In fighting these areas, ranges that tanks so have an advantage are not found. We have even been fighting and firing at ranges that are even the below computation range of a ballistic computer. Its a very different kinda fight .... tanks are more of moving heavy guns rather than the shock action mobile heavy machines in these conflicts ..... unless u have been in it, its really hard to understand the peculiarities of this kinda combat ...!!!
I understand much more than a normal civilian can because I have had the privilege to spend time on the front lines in the tribal areas during 80s and in Azad Kashmir recently . belonging to an army family with father, uncles, grand uncles, cousins meant that I grew up in this world has given me the insight not many non uniformed people can imagine or think of.
I was deliberately commenting on the face value of the video (layman as you put it) tank without infantry is vulnerable. I just wanted to see how you or someone else will explain it. The key word you used was about the ambiguity about the origin/ direction of fire from Taliban. that’s all I needed, rest is pretty much obvious for me but a good read for anyone who doesn’t know about hand in hand role of infantry and armour in a battle.
Committing tanks without infantry support would have been ill advised and risking our infantry for the sake of using tanks against the Taliban would have meant loosing valuable infantry when the terrain favoured the Taliban who had layed out the ambush . Maybe gunships with the help of their high altitude observation would have helped in locating and eliminating the Taliban but they also have their limitation (fuel +ammo, availability ) I know so well how different we are to Americans who would call air support even f they hear AK-47 from range, we just don’t have that kind of unlimited recourse luxury.) Now I think about this incident a bit more I realise that maybe that retreat would have disappointed Taliban. They would have had been banking on some hot head deciding to go ahead no matter what thus inflicting casualties and then fleeing from the well rehearsed and worked out escape route.
In addition to infantry, in the changing modern warfare we got IFVs taking on the front role in an COIN operations where the tanks have become the hunters and the IFVs the actual killers. (ref Iraq urban warfare, where the tanks took the fire and helped the IFVs to finish off the insurgents) . Do you agree? Have you seen our APCs more effectively covering the role or both tank and infantry on foot due to it being more agile and low profile + more protected than the solider on foot? The kind of terrain in the tribal areas doesn’t support the traditional use of tanks. you are 100% right these tanks have more or less the role of self propelled artillery (of course with more agility than a our fixed turret 8 inch SP gun) as unlike plans of Punjab we don’t have the luxury of charging into the enemy defences.
Having said that, just like other armies, I have seen our tanks also guarding bypasses, important intersections and tunnels in the tribal areas and together with infantry they can see off any assault no matter how ambitious that maybe. My guess is that’s what happened (destroyed by tanks?) to those aspiring Taliban suicide drivers that were used by TTP as their main weapons during their waves of attacks on the advancing Pakistan army during the operation Rah e Nijat. By the way how did you find our 130mm Artillery in this conflict?
Re media claims about Taliban, I give it as much credence as much I give to the speeches of Nawaz and Zardari when they shed tears in the name of serving the nation. As it happens that they are very effective in their media camaign because our newly “liberated” media wants to religiously follow the course of our pseudo left wing liberals and right wing Taliban supporters who cant go to bed without blaming Pakistan for everything in their life and even the circumstances that led to their birth.