Operation "Gibraltar" and "Grand Slam"

[MilSpec]

Ayub was not the first "below average military commander" to become COAS or even President.

Musa was "below average" too, he was appointed COAS precisely because of that; so that he could never become a threat to the self-appointed "Field Marshal" Ayub. Ditto for Yahya Khan.
Then even Zia-ul-Haq who could have become the ultimate "Super Rug Salesman of the year" or the "Khalifa of Mullas" instead and done a darn sight better.

Execrpt from Gen (Retd) Tajammal Hussain Malik sums Zia quite well:
What were your impressions about Zia as you saw him in the Army tenure?

I had not intimately known him before he became the Chief of the Army Staff but from his conduct during the Divisional Commanders Conferences, he appeared to me an incompetent and low grade officer. In one of the Division Commanders promotion conferences, I even saw him sleeping with his mouth open. He surpassed all limits of sycophancy when meeting the Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. While in uniform, he used to bow when shaking hands with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. I remember my old Brigade Commander, Brigadier Hayat, with whom I served as his Brigade Major, once told me that he had written in Major Zia ul Haq’s ACR when he served under his command, “Not fit to go beyond the rank of a Major”. It is an irony of fate that a person of such a calibre had ruled Pakistan for a long period of eleven years till he was finally killed in an air crash.

 

[ice_man]

There is a reason we did not annex East Pakistan, even though it shares very close cultural and ethnic ties with a part of India, i.e. West Bengal. We believe in calibrated use of power.


You start a war with the objective of winning Kashmir.
Your objective took a full about-turn within a matter of two weeks and came down to protecting your own heartland. And you call it a victory ? Man.. are you so desperate to see something good come towards you ?

I don't celebrate unless I achieve my objective, my goal, may be it works differently for you ?

your aims were to capture lahore if not atleast Sialkot. against an enemy 1/6 your size what did you attain?

clearly our Defense day is worth celebrating for us for destroying your aims of capturing Lahore.

Execrpt from Gen (Retd) Tajammal Hussain Malik sums Zia quite well:
What were your impressions about Zia as you saw him in the Army tenure?

I had not intimately known him before he became the Chief of the Army Staff but from his conduct during the Divisional Commanders Conferences, he appeared to me an incompetent and low grade officer. In one of the Division Commanders promotion conferences, I even saw him sleeping with his mouth open. He surpassed all limits of sycophancy when meeting the Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. While in uniform, he used to bow when shaking hands with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. I remember my old Brigade Commander, Brigadier Hayat, with whom I served as his Brigade Major, once told me that he had written in Major Zia ul Haq’s ACR when he served under his command, “Not fit to go beyond the rank of a Major”. It is an irony of fate that a person of such a calibre had ruled Pakistan for a long period of eleven years till he was finally killed in an air crash.

Zia Ul Haq was the biggest blunder in the history of our Nation!! He rose due to seemingly harmless puppet image.

However, Zia Ul Haq is the man needs to be credited for pushing Pakistan behind by 3 decades in his 11 year rule

 

[MilSpec]

Zia Ul Haq was the biggest blunder in the history of our Nation!! He rose due to seemingly harmless puppet image.

However, Zia Ul Haq is the man needs to be credited for pushing Pakistan behind by 3 decades in his 11 year rule

Careful now, your brethrens will come after you with pitchforks and axes now that you have insulted the great Muhib ul Watan Zia...

 

[nForce]

your aims were to capture lahore if not atleast Sialkot. against an enemy 1/6 your size what did you attain?

clearly our Defense day is worth celebrating for us for destroying your aims of capturing Lahore.

Did we start the war with the objective to capturing Lahore ? No, Pakistan started it with the objective of capturing Kashmir.

When the war started our aims were to capture as much land as possible with minimal damage to our own forces to use as a bargaining chip for later. We opened a front in the flat land to counter Pakistan's offensive. We were successful in that objective. India did capture 3 times more land than Pakistan, about 1800 sq.km land.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Execrpt from Gen (Retd) Tajammal Hussain Malik sums Zia quite well:
What were your impressions about Zia as you saw him in the Army tenure?

I had not intimately known him before he became the Chief of the Army Staff but from his conduct during the Divisional Commanders Conferences, he appeared to me an incompetent and low grade officer. In one of the Division Commanders promotion conferences, I even saw him sleeping with his mouth open. He surpassed all limits of sycophancy when meeting the Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. While in uniform, he used to bow when shaking hands with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. I remember my old Brigade Commander, Brigadier Hayat, with whom I served as his Brigade Major, once told me that he had written in Major Zia ul Haq’s ACR when he served under his command, “Not fit to go beyond the rank of a Major”. It is an irony of fate that a person of such a calibre had ruled Pakistan for a long period of eleven years till he was finally killed in an air crash.

Sycophancy was the parameter that was rated highest on ACRs to move beyond Corps Commanders. Zia was the same guy who got even a Military Uniform stitched for Bhutto and toyed with a proposal to appoint Bhutto an Honorary Field Marshal. Then he eventually "shafted" Bhutto.....
That narrative was repeated in the Nawaz Sharif- Musharafff kissa. So that then beings up another parameter: Deviousness/Duplicity. That rating usually got inked in too late.....

 

[ice_man]

Did we start the war with the objective to capturing Lahore ? No, Pakistan started it with the objective of capturing Kashmir.

When the war started our aims were to capture as much land as possible with minimal damage to our own forces to use as a bargaining chip for later. We opened a front in the flat land to counter Pakistan's offensive. We were successful in that objective. India did capture 3 times more land than Pakistan, about 1800 sq.km land.

and one of those bargaining chips was to be Lahore or Sialkot. And neither was attained. Hence no victory for india and a great defense by our troops. india captured land but the crown jewel of Lahore or Sialkot were never attained. and after Tashkent everything was back to status quo. however, we held out and defended ourselves against an enemy vastly superior in numbers.

 

[nForce]

and one of those bargaining chips was to be Lahore or Sialkot. And neither was attained. Hence no victory for india and a great defense by our troops. india captured land but the crown jewel of Lahore or Sialkot were never attained.

How about 1800 sq. km. of land ?

and after Tashkent everything was back to status quo.

Pakistan started the war to go back to status quo ?

however, we held out and defended ourselves against an enemy vastly superior in numbers.

Was that your objective ?

 

[ice_man]

How about 1800 sq. km. of land ?

Pakistan started the war to go back to status quo ?


Was that your objective ?

1800 sq kmsof landi am not sure if you have the correct sqkms.

status quo well if you held so much land and you consider yourself victorious then why revert to status quo? why not keep the 1,800 kmss of land (figure is way to high more like 500 sq kms)

lastly was it not your aim to capture lahore or atleast sialkot?

 

[nForce]

1800 sq kmsof landi am not sure if you have the correct sqkms.

status quo well if you held so much land and you consider yourself victorious then why revert to status quo? why not keep the 1,800 kmss of land (figure is way to high more like 500 sq kms)

lastly was it not your aim to capture lahore or atleast sialkot?

1. According to neutral sources it is 1840 sq. km. According to Indian Army, it is 1920 sq. km.
2. Yes, it was one of the targets to capture Lahore. We failed to achieve our target.

 

[ice_man]

1. According to neutral sources it is 1840 sq. km. According to Indian Army, it is 1920 sq. km.
2. Yes, it was one of the targets to capture Lahore. We failed to achieve our target.

so failure of yours is our celebration of defense of our fatherland. and hence the 6th september celebrations in Pakistan.

IF you had attained sialkot or Lahore things would have been very different. Maybe even Tashkent agreement would have been different instead of return to the boundaries of May 1965. the bargaining chip never came.

can you please provide a "neutral source" that says india held 1800sqkms of land even indian offical war history claims land was just 360 sq kms

 

[Psychic]

Execrpt from Gen (Retd) Tajammal Hussain Malik sums Zia quite well:
What were your impressions about Zia as you saw him in the Army tenure?

I had not intimately known him before he became the Chief of the Army Staff but from his conduct during the Divisional Commanders Conferences, he appeared to me an incompetent and low grade officer. In one of the Division Commanders promotion conferences, I even saw him sleeping with his mouth open. He surpassed all limits of sycophancy when meeting the Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. While in uniform, he used to bow when shaking hands with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. I remember my old Brigade Commander, Brigadier Hayat, with whom I served as his Brigade Major, once told me that he had written in Major Zia ul Haq’s ACR when he served under his command, “Not fit to go beyond the rank of a Major”. It is an irony of fate that a person of such a calibre had ruled Pakistan for a long period of eleven years till he was finally killed in an air crash.

May be it is his personal enmity for Zia. Many other armour corps officers who served under Zia did not think of him like that. Zia was however a junior General promoted by Bhutto to COAS.

Gen Tajammul himself was such a "brilliant " commander who left his soldiers leaderless in Bogra and departed for an unknown destination after recieving orders of surrender.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

1800 sq kmsof landi am not sure if you have the correct sqkms.

status quo well if you held so much land and you consider yourself victorious then why revert to status quo? why not keep the 1,800 kmss of land (figure is way to high more like 500 sq kms)

lastly was it not your aim to capture lahore or atleast sialkot?

Nope.
The idea was to threaten Lahore and thus ease of the pressure on the 'chickens-neck' in Chamb-Jaurian and Akhnoor which were under pressure and which was threatening India's sole supply route to Jammu and Kashmir in the initial days of "Grand Slam" which BTW... was started when "Gibraltar" in Kashmir failed and fell flat on its face.

LHR was not the primary objective, it had the most formidable defences in the form of the Canal-Bund system of Icchogil-BRB Canal. Actually the IA was even surprised to reach Barkee which is abt 14 km from the outskirts of LHR (at that time). The pressure on Chhamb Sector eased; because of the thrust towards LHR..

Most of the 1800 sq km of territory was in fact in Sind, which was yet another feint to divert forces from Lahore-Sialkot. In the circumstances.; the Battle for Lahore became a "Do or Die" battle for PA after successively goofing up in its plans. For what went wrong in Chhamb-Jaurian; eventually bogging down that attack, read up Maj.A.H.Amin's history.
A Tactical Surprise sprung in Chhamb, nearly led to a Strategic Disaster.

The Ayub-Musa combination of "military dimwits" put the last nail into the plan that was egged on by a Megalomaniac called Bhutto. This was the genesis of the debacle and shame of 1971 finally.
1965 was just a "Stalemate", which brought on the "Check-Mate", later.

 

[nForce]

so failure of yours is our celebration of defense of our fatherland. and hence the 6th september celebrations in Pakistan.

I understand, you need some feel-good factor to pat your own back. I mean it will be difficult for a country, which is a garrison state to have no military achievements under it's belt. That's just, well demoralizing.

So, what do you do ? You cherry pick particular events! How convenient !!

It's very simple. I will compare the results between start-point and end point. This is the outcome :

1. Pakistan started with the objective of capturing Kashmir - Failure
2. India started with the objective of defence - success
3. India ended up capturing 3 times more land than that of Pakistan and yet being the bigger brother, had forgiven you, and gave your land back.
That's the end result - no cherry picking there!!

IF you had attained sialkot or Lahore things would have been very different. Maybe even Tashkent agreement would have been different instead of return to the boundaries of May 1965. the bargaining chip never came.

History has no place for speculation.

 

[Psychic]

There is a reason we did not annex East Pakistan, even though it shares very close cultural and ethnic ties with a part of India, i.e. West Bengal. We believe in calibrated use of power.

That is because you could not.

 

[ice_man]

I understand, you need some feel-good factor to pat your own back. I mean it will be difficult for a country, which is a garrison state to have no military achievements under it's belt. That's just, well demoralizing.

So, what do you do ? You cherry pick particular events! How convenient !!

It's very simple. I will compare the results between start-point and end point. This is the outcome :

1. Pakistan started with the objective of capturing Kashmir - Failure
2. India started with the objective of defence - success
3. India ended up capturing 3 times more land than that of Pakistan and yet being the bigger brother, had forgiven you, and gave your land back.
That's the end result - no cherry picking there!!


History has no place for speculation.

i understand your Bharaaat Raaakshak mindset however, this is not how the history unfolded. "big brother forgiving" nonsense as well as objective of defense of india goes back on your own claims of bargaining chips.

i understand it is humiliting for a nation 6 times our size to fight 16 days of all out war and have nothing to show for it.no war trophies no teas in Lahore gymkhana.

its ok 65 is brushed aside in indian history and 71 is celebrated rightly so. the whole grand slam was copied improved and used effectively by india in bangladesh,