Should Pakistan do Surgical Strikes in IOK?

[araz]

Cool and calm ... And in right moment .. And dont do surgical strike .. Go for the kill

I agree. If the right moment comes it will be a hit at the jugular. However for that we will need to be very patient.
A

 

[Dubious]

I agree. If the right moment comes it will be a hit at the jugular. However for that we will need to be very patient.
A

patience is a virtue for a reason....

 

[Adam_Khan]

India has broken all its laws and commitments and is engaged in terrorising Kashmir's innocent population.

Since India has already set the precedent of surgical strikes, Pak can now take advantage and engage in strikes against Indian occupation soldiers and police that are engaged in terrorism of innocent civilians.

Pak would not be violating international law as the LoC no longer exists. The IAF is ill prepared to deal with such a confrontation.

There are pros and cons to this discussion and I thought of creating a thread to discuss.

I see that in terms of the negatives, this could drag itself into a full scale war. Additionally, it would allow IAF to learn and counter PAF tactics.

Would you care to elaborate that how a surgical strike will solve the Kashmir problem?

 

[Armchair]

how about a stunt like this in IOK?

Interesting propaganda tool.

Would you care to elaborate that how a surgical strike will solve the Kashmir problem?

Perhaps you need to re-read what I wrote without the blinders on. I've asked for a debate on the pros and cons. Only a dimwit would imagine I'm saying that the entire Kashmir problem will be solved by surgical strikes.

patience is a virtue for a reason....

Pak has been cool and calm since 1947. Some fellows here pretending we are a lion after a prey, waiting for 70 years "for the right time". This fantasy narrative only feeds everyone some Kool Aid and is basically a dishonest narrative.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

M

If Vietnam could, if in Yarmouk we could, we can. With the right strategy and planning.


.

your examples are not very sound
Vietnames had nothing left to loose.
Yarmouk was small battle in the ancient times by Arabs against a Roman army

are we willing to loose everything? do we have national consensus to give up all our comforts all the progress and property?
by everything I mean just look around the cities.

like I said, India is more capable than us to

 

[Armchair]

your examples are not very sound
Vietnames had nothing left to loose.
Yarmouk was small battle in the ancient times by Arabs against a Roman army

are we willing to loose everything? do we have national consensus to give up all our comforts all the progress and property?
by everything I mean just look around the cities.

like I said, India is more capable than us to

Ah just so that we are on the same page,

Yarmouk, according to a Pak army historian was the decisive battle of that era. Against a roman army of 250,000 to 400,000 strong. Reference: The Sword of Allah Khalid bin Al Walid"

Now if you wish to dispute something as unsound, better read up on it better.

Do you know how this battle was won? I highly recommend you read the book. Its a classic by a Pak author read world over, a Pak Army scholar of the highest calibre.

 

[Dubious]

Pak has been cool and calm since 1947. Some fellows here pretending we are a lion after a prey, waiting for 70 years "for the right time". This fantasy narrative only feeds everyone some Kool Aid and is basically a dishonest narrative.

Anger will also not really serve the purpose...You need a cool mind to plan a war...The responsibility of each soul is a hard burden to bear!

 

[Armchair]

"the Indian army cannot be defeated, they are too great, we will have all our luxuries taken away... let us not even discuss the pros and cons of a surgical strike..."

 

[Dubious]

Anger only divides (in our nation)..a cooler head...will lead a better war...

"the Indian army cannot be defeated, they are too great, we will have all our luxuries taken away... let us not even discuss the pros and cons of a surgical strike..."

Well we are a little too comfortable...look at our imports

Secondly no point being a bull charging like the blind bat!

 

[Armchair]

Whatever we do or should not do, should not be in haste but well planned and executed. If we are going to war or preparing for war, we should do it properly. We should be buying up stocks of G3, old tanks, aircraft, ammo, etc. Until we see a national mobilisation, we should do nothing.

This is why I wrote this earlier @Dubious

Why are you assuming I am angry?

 

[Mrc]

"the Indian army cannot be defeated, they are too great, we will have all our luxuries taken away... let us not even discuss the pros and cons of a surgical strike..."

If death was in battle khalid would have never died in bed

Quote


War is coming and its inevitable .... Better be prepared than living under a delusion of peace

 

[Dubious]

This is why I wrote this earlier @Dubious

Why are you assuming I am angry?

Not you bro...half the forum is ready to eat each other alive!

 

[Armchair]

Not you bro...half the forum is ready to eat each other alive!

At least their blood is red.
What possible use could a surgical strike be of?
Pros
Send a message to the world that if this is business as usual, planet earth as we know it could end
Use surgical strikes as a trap for India to do something stupid
Give moral support to the Kashmiris
Use it as a cover to drop supplies to Kashmiris
Getting India to over react and start a war at a time of our choosing, whereupon major Indian army imbalance could allow Pak to take over large swathes of Punjab, Hatayana, rajestsn and even Modi's home state
Kill large number of Indian troops, destroy their morale and force them to disperse

Cons
Show India one of our cards - help them understand how to counter our air force
Wrong timing of such a strike would be against us
Harm economy, even without war due to instability
MAD

 

[BATMAN]

The biggest surgical strike Pakistan can do on India is to impose emergency and appoint a general as head of state. All Indian hostilities would end like they never existed.

 

[Armchair]

The biggest surgical strike Pakistan can do on India is to impose emergency and appoint a general as head of state. All Indian hostilities would end like they never existed.

A nation at war does not do that. Unfortunately Pakistanis, specially our "genrals" have no clue how to mobilize a country at war.
Did UK or US during WW2 put a general in charge of the country and stop the civilian government?
No.
Only children and Pak generals dream up such rubbish.
A nation at war requires bringing on board all segments of society. To get citizens to conscript and go to war.
Without a salary or a pension or a cushy job in a housing scheme or in Fauji Foundation.

This requires people who have the legitimacy of governance, not some whiskey drinking moron of a general who went to Sandhurst and became gora.