What's new

Issuance of a PAF Standing Order 2002

In other words, Indian politicians weren't confident enough that the "gains" defined by the political establishment were achievable by the mighty Indian armed forces ---
Political establishment was not sure of that definition. It is the whole point. It is way better not go into war without knowing the goals. So, while you can get many "actual" answers for the question why India did not go to war in 2002, none of them would PA conventional military.

Again, like mentioned before, there was little role of PAF in te kargil conflict so you simply cannot assume, "oh the IAF of 1999 would have wiped the floor with the PAF" as they never went head to head in a full blown out air war like in 1965 or 1971 in both cases IAF having significant numerical advantage and we all know how that turned out for the IAF don't we ---

Little role of PAF in Kargil? Seriously? IAF crossed LoC and bombed Muntho Dhalo base camp. A navy Atlantique was shot down just after kargil. Where was PAF? Even Kaiser Tufail admits IAF regularly violated LoC and PAF did not react adequately.

However, as a senior member has already pointed out, we were getting spares for our falcons, the F-7PG was delivered to PAF and like I said previously, PAF had been allegedly operating a BVR well before the Aim 120 deal was ever signed, so bottom line and the answer to your question as well, the PAF of 2002 was significantly superior to that of the one in 1999 ....

Allegedly, again, is this the best you could come up with??
 
.
Political establishment was not sure of that definition. It is the whole point. It is way better not go into war without knowing the goals. So, while you can get many "actual" answers for the question why India did not go to war in 2002, none of them would PA conventional military.



Little role of PAF in Kargil? Seriously? IAF crossed LoC and bombed Muntho Dhalo base camp. A navy Atlantique was shot down just after kargil. Where was PAF? Even Kaiser Tufail admits IAF regularly violated LoC and PAF did not react adequately.



Allegedly, again, is this the best you could come up with??


If political establishment of yours wasn't even sure of the definition of whats a "gain" in a potential conflict, what the hell was even it doing fielding its army on the border in the first place after playing a whole build up to a war via war mongering/ media campaigns etc.

Or is it that it ( the indian political establishment ) started the whole thing only to be "advised" as you put it by saner heads in the Indian military establishment that it would be a bigger of an embarassment if India went to war and get spanked butt naked then if the political establishment turns its back and chews on the very words that it uttered in the wake of the parliament attacks ....

As far as Kaiser Tufail goes, since you claim to have read his blog on Kargil ops, I suppose you deliberately excluded the detail of him mentioning that PAF's hands were more or less tied because if it was going all out in the air it would be aiding "rebels" -- but his point of F-16's not being able to fully participate due to the sanctions is certainly believable --

Back to your original point, and to your latest response, you didn't even bother replying on Pakistan being able to get the supplies for F-16's and inductions of F-7 PG instead you went for the BVR, your free to believe what you want to believe though --

But since "its the best I can do" how about you explain, why the IAF hesitated with the "surgical strikes" in 2008
(because if we were to go by your logic, PAF wouldn't have any BVR in 2008 as well) ---

Seems to me unless a weapon isn't fully disclosed and "times of India" doesn't have a report on it, it is pretty much an 'unusable weapon' by the opposition --
 
Last edited:
. .
If political establishment of yours wasn't even sure of the definition of whats a "gain" in a potential conflict, what the hell was even it doing fielding its army on the border in the first place after playing a whole build up to a war via war mongering/ media campaigns etc.
These are good questions, answer to none of which is PAF/PA are too strong. Do not get me wrong here, they can hold their own in limited engagement for limited time, but nobody (except pakistanis) have any delusion that they can stop IA and IAF in all out war.

Or is it that it ( the indian political establishment ) started the whole thing only to be "advised" as you put it by saner heads in the Indian military establishment that it would be a bigger of an embarassment if India went to war and get spanked butt naked then if the political establishment turns its back and chews on the very words that it uttered in the wake of the parliament attacks ....
Nope, IA was asking for orders which weren't forthcoming. IA had superior balance in initial stages (10:1, I believe). By march/april force balance was more or less equalized and there wouldn't be any swift results and gains. If IA were to be "afraid" of PA, it wouldn't have mobilized in the first place.
The Hindu : Gen. Padmanabhan mulls over lessons of Operation Parakram

Back to your original point, and to your latest response, you didn't even bother replying on Pakistan being able to get the supplies for F-16's and inductions of F-7 PG instead you went for the BVR, your free to believe what you want to believe though --
F-16 w/o BVR and F7-PGs (3rd gen fighter? really) are non issue. They don't stand a chance, f-16 (basic version I believe) numbers are too small and "spare from other sources" is a optimistic stance at best. Any links in to back that up? So, sorry to say, the directive to PAF wouldn't have mattered at all. It was just a bravado and chest thumping by a general who was beaten black and blue during kargil...
 
.
These are good questions, answer to none of which is PAF/PA are too strong. Do not get me wrong here, they can hold their own in limited engagement for limited time, but nobody (except pakistanis) have any delusion that they can stop IA and IAF in all out war.

Nope, IA was asking for orders which weren't forthcoming. IA had superior balance in initial stages (10:1, I believe). By march/april force balance was more or less equalized and there wouldn't be any swift results and gains. If IA were to be "afraid" of PA, it wouldn't have mobilized in the first place.
The Hindu : Gen. Padmanabhan mulls over lessons of Operation Parakram

F-16 w/o BVR and F7-PGs (3rd gen fighter? really) are non issue. They don't stand a chance, f-16 (basic version I believe) numbers are too small and "spare from other sources" is a optimistic stance at best. Any links in to back that up? So, sorry to say, the directive to PAF wouldn't have mattered at all. It was just a bravado and chest thumping by a general who was beaten black and blue during kargil...

This is actually getting comical, just 2-3 posts ago your narrative bounced along the lines of, IA only 'advises' and takes orders from the political establishment, but now your argument becomes " If IA was afraid of PA it wouldn't have mobilized in the first place" -- how about you decide first how things work around in India, and then we can talk further on this ...

Secondly, the only way that you'd know that if Pakistan can handle a full out war, is if you have a full blown out war with us. As I recall since the 2000's Pakistan hasn't taken any aggressive tone against India, it has always retaliated to Indian threats which never even materialized to a limited war and the result is always the same--

Indian political establishment ---" bla bla bla"
Indian military -- "bla bla bla"
Pakistani military --- "ao na zara khushbo laga ke "
Indian military/political establishment ------- " -------------- "


Lastly, you can call it a non issue, but as I recall, IAF backed down in 2008 after similar chest thumping by the politicians --- and as I remember PAF hadn't really acquired any new platforms by then-- the first squadron of JF-17's wasn't even raised, the MLU and block 52 deal were a good 2 years away and yet the superior IAF who had the MKI and all the other goods chose to back down --- the question is why after all the tall claims does the Indian military establishment always ends up tucking its tail between its legs and backing out --- against a BVR-less airforce, whose best fighter was the basic F-16 Block 15 amd other fighters included "3rd gen fighters" ....
 
Last edited:
.
Just bomb their Karachi port, create blockade and they will be left with just 1 week of fuel supply . Their PAF shaheens will become sitting ducks . One week is the time frame of war. They will be able to inflict only low damage to our air bases near border. That's all
And who will be able to do that.....remember how you losers use to intimidate the land locked Nepal once, even they have now shown you the birdie, and now you dream of blocking our seaport. I surely hope India does try this, your sinking flotilla may just achieve the objective of blocking sea lanes for a while.
 
.
... like if we really care about Pakistan. ... you guys struck in a loop with no future....

Right, like its really the case. We laugh at both of you, you are both equally obsessed with each other. The funny thing is, India wants to be a bigger power and says "our focus is on China", but in reality, for the past 70 years and till date, ALL of her energies are focused on Pakistan!!! And that would NEVER change.

By dropping a 100 or a 200 member special force team, you can't conquer a country of 200 million people, heck, you may not get your team back. Some yoyo's in Miyanmar are different than a professional military trained on American war doctrine, including close encounters, urban warfare, and having significant number of American trained special forces groups!!

In fact, this would start an open war. Knowing how Pakistanis perceive India, the little stunt would be provided with a big punch back; and then another punch from India and the whole boxing match would start and the peace would go....KABOOM.

And, after the dust settles........India will have half a billion more people WAY below the poverty line and Pakistan would have over 150 million people in the same boat, sick, with waste and environment damaged. And no body would win shiit. Not even a DIME, let alone a Dollar!!

And the Chinese would literally drive into India all the way to Bangalore (for the Chinese, at that time, it'd be "Bang Alone",and Ban-Galore, instead of Bangalore), and the US's trillions of dollars worth of investments into IT and all, would become Chinese property over night.....WHY all this drama??

Please return our money and sensitive technologies and all, and THEN go fight the Pakistanis and both of you can figure shiit out on your own!
 
Last edited:
.
As I am going through all the discussion above ...the Indians are proving hard that Pakistan is a weakling ....If so why don't they attack us, what is stopping them ? Some reasons to me my understanding could be:
1) Being Plainly Cowards :tdown:
2) Modi being Indira The Gandi :P
3)Modi Team suffering from Gastric Trouble:taz:
4) Pakistan having millions of Pigeons:lol:
 
.
As I am going through all the discussion above ...the Indians are proving hard that Pakistan is a weakling ....If so why don't they attack us, what is stopping them ? Some reasons to me my understanding could be:
1) Being Plainly Cowards :tdown:
2) Modi being Indira The Gandi :P
3)Modi Team suffering from Gastric Trouble:taz:
4) Pakistan having millions of Pigeons:lol:

I seriously think it's the pigeons that is scaring them! :-)
 
. .
Can someone please stop this Indian troll on PDF !! why the hell these Bhanghees don't go and piss at their Bharat raksha ! Time has come we need to stop allow them from joining PDF.
 
.
This is actually getting comical, just 2-3 posts ago your narrative bounced along the lines of, IA only 'advises' and takes orders from the political establishment, but now your argument becomes " If IA was afraid of PA it wouldn't have mobilized in the first place" -- how about you decide first how things work around in India, and then we can talk further on this ...
This is getting comical for you because apparently you don't read english well and has even lesser comprehension ability, but very good quote mining skill. I just replied to your nonsense that IA made GoI back down because it was "afraid of superior" PA. My reply was if IA had the ability to dictate terms to GoI and was afraid of PA, it would have not mobilized at all. I know you can't comprehend or digest this, but I am clarifying it any way for the convenience of other readers.

Secondly, the only way that you'd know that if Pakistan can handle a full out war, is if you have a full blown out war with us. As I recall since the 2000's Pakistan hasn't taken any aggressive tone against India, it has always retaliated to Indian threats which never even materialized to a limited war and the result is always the same--

Indian political establishment ---" bla bla bla"
Indian military -- "bla bla bla"
Pakistani military --- "ao na zara khushbo laga ke "
Indian military/political establishment ------- " -------------- "

OMG.... Funny as hell. Since 2000? why arbitrary number? why not 1998? the whole thread is about what changed between 1999 and 2002.. if nothing changed, directive to PAF was chest thumping as PAF was in no position to carry it out...

Lastly, you can call it a non issue, but as I recall, IAF backed down in 2008 after similar chest thumping by the politicians --- and as I remember PAF hadn't really acquired any new platforms by then-- the first squadron of JF-17's wasn't even raised, the MLU and block 52 deal were a good 2 years away and yet the superior IAF who had the MKI and all the other goods chose to back down --- the question is why after all the tall claims does the Indian military establishment always ends up tucking its tail between its legs and backing out --- against a BVR-less airforce, whose best fighter was the basic F-16 Block 15 amd other fighters included "3rd gen fighters" ....
Classic straw-man argument. Show me one reference to prove that it was IAF which "backed down". Show me one reference where GoI asked IAF to carry out an operation and IAF said "NO". That is the forte of PAF. Withdrawing from fight to save assets, man...
 
.
This is getting comical for you because apparently you don't read english well and has even lesser comprehension ability, but very good quote mining skill. I just replied to your nonsense that IA made GoI back down because it was "afraid of superior" PA. My reply was if IA had the ability to dictate terms to GoI and was afraid of PA, it would have not mobilized at all. I know you can't comprehend or digest this, but I am clarifying it any way for the convenience of other readers.



OMG.... Funny as hell. Since 2000? why arbitrary number? why not 1998? the whole thread is about what changed between 1999 and 2002.. if nothing changed, directive to PAF was chest thumping as PAF was in no position to carry it out...


Classic straw-man argument. Show me one reference to prove that it was IAF which "backed down". Show me one reference where GoI asked IAF to carry out an operation and IAF said "NO". That is the forte of PAF. Withdrawing from fight to save assets, man...

Aww-- did I strike a nerve -- and for someone who claims that I've got bad comprehension and reading skills and then goes on to say that the thread is about is " what changed between 99 and 02" --well Ive no words ---

and lastly how about another classic straw man question if you will

what do you call when a person goes "imma do this and this and this" and when its time --- runs the other way ...
 
.
Aww-- did I strike a nerve -- and for someone who claims that I've got bad comprehension and reading skills and then goes on to say that the thread is about is " what changed between 99 and 02" --well Ive no words ---
Err, nope. This is what I asked for. If you have some comprehension or reading skill, you would have noticed that in post number 26. Can you read? huh?? no words, ... true, but in an ironic way...
So what changed from 1999 when PAF stood as mute spectator to the mauling received by PA from IAF? Reason given was lack of spares (kaiser Tufail said it, I think). How did PAF drastically recover from a situation when they couldn't engage IAF in limited war but all of a sudden ready to fight a full scale war, in 2 years?
and lastly how about another classic straw man question if you will

what do you call when a person goes "imma do this and this and this" and when its time --- runs the other way ...

I dunno what we called pakistan back in 1971, oh wait, how silly of me, Pakistan!
 
.
Indians until this day do not accept Pakistan, but the sooner they accept it the better it will be for the them. In the meantime I would recommend sleep medication and entox/Malox for the Indian Members to digest Pakistan success.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom