Thanks! But sorry, there is no flaw. Am not assuming that there is not going to be any reciprocal action. Sorry, but infact we are counting on a reciprocal action. The policy is based on multiple small attacking formations involved in high maneuver warfare in multiple sectors with stress on firepower rather than numbers.
I agree it appears this is what the plan is, but India is not even close to obtaining that fire power that is required to break through and overwhelm the PA defenders. Your assumption has a major flaw because it takes into account the modernization that the IA is going through, but fails to factor in the modernization PA has taken upon to counter the IA
Yes. Aim is to evict the incumbent PA forces and hold the small chunks of land. A penetration depth of 50-80 kms (which in any war will be a penetration depth achieved in case of a breach before the opposing forces regroup and reinforce for a counterattack) is what we aim for. Not more. This prevents any nutter for employing nukes too.
Okay so for arguments sake, lets say the IBG's break through and capture 60 km of Pakistani territory. Now they are sitting there static, there is nothing that is stopping the PA from regrouping. Unless the IBG's break through and continue driving down to Islamabad keeping the attack momentum, there is nothing that will stop the PA from regrouping. Your failing to see the flaw in this doctrine, unless the IBG's keep the attack momentum, there is nothing that is stopping the PA from regrouping and launching a counter attack.
And the reference to the long lines of communication, I did say that was addressed by forward staging of stores and ammunition. So the observation is rendered redundant here. And we have capability for long supply lines. Every one has them.
Excellent; move them forward, i will personally send a 'Thank You' note to the Indian Army. The PAF can simply launch its stand off weapons at these supply depots or the PA can shell them with either rockets or artillery, i cant believe the IA would implement a policy such as this. Sorry to say India does not has the capability to establish long secure supply lines inside the enemy territory, it simply does not has the infrastructure in place to do that. Take it with a pinch of salt when i say this, Indian Army is good very good for the likes of a 3rd World Nation, but is no way near capable of fighting warfare deep inside enemy territory like NATO or Former USSR.
Outflanking will be possible, but that is where the tier II troops will come into play. Also aim is not to beat your mech formations to the border, aim is to launch the offensives from the area the IA units are present, and hit on axis of own choosing. You can mass your troops all along, no problem, the axis of advances will be multiple. Again its redundant.
Putting in Tier II troops is contrary to what the CDS suggests, but if IA does plan to bring in its Holding Corps in to the battlefield, this changes the whole scenario. As soon as you put your Holding Corps on alert, it will take atleast 24-48 hours for them to prepare and get ready for the war. This activity will not go unnoticed by PA and they will put their forces on full alert. The element of surprise is gone and the PA defenders would be ready and waiting for the attack.
If you look at the axis of advances, there is only Sindh where the Indians can fight a mobile battlefield. Punjab is full of canals, the PA defenders and the natural soil will serve as a barrier to Indian advancement thus the battles are going to be much more static. Sindh-Rajashtan is where the real action is going to take place, and trust me the PA has enough armoured/mechanized/infantry assets in Sindh to ensure to beat any multiple attacks. Thus, for India to launch a full mechanized war, the most tempting option is to launch an attack from the desert.
On a lighter note, I have a severe doubt on your RADAR capability
Well jokes apart, the issue of your SF increment is noted. But they are not into our calculation. When I quoted our SF being beefed up, it was with the aim to emphasize highly mobile teams working in tandem. No airdrop deep into your territory is envisaged. Even India has separate SF units of navy (MARCOS) and airforce (GARUDS). So a sizeable amount is held here and very difficult to see one on one face off of the SF units.
True, but the use of SF will be essential in my opinion.
Arty is somewhere I agree that you have better positioning in terms of SP. India has very few M-46 Catapault versions in inventory (150 or so). But then, adequate resources in terms of firepower and ability to employ them in terms of ammunition (number of guided munitions) does allow us a slight edge. Overall the artillery is sufficient for now.
It is sufficient but not sufficient enough to cater to the doctrine that the IA is envisioning. I fail to understand how does India has the advantage in employing its artillery. The Indians would have to move up their tubed artillery with their limited SP artillery, and setting up the tubed artillery takes time. While on the other hand PA which has enough 203MM and 155MM artillery already set up, as soon as the Indians cross the border they will start blasting towards advancing Indian Armour Formations and trust me on this one, they will be deadly accurate as this has been proved in several exercises and the operations against the TTP in FATA. The American, Chinese and Turkish artillery in our possession is very accurate and they use excellent guidance systems. So no you dont have a slight edge in the artillery department and neither do you have the capability to neutralize it in the opening phases of the war. You had the Smerch, but that option has been cancelled out.
Am glad you think that ways. Hope its a commonly shared view.
I am just looking at the facts on the ground, conducting a few meagre exercises here and there does not change things. I am yet to see any real reorganizations in IA Divisions or Brigade level.
Evidence for what? If PA is in a position to sustain itself in face of India, why base your nuclear doctrine in first strike basis?
For a long static war, if India decides to fight a long static war, Pakistan will loose. So our first strike nuclear doctrine is based to ensure that India does not fights a long static war with us. Indians should have thought about it twice before they decided to explode a nuke.
The mere fact that PA can never in conventional terms, match up to Indian army, be it in short conflict or a long one, is a fact that only the common Pakistani citizen is unable to appreciate. The PA does appreciate what can happen.
Than you have failed to explain to me how does PA fail to match the IA in a shooting conventional war in a short conflict. You have gone round and round in circles, but have failed to provide me any logical reasoning. I have put forward my arguments, you are more than welcome to do so too.
The Cold Start is not based on numbers, its based on mobility and immense firepower. We have the resourcess to provide that. We have the numbers in terms of platforms and weapons. Short of nukes!
No arguments there, but India at current does not has the mobility or immense firepower to tame PA in the battlefield. If that was possible, trust me IA Armour Formations would have crossed over to duel out with PA Armour Formations.
