India's conventional military superiority over Pakistan is exaggerated.

[Maj.Osmani]

aid

Waoo what a Muslim Ummah concept you have...we fought for them...our pilots volunteered to fight and they just or you expecting just aid....are we beggers or borther / part of Muslim Ummah.

 

[Blue Marlin]

why is this thread even open? the world will not allow a war to break out. even if its conventional the aftershocks will cause chaos everywhere only stupid countries will continue to provide weapons to either parties. for india..... make in india...... kiss that good bye..... pakistan......... same thing. the economic consequences are too significant for either side to prove viable for an all out war

 

[The SC]

Let me put it this way. This is an international forum dealing with open source information so advertising or not, if you have it show it. That is how it works. I am ready to provide sources for each of my claims.

The country of your origin is not China and you are not a Chinese national. China is the second largest economy and yours is equal to that of Chile and Ireland. It is that simple. Chinese will not fight for you and they never had and let's not go further offtopic.

As for countering these weapon systems, just because you believe it doesn't make it true. I am open for point by point rebuttal if you can provide one.

You just want to talk about India's strength, the article has rebuttles for all your claims. It seem it has maddened you somehow.. I am not Pakistani either but you can consider me as Chinese or Pakistani, that isn't the point though..Pakistan has access from China to everything you have mentioned as new procurments for India, so what the point of mentioning those new "might be" systems if they can be have by Pakistan too..I do not see any advantage from them but modernization, for the rest The military balance will prevail, be it conventional or otherwise..

 

[khanmubashir]

Exactly! The question is, how long will Pakistan be able to fight a war with a far, far smaller industrial base than India? 10 days? 15? And after that? You won't be able to last even a fortnight. Your limited assets like dams, power stations, ports, oil refineries etc are all in an area having no depth which will be taken out in the first few days of war. And I'm not talking of a nuclear war, which will never happen.

how long did usa thought war in afghan and iraq would be but look who is licking his *** so forget about yrself defeating a country that kicked both russia and now usa out

 

[omega supremme]

Waoo what a Muslim Ummah concept you have...we fought for them...our pilots volunteered to fight and they just or you expecting just aid....are we beggers or borther / part of Muslim Ummah.

Yes because they are not capable of fighting that's why i'm only expecting aid

 

[Maj.Osmani]

Yes because they are not capable of fighting that's why i'm only expecting aid

In you previous comment you replied me that we are not helping them in Yemen because now they are quite capable and now you’re telling me something different.

 

[randomradio]

This is a scholarly article talking about strategic facts, it proves everything it says with numbers, geography, military science and experience of conventional warfare in general..
You are entiteled to your opinion, wiishes and thoughts, but they won't change the facts stated in the article.. For instance; you can not change geography, can you?

Nice strawman post. Did I question geography?

Write four words is easy, kid.

Make your argument with facts or don't quote me again.

Spend some time here in this forum and you'll be educated.

Pakistan-india war is a primary air and land war.

Please tell me how the conventional difference here in "bigger" today than it was in 2001-02

lol...

Since 2000, IAF's overall strength has increased, so has the IN's and the IAF's. It's obvious for anybody who sees it. During the same time, PA, PAF and PN have more or less been stagnant.

First you need to prove how the conventional difference was bigger at the time, then I can counter it. Where are the 'facts' in your post?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Conclusion:

The Indian government has demonstrated an increased willingness to use force in an environment where headline grabbing increases in the Indian defense budget and a high-profile military modernization program are already alarming observers who worry that this could undermine the conventional military balance maintaining South Asia’s “ugly stability.” While on their face these concerns have validity, upon deeper examination, it is clear that, modernizing or not, the Indian military is capable of bringing far less force to bear in a limited conflict with Pakistan than most people realize. As a result, it is unlikely that Indian policymakers would conclude that they can either achieve strategic surprise against Pakistan necessary for a successful ground incursion or carry out highly-effective air strikes with little escalatory risk, each of which is a necessary condition for military operations to be authorized. Consequently, claims that India’s growing military power justifies Pakistan’s pursuit of tactical nuclear weapons, lack a firm foundation. South Asia remains an unstable region of the world, but the Indian military is not a source of that instability.

Source:
Walter C. Ladwig III is an Assistant Professor of International Relations in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London. For a more detailed examination of this topic, see the author’s “Indian Military Modernization and Conventional Deterrence in South Asia,” Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol. 38, No. 4 (2015).

@The SC

The note was outstanding, although it carries baggage (which note does not?) My response to it, a first, not very well articulated one, was to respond stating what the Indian Army needs to do, not what it has done, and is continuing to do, in order to establish sufficient superiority both of potential and of practical implementation capability.

Do you think that would be useful?

Disclaimer: I am going through a fairly disruptive stage personally and professionally, and might take a while to assemble my thoughts into a coherent narrative.

 

[Syed_Adeel]

Exactly! The question is, how long will Pakistan be able to fight a war with a far, far smaller industrial base than India? 10 days? 15? And after that? You won't be able to last even a fortnight. Your limited assets like dams, power stations, ports, oil refineries etc are all in an area having no depth which will be taken out in the first few days of war. And I'm not talking of a nuclear war, which will never happen.

Well you are missing military reserve capabilities where India is also not having more reserves than 15 days. more over poor performances and obsolete and diversed equipment is also an issue. so an conflict between two states is not gonna longer than 10 days in any case. Pakistan follows MAD doctrine which states to make war so expensive so that other fears to start and even if started then the other cannot win and face high destruction. Given the internal insurgencies in India and nation of 1.25 billion, it will be more difficult for India to cope with a longer war as you will have more cities and Industrial areas and dams to defend.

 

[guest11]

You just want to talk about India's strength, the article has rebuttles for all your claims. It seem it has maddened you somehow.. I am not Pakistani either but you can consider me as Chinese or Pakistani, that isn't the point though..Pakistan has access from China to everything you have mentioned as new procurments for India, so what the point of mentioning those new "might be" systems if they can be have by Pakistan too..i do not see any advantage from them but modernization..for the rest The military balance will prevail, be it conventional or otherwise..

Dude I really don't know what are you talking about. The reason I wrote this was to provide rebuttal to the article which is counting numbers which is very amateurish and is based on outdated info. F-7 and Su-30MKI are not same, you can count 170 and 220 as somewhat similar numbers but you know that it is not true, I hope you do.

Be it ammo reserves or T-72s night blindness, I systematically debunked claims made by author.

I am not mad but incredibly disappointed because I was expecting a fact based discussion but all you are doing is acting emotional and irrational. No Pakistan do not have access to all things Chinese. You don't have access to J-20, SSBNs, aircraft carriers and the list goes on. What you have access to is export variants of lower rung weapon systems that even China doesn't use for itself. Feel free to prove me wrong with a reliable source.

Despite the fact that India and China have disputes, not a single bullet has been fired on India-China border in almost three decades and somehow you think China will throw all that away & will decide to wage a war against India for Pakistan's sake. How stupid do you think Chinese are?

Are you really that delusional?

 

[Joe Shearer]

I have full confidence that they will. A few examples illustrated they can take on the numerical superiority.

And which examples are these?

 

[shah1398]

That's a very dangerous thought process. If Pak convinces the world that its entire population will fight back, that means the entire population will become India's target and the entire population can become PoW with no humanitarian backlash.

We do not need to convince the world for that. They already know it

 

[AhsanAmin]

Indian strategy appears to be employing overwhelming force against Pak thin defenses as observed in the previous wars. Pak needs to hold territory whatever resources available like one platoon against a brigade, or a column of tanks against the entire armored corps or a lone fighter against the half of a squadron..

@HAKIKAT, From a Turkish friend, it reminds me of the famous orders of Mustafa Kemal in the battle of Gallipoli in the first world war.

Men, I am not ordering you to attack. I am ordering you to die. In the time that it takes us to die, other forces and commanders can come and take our place.

• Orders to the 57th Infantry Regiment, at the Battle of Gallipoli (25 April 1915)

They say that Turkish Army still does not have a 57th regiment in honor of the soldiers who died bravely.

 

[litman]

Exactly! The question is, how long will Pakistan be able to fight a war with a far, far smaller industrial base than India? 10 days? 15? And after that? You won't be able to last even a fortnight. Your limited assets like dams, power stations, ports, oil refineries etc are all in an area having no depth which will be taken out in the first few days of war. And I'm not talking of a nuclear war, which will never happen.

and we will not strike indian dams, power stations, ports, oil refineries etc??
secondly once our assets will be made non functional by indian strikes we will never strike india with a nuke???

 

[Piper]

@HAKIKAT, From a Turkish friend, it reminds me of the famous orders of Mustafa Kemal in the battle of Gallipoli in the first world war.

Men, I am not ordering you to attack. I am ordering you to die. In the time that it takes us to die, other forces and commanders can come and take our place.

• Orders to the 57th Infantry Regiment, at the Battle of Gallipoli (25 April 1915)

They say that Turkish Army still does not have a 57th regiment in honor of the soldiers who died bravely.

compare that with what the good general Patton said " No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his country".