What's new

Naswarville

Status
Not open for further replies.
@RAMPAGE let's have some charas, shall we? :drag: :drag:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dillinger said:
Because before 95 we held it, now we have to hold two extra peaks just to cover it and the narrow passes to said peaks are non-existent.

Conways saddle (35°38'56"N 76°43'21"E- as accurate as I can be) can be found straight north of the Kondus glacier.

The issue arises when we have no facility whatsoever to assault said peak from the front, as in its NOT possible. Nothing shot of an airstrike will shut that post off- AND that means BIG trouble if someone needs to shut it off.

Mere yaara, someone needs to tell people that the map is amateur made- made by people like you and me. Otherwise please reference point number of tiger hill peak coinciding with its height and check an indexed map which provides the topography and elevation of the region marked as TGH and compare the facts.
Click to expand...

Well , this part I didn't really know about , why did the IA choose to abandon it back then ? Same logistics and no practicality ? Sure it can be , I told you its a famous point , a sort of camp for the mountaineers actually :D . Dillinger , someone back then made a grave mistake by not holding on the 5353 , even if you can cover it from the front and neutralize any threat to NH1-D , it still presents a significant threat with the supply line under direct Pakistani observation .

Not really a amateur , are you ? :P I know it isn't really accurate since well its media made , one which specializes in sensationalizing things . The point is that it isn't exactly wrong either in pointing out that the peak was actually lost back then .
 
Secur said:
Well , this part I didn't really know about , why did the IA chose to abandon it back then ? Same logistics and no practicality ? Sure it can be , I told you its a famous point , a sort of camp for the mountaineers actually :D . Dillinger , someone back then made a grave mistake by not holding on the 5353 , even if you can cover it from the front and neutralize any threat to NH1-D , it still presents a significant threat with the supply line under direct Pakistani observation .

Not really a amateur , are you ? :P I know it isn't really accurate since well its media made , one which specializes in sensationalizing things . The point is that it isn't exactly wrong either in pointing out that the peak was actually lost back then .
Click to expand...

It can't be lost when its not even held- in fact by the 72 demarcation (contrary to PTI claims- the peak point itself is not "in" our territory). The same reason Pakistan can hold it from its side- the opposite is the reason we can't. Let me provide you a glimpse. Bro mum's geography masters- I was mock reading maps when I was a toddler.

Try to find a path on this for a try-

oRQw0A7.png


A mistake, not in todays world. Now its just a post, smack dab on the LOC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ghazi52
Pakistanis do not learn from history
Replies
2
Views
884
Solidify
S
Maula Jatt
Equal sharing with provinces
Replies
0
Views
338
Maula Jatt
Maula Jatt
ghazi52
Why Pakistan’s first-ever digital census may be an exercise in futility
Replies
0
Views
1K
ghazi52
ghazi52
B
Why the appearance of Biden's fake advisor in politics?
Replies
3
Views
437
saif
S
SalarHaqq
Why America Should Never Even Think About Invading Iran
Replies
2
Views
768
SalarHaqq
SalarHaqq

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom