Bro, tell me who accepted his statistics first of all???? Can you show any other source except Pakistani claims which refer to Yeagar's statistics ???? Who will believe a country whiped its opponent's airforce with a margin of 104 :34 but lost the war within 2 weeks. Every country during war publishes news which keep its countrymen's moral high. Please search how Pakistani people reacted after the war knowing how they were misinformed about the war by GoP which forced Y Khan to resign from his post.
PAF 1965 air war explained (John Fricker)
- Thread starter Myth_buster_1
- Start date
- Status
Icarus
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2009
- Messages
- 9,040
- Reaction score
- 78
- Country
- Location
We did not lose the war, India's bid to capture Lahore without formal declaration of war was foiled by few platoons of ill-equipped but very courageous men.............The counter attack pushed a much larger Indian force back to Amritsar and even captured towns that bordered amritsar.
At Sialkot "Fakhr-e-Hind" had to suffer the whooping of a lifetime....in the largest tank battle after WWII.
The war was a disaster for you guys yet you say we lost ?????
Yahya Khan resigned as a result of 1971 war, not 65, get your facts right man......................
LOL.....we were discussig Yeagar's statement. wasn't it??? Now you get your facts right during which war he was in Pakistan....Or your source said about his presence during 65 war. And about !965 war (which was a stalemate) I should give PA the credit they deserved for holding IA.
kashith
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 478
- Reaction score
- 0
It's seem like everytime we try to discuss on the PAF 1965 war history, the indians have always to point out that they were the winners or (when they try there best to act like serious persons) it was a tie according to them.....or there was no winner etc. But i think the facts clearly shows the truth so no need to discuss on this topic, let them write there meanless comments bcz they will never change the history!
just look at the losses for IAF and PAF. If M.M. Alam got more chances IAF had to face a big tragedy!
If Pakistan would have won then I would have been watching PTV,since I am not,then that means that it did not win.PAF held IAF ...That is true .I totally accept this fact ,but pakistan won over India,,,Sorry no comprende
All-Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,824
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
A very interesting neutral article
which i came across and commented on before as well in the past...And i quote from the global security article...
Overall, the war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy--on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.
1) Focus on Pakistan's loss of 20 aircraft and 200 tanks and no mention of Indian Air force's huge losses and the Indian Armour's destroyed assets...very neutral perspective indeed.
2) A theory that even though Indian military failed to defeat Pakistan, continuation of War would only have resulted in Pakistan's defeat...
3) Refused to accept the possibility of a military defeat by Hindu India?
Sounding a bit too neutral to my ears... to change stance from militarily inconclusive war to a lack of acceptance of a military defeat by the ignorant and overconfident Pakistanis...and that too in the same paragraph of the article..
Few observations i have about 65 Airwar.
Traditionally a Stalemate is between two opponents which start off as evenly matched...the PAF was much smaller than IAF and had very few assets to begin with, IAF could have been much bolder due to its huge numerical advantage...the fact that PAF carried the fight to IAF, attacked its bases and still held its own and actually gave more punishment than it took is a great achievement by PAF.
To me 65 was a case of Pakistan achieving something special...a sense of everlasting pride in keeping a much larger Airforce at bay and giving it a lot of punishment as well...i do not know how this can be called a stalemate since by all accounts, Pakistan should have been given a thrashing by India especially in the air war...if we take traditional comparative parameters into account...
India claimed 100 odd aircraft kills which was exaggerated...PAF had a prewar strength of nearly 152 fighters and bombers. To counter the IAF claim PAF displayed 77% of its aircraft in a post war military flyby/inspection for all the world to see after the War...the PAF claim of 20 odd losses and dozen odd damaged aircraft was pretty much proven to the world.
Now compare these losses with the relevant strengths of the two air forces and one wonders why it cannot be called a great achievement in face of overwhelming odds...
PAF defied the odds and that is why it is hailed as a heroic effort to this day.
Last edited:
The PAF had a total of 145 aircraft in service in 1965. Compared to this, India had close to 500. So this point of Pakistan loosing 200 aircraft is laughable propaganda.
Khalid Mahmood, the senior member of the JFT project who recently gave an interview on Sept. 6, confirmed the fact that we had 145 aircraft.
So yes Indians, if it makes you happy, we lost many imaginary aircraft. You are the most insecure, petty, and manipulative people I have ever come across.
- Status
Similar threads
