported by some frigates! we wont require them in large numbers but surely it will help if the have a qualitative edge. if however at ome point of time we require to adopt an offensive defence stance and need to destroy some key indian shis approaching us then it will be a job for our sub fleet so we must concentrate on the submarines more then getting second hand frigates just to increase the number of ships!

that is my point of view regarding the topic!

regards!
I see it the same way, PN main role will be a defensive and to make sure that the ports are open for supplies or arms, oil and stuff. That will be difficult enough and more important than to wast those resources for small and risky offensive attacks.
 
As far as the priorities are concerned.It would be totally foolish and suicidal for Pakistan to invest more in the navy than the airforce and the army....for we share a border and if the resistance offered is compromised...every effort to enhance the navy would turn out to be futile.
It would be similar to the French case in WWII when their army collapsed facing the German juggernaut...and their massive navy was rendered useless.

Not really you see what will a large and a powerful army do without a proper air cover and a running economy. A Country that looses air control looses war. We have seen it in 71 where the only air field was bombed by the IAF and PAF could not provide effective air cover to 90000 soiders and so what happened? Take the example of the US they easily over come large numbers of troops on the ground because they maintain complete air superiority and impose a naval blockade and not matter what the numbers say you will still be bombed from the sky. So it makes absolutely sense to pour more funding into the both navy and the airforce.
 
Last edited:
To be a real military power you need the FULL TRIAD of military capability.

If you want to dominate your enemy you need to win both the air & the sea War.

Land victory is the last item on the Agenda.

If india blockades Pakistan this = no feul no resupply of war material no imports no exports. The economy will be suffocated...
 
To be a real military power you need the FULL TRIAD of military capability.

If you want to dominate your enemy you need to win both the air & the sea War.

Land victory is the last item on the Agenda.

If india blockades Pakistan this = no feul no resupply of war material no imports no exports. The economy will be suffocated...

Totally agreed boss
:smokin:
 
well you are right however....a friendly ADVISE.....always be aware of an enemy who has nothing left too lose.....no economy in case of a war just means every pakistani is pissed off and has nothing to lose....but in india's case all the big billionaires will be scared of losing business for as long as the war lasts etc.....

just like the recession hasn't really affected pakistan because pakistan wasn't doing better when it hit.....

another example is afghanistan every SUPER POWER that entered afghanistan has always bled while afghanis never had anything to lose no infrasturcutre nothing except humans...humans who have no value of life for them....



anyhow PAKISTAN and AFGHANISTAN are very diffrent countries but in case of war pakistanis will have very less to lose...the indians should realize this for their own good!!

First u started with saying "Pakistan has nothing to lose".....finally u end up with saying "Pakistan have very less to lose". I can understand ur worry of losing here.:lol:
 
To be a real military power you need the FULL TRIAD of military capability.

Agreed

If you want to dominate your enemy you need to win both the air & the sea War.

Land victory is the last item on the Agenda.

Not necessarily, it depends on the location of the country. To defeat a country like Britian, Japan or Australia you have to defeat their navy but thats not the case in South Asia. The major battles will be fought on land between both India and Pakistan, i dont know how did you come to the conclusion that Land is the last item on the agenda. Gone are those days when both militaries would engage each other and duel each other for weeks. God Forbid, if a war is fought between India and Pakistan it will be a maximum of 2 or 3 days. Do you really think the world will let two nuclear powers fight each other?

If india blockades Pakistan this = no feul no resupply of war material no imports no exports. The economy will be suffocated...

A small chance of that happening but even if it does, keep in mind Pakistan is connected through land to both China and Iran. Besides, Pakistan's Armed Forces maintain 45 days of reserve fuel and ammo which is more than enough. As i said before, if a war does take place it will be not more than 2 or 3 days.

Coming back to the topic, it would simply be the most foolish mistake PN could ever make engaging IN in open waters. You always fight your enemy at your strength; PN should only focus on denying India a blockage of Pakistan's ports. Although i have to say i was laughing my a** off reading this thread, some people are claiming the IN will simply just run over PN :D. IN didnt dare engage PN during Kargil or in 2001; if i remember correctly during 2001 an Indian fish boat was in Pakistan's water due to a technical failure and could not be moved, the IN didnt dare enter Pakistan's water and requested the US Navy to tow the vessel away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom