What's new

KAMIKAZE

Enlighten me on how and why the americans managed that?
:coffee:

Yar you are a educated guy just add 2+2 and you will get your answer.
and
Blain: It is true that soilders strapped bombs to there chest and blew up the tanks. My father was commanding FF regent and my younger brother was a lt and was hit by a piece of metal blown up by the Tank. So it is very true soilders volunteered them selves the order wasn't from the top a wounded soilder pulled all 3 pins of his granade that is how it started.
 
.
The Iraqis who died in suicide bombings were muslims. Suicide bombings have taken place recently in pakistan where both the perpetrators and victims were muslims. Both Rajiv Gandhi and the bomber who killed him were hindus.

What's your point?
 
.
I hate to break this to you guys, not a single case of soldiers strapping bombs and taking out tanks has been recorded. This is another myth that has been making rounds ever since the 1965 days. Officers and soldiers did fight it out to the last man in many cases but there was no "laying under the tank with TNT strapped".

how can you prove it ?
 
. .
I can tell you one thing, in 1965 the IA didn't have 2500 tanks.

hahahah yes you are right ..but whats the different between 2000 Indian tanks against 50 pakistani tanks and 2500 Indian Tanks between 50 pakistani tanks ?
 
.
hahahah yes you are right ..but whats the different between 2000 Indian tanks against 50 pakistani tanks and 2500 Indian Tanks between 50 pakistani tanks ?

Again, correction. The Indian Army did not have 2000 tanks. In terms of tanks, artillery, and AA defense, the PA had qualitative (and in some cases quantitative) superiority over the IA.

Indian Army: 4 Rgts (Centurion) + 8 Rgts (Sherman) + 2 Rgts (AMX-13) + 2 Rgts (PT-76) = 720 tanks.

Pakistan Army: 9 Rgts (Patton) + 5 Rgts (Sherman) + 3 Rgts (Chaffee) = 765 tanks.

Source: Official History of 1965 War - Chapter 2

I would ideally have quoted a neutral or Pakistani source, but I couldn't find any. Plus, the document is pretty neutral as far as unit strength, kills, and losses are concerned.

Here is a Pakistani source which states that Pakistani armor was superior to India's.
 
.
Again, correction. The Indian Army did not have 2000 tanks. In terms of tanks, artillery, and AA defense, the PA had qualitative (and in some cases quantitative) superiority over the IA.

Indian Army: 4 Rgts (Centurion) + 8 Rgts (Sherman) + 2 Rgts (AMX-13) + 2 Rgts (PT-76) = 720 tanks.

Pakistan Army: 9 Rgts (Patton) + 5 Rgts (Sherman) + 3 Rgts (Chaffee) = 765 tanks.

Source: Official History of 1965 War - Chapter 2

I would ideally have quoted a neutral or Pakistani source, but I couldn't find any. Plus, the document is pretty neutral as far as unit strength, kills, and losses are concerned.

Here is a Pakistani source which states that Pakistani armor was superior to India's.

my source is Indian Air Force History Book from the 1965 war.
 
.
my source is Indian Air Force History Book from the 1965 war.

Can you provide me with a link please? The source that I have given is the official Indian account of the 1965 war. Wonder how the official history of the IAF is different.
 
. .
Yar you are a educated guy just add 2+2 and you will get your answer.

Muradk,
Starting a war between shias and sunnis would be totally counter-productive to american interests. Why would they want to have a new insurgency on their hands just when they had finished defeating the iraqi army? One opinion is that americans invaded iraq for the oil and I'm inclined to believe it. Internal strife only means more oil wells getting blown up and disruption in supply. Why would the americans want that? The feelings of enmity between shias and sunnis in iraq were already there. They didn't appear overnight. When the Saddam Hussein government fell people on either side saw a chance to get even with the other side for whatever non-violent disagreements/conflicts they might have had in the past and the whole country erupted.
 
.
I was trying to say that the "justification for suicide bombings" which you wrote in your post does not apply everywhere.

Yeah, it applies to muslim extremists. That's what the post was about rite?
 
.
Can you provide me with a link please? The source that I have given is the official Indian account of the 1965 war. Wonder how the official history of the IAF is different.

you will be wounder...

"The India- pakistan Air war of 1965" from jagan Mohan and Samir Chopra.....
 
.
you will be wounder...

"The India- pakistan Air war of 1965" from jagan Mohan and Samir Chopra.....

The book is not the official history of the IAF. I tried finding a reference for the "2000 tanks" from the available extracts, no go. Can you help me out? Plus I haven't come across any source which says that the IA had 2000 tanks.
 
.
The book is not the official history of the IAF. I tried finding a reference for the "2000 tanks" from the available extracts, no go. Can you help me out? Plus I haven't come across any source which says that the IA had 2000 tanks.


"Can you help me out?" no I can not help to think that India had no 2000 Tanks .....but I can show you my sources

here on of so much

1.
Amazon.de: Panzerschlachten: Christer Jorgensen, Chris Mann: Bücher

I have read this Book!

( I can speak german perfect......I study here..I study their "Wehrmacht" good tank tactics) !
 
.
"Can you help me out?" no I can not help to think that India had no 2000 Tanks .....but I can show you my sources

here on of so much

1.
Amazon.de: Panzerschlachten: Christer Jorgensen, Chris Mann: Bücher

I have read this Book!

( I can speak german perfect......I study here..I study their "Wehrmacht" good tank tactics) !

I'm sorry I will need a link where it is clearly stated that the IA had 2000 tanks. Until then, I'll disagree with you. I've found no sources on the internet stating that the IA had 1000+ tanks. The books that you've mentioned, I cannot read and confirm.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom