What's new

Pakistan (non nuclear)plan to counter cold start

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.

  • Former New York Times reporter Arif Jamal wrote in his book Shadow War[9]
This time, India's victory was nearly total: India accepted cease-fire only after it had occupied 740 square miles, though Pakistan had made marginal gains of 210 square miles of territory. Despite the obvious strength of the Indian wins, both countries claim to have been victorious.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[119]
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[120] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[7]
India won the war. It gained 1,840 km2(710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2(250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2(150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2(190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2(19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[122]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[8]
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km2) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km2) of its own.

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[123]
A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[124]
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[125]
Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.


Now get out of your imaginary world.

You are right, we have been winning since 2015, i thought we have won all years. However we did win in 2010, 2012, 2015, 2016, giving us 4 medals. india won in 2011, 2014, 2016, giving it 3 medals. 4 is bigger then 3, not equal.
2012 medal was fake news by some Pakistani media channels.
 
.
CSD is a decade old doctrine and no more applicable as Pakistan has validated effective counter measure during last decade.

So, better go back in your drawing room and come up with new Ideas.
 
.
TTP is now nowhere in Pakistan. Their few left people are dying in US drone strikes in afghanistan.


governments and people. Not same thing. Nobody sent their forces to afghanistan either. Nor bosnia.
But everybody went there.
If you see islamic radicals propaganda they are using ghazwa e hind predictions for war against india. Just like they used dabiq against syrians.


you are not mentaly prepared to accept the ground realities. Ground realitis are always bitter and different than what you are told.
Pakistan saw far more violent incidents than India this year. as forAfghanistan only problem for Soviet was USA involvement, others contributions had zero effects.
 
.
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.

  • Former New York Times reporter Arif Jamal wrote in his book Shadow War[9]
This time, India's victory was nearly total: India accepted cease-fire only after it had occupied 740 square miles, though Pakistan had made marginal gains of 210 square miles of territory. Despite the obvious strength of the Indian wins, both countries claim to have been victorious.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[119]
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[120] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[7]
India won the war. It gained 1,840 km2(710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2(250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2(150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2(190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2(19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[122]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[8]
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km2) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km2) of its own.

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[123]
A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[124]
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[125]
Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.


Now get out of your imaginary world.


2012 medal was fake news by some Pakistani media channels.
lol all that news against one article with no link looks like an wikipedia stuff cause and was published in 2005 what a joke

first tell me all that news i have given were all fake where US,Australia,england,Lebanon etc etc were reporting false news and that link i send is also false but this article with no link which was published years latter is true good
now tell me the link i send also have wrong information ??
now tell me if india was able to win 1965 war easily but obeyed UN cease fire? despite rejecting the existence of pakistan since the beginning of it creations and wanted to destroy pakistan by not providing the due shares (financial,military,stoping water etc etc)
what a joke
no wonder why they call you people most dumbest people in the world
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...Losj5Nwnt2azNvRtg&sig2=hmKQ2cNqGRl_snfsW0LbLg

stop living in your imaginary world
 
. .
lol all that news against one article with no link looks like an wikipedia stuff cause and was published in 2005 what a joke

first tell me all that news i have given were all fake where US,Australia,england,Lebanon etc etc were reporting false news and that link i send is also false but this article with no link which was published years latter is true good
now tell me the link i send also have wrong information ??
now tell me if india was able to win 1965 war easily but obeyed UN cease fire? despite rejecting the existence of pakistan since the beginning of it creations and wanted to destroy pakistan by not providing the due shares (financial,military,stoping water etc etc)
what a joke
no wonder why they call you people most dumbest people in the world
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjfqZHtkPLSAhVBVhoKHZ6DBI4QFggqMAM&url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-most-ignorant-countries-index-ipsos-mori-poll-survey-a7481196.html&usg=AFQjCNGludpYoiWKULosj5Nwnt2azNvRtg&sig2=hmKQ2cNqGRl_snfsW0LbLg

stop living in your imaginary world
Each and every analyst including major think tanks agree that India emerged on the top.
 
.
The tribals were far better armed than Dogras.
In 65 war you were kicked out Punjab at the borders at Khemkaran itself.
Ceasefire saved your sialjot sector and haji pair from us.

Shahud Aziz was a lieutenant General during Kargil so his words along with that of PM Nawaz Sharif Carey a lot of Wright.

Just for your info about Khem Kharan.

IMG_20170325_223842_801.jpg


IMG_20170325_223809_652.jpg


IMG_20170325_223948_657.jpg


IMG_20170325_223730_028.jpg
 
.
.
.
Ceasefire saved your sialjot sector and haji pair from us.
Lol then why Indian generals ran to UN??
Screenshot (111).png

PS the Author is British

India won the war. It gained 1,840 km2(710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2(250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2(150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2(190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2(19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.
all your bogus claim go down the drain when your PM ran to UN to save hi @55

any idea whose jeep is this??
Indian-general-jeep-capture.gif
 
.
This is what happened a few days later :lol:
300px-Pattonb.jpg

paktank5.jpg



None of them are analysts all of them are media reports when the war was still ongoing and based on pak claims.
For analysts see post number 47
maxresdefault.jpg

prove we won
munabao rajasthan india

10.jpg

khemkaran punjab india
42.jpg

ranghar punjab india
11.jpg

even your captured soldiers are happy with us
8.jpg

now you tell your analyst how pakistan able to capture indian territory in punjab near lahore when india was going to win

you attack we retaliate these are the prove now cry in the corner
 
. . .
Pakistanis main response to CSD seems to centered around SRBM and mobile artillery.
This has been the biggest improvement in Pakistani military capability between 2010-2017

The induction of nasr and threat to use tactical nuke warheads in a campaign where Pakistan starts to lose territory suggests three key points

1. Pakistani planners feel at some stage CSD will exist and will be a threat to Pakistan
2. Pakistani planners are preparing a worst case scenario that if CSD actually is implemented and it works as Indians enviage then they need a response. That response is tactical nuke,
3. Pakistanis open doctrine they will use first use of nukes is a open admission they feel they cannot match india in a conventional arms race or war at present

What nobody knows is what is the RED LINE upon which a PAKISTANI leader orders a nuclear missle strike on the enemy.
 
.
It is Pakistan who begged US for help and tried to save its *** by joining SEATO & cento
don't twist facts it was clearly said in the ceato and cento US will not help Pakistan in case of was war with india
Now tell me why india ran to UN??

Video Proof by British Pathe we won entire Haji Pir sector:


It is Pakistan who begged US for help and tried to save its *** by joining SEATO & cento

Any idea whose tank is this:
https://i0.wp.com/thewire.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Destroyed_Patton_Tank_1965_Indo-Pak_War.jpg
there is a hell of difference b/w tank and jeep of GOC the truth is that your GOC ran from the battle

In Chapter 8 titled "Of Cowardice and Panic" of his book "1965 War-The Inside Story", R.D. Pradhan describes the cowardice of Maj. Gen. Niranjan Prasad, the Indian general commanding officer in Lahore sector. When Pakistan Defense Forces counter-attacked the intruding Indian military and the general was fired upon on Sept 6, 1965, he "ran away". Here's an excerpt:

"On learning that, Lt. Gen. Harbakash Singh and the corps commander drove in a Jonga (Nissan P60 Jeep) to the battlefront. Army commander found that the enemy (PAF) air attack had created a havoc on G.T. Road. (Indian) Vehicles were burning and several vehicles of 15 Division abandoned on the road, the drivers having run away, leaving some of the engines still running. Maj. Gen. Niranjan Prasad was hiding in a recently irrigated sugar cane field. As described by Harabakash Singh: "He (Prasad) came out to receive us, with his boots covered with wet mud. He had no head cover, nor was he wearing any badges of his rank. He had stubble on his face, not having shaved." Seeing him in such a stage, Harbakhash Singh asked him: "Whether he was the General Officer commanding a division or a coolie? Why had he removed badges of rank and not shaved? Niranjan Prasad had no answer."
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom