Siachen Glacier, Fighting On The Roof Of The World

[XxX_Sniper_Wolf_XxX]

hmmm Saichen although I do give credit for a 60 year old country for coming this far but I must say that India took more and achieve far more than Pakistan they even killed 40 SSG during a small shootout. I dont know what the reason is that Pakistan did not advance faster but overall India took the lead. but i dont know what going on now. I researched that Every 4 days a pakistani is killled and every other day an Indian.

 

[blain2]

hmmm Saichen although I do give credit for a 60 year old country for coming this far but I must say that India took more and achieve far more than Pakistan they even killed 40 SSG during a small shootout. I dont know what the reason is that Pakistan did not advance faster but overall India took the lead. but i dont know what going on now. I researched that Every 4 days a pakistani is killled and every other day an Indian.

Which small operation are you referring to? Regardless of any operation you can think of, Pakistan Army has never suffered any such casualties in a single operation on Siachen.

 

[Keysersoze]

hmmm Saichen although I do give credit for a 60 year old country for coming this far but I must say that India took more and achieve far more than Pakistan they even killed 40 SSG during a small shootout. I dont know what the reason is that Pakistan did not advance faster but overall India took the lead. but i dont know what going on now. I researched that Every 4 days a pakistani is killled and every other day an Indian.

Where did you "research"? please share this with us......

 

[Goodperson]

Pakistan conveys concern to US over Gen Casey visit to disputed Kashmir territory

WASHINGTON, Oct 18 (APP) :The Pakistani embassy here officially has conveyed Islamabad’s concern to the United States over the American military Chief General George W Casey’s reported visit to Siachen in the Indian occupied Kashmir.

Washington officially considers Kashmir as a disputed region between Pakistan and India whereas the senior US military leaders’s visit could be interpreted as endorsement of New Delhi’s position.

Pakitan and India are engaged in a dialogue process to resolve the decades-old Kashmir dispute and experts say visits by foreign officials to the Indian occupied territory could undermine the peace talks.

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency )

 

[batmannow]

Shivaji;
its not crying, but it just diplomatic crap, but what you think about , a situation where coas of PLAC visting Siachen Glacier pak side?
i guss, thn you will be thinking of "Grapes are sour" story .

 

[deltacamelately]

Shivaji;
its not crying, but it just diplomatic crap, but what you think about , a situation where coas of PLAC visting Siachen Glacier pak side?
i guss, thn you will be thinking of "Grapes are sour" story .

Batmannow,
Couldn't quite get your point. Could you please eleborate?

 

[third eye]

Looking into the genesis of Siachen conflict, It is India which started that all in 1984. Although, there is now a tense ceasefire prevailing all over the LOC including the Siachen, however, India and Pakistan are sticking to there respective positions.

To resolve the issue, Pakistan stance is more realistic:
Pakistan wants India to go back to pre 1984 positions on ground. This means both India and Pakistan will withdraw their troops from present positions and will redeploy where they are not in direct contact with each other, eyeball to eyeball.

However, India has proved itself more stubborn. India donot want to relinquish present positions and want status que to be maintainrd. This implies that all the mountain peaks which India has occupied, Pakistan must concead to this, which is unacceptable. Interestingly, Govt of India, wants redeployment of troops, yet it is Indian Army, which donot want to leave posts and thus does not want settlement of conflict.

Pak wants to go back to '48 coz in so doing it stands to gain while IA does not want to lose what it has lost lives for.

Whats stubborn abt it ? It makes military sense to hold the ground.

 

[Kasrkin]

It makes absolutely no military or any other sense. Every professional observer will tell you this, it was a retarded idea from the start. Indian forces cant come down and Pakistani forces can't go up, and men from both armies are dying (Indians more than Pakistanis). What possible strategic objective could anyone have in stationing troops in a desolate waste land with no prospect of further advancment? It's just about vain pride. Why waste more men because of the ones you have already wasted? Makes NO sense.

 

[third eye]

It makes absolutely no military or any other sense. Every professional observer will tell you this, it was a retarded idea from the start. Indian forces cant come down and Pakistani forces can't go up, and men from both armies are dying (Indians more than Pakistanis). What possible strategic objective could anyone have in stationing troops in a desolate waste land with no prospect of further advancment? It's just about vain pride. Why waste more men because of the ones you have already wasted? Makes NO sense.

How many things that India - Pak have done which have any sense ?

What makes mil sense is not vacating heights till the ground positions are validated & recorded by both parties.

It seems like a retarded idea coz Pak is on lower heights, if it were the other way round it wouldn't.

Was kargil a retarded idea ? To Pak it wasn't , to India is is.

 

[Kasrkin]

How many things that India - Pak have done which have any sense ?

You change track pretty quickly, first you proclaimed that its sound military logic and then you attempt to dilute my reality check by suggesting that Pakistan has no sense?

What importance are ground positions to you when it is a bloody desolate waste land completely insignificant in terms of any military application and no use to anyone other than the most dedicated mountaineers? Indian soldiers DIE horrible, lonely and cold deaths on a daily basis, why so you can keep a grasp on something insignificant that was never even yours? Do you value the lives of your men so lowly? What is this if not vain pride I ask you?

It seems like a retarded idea coz Pak is on lower heights, if it were the other way round it wouldn't.

Your understanding of the situation seems to be retarded. Indian forces are essentially check-mated and have been for decades. Lower heights gives Pakistan an advantage because it’s 10 times cheaper and easier for us to keep our men properly supplied than it is for you. Also because lower heights mean our soldiers are less likely to die pointless, natural deaths as opposed to your soldiers.

Was kargil a retarded idea ? To Pak it wasn't , to India is is.

Pathetic and predictable attempt at changing the topic that is an impulsive quality some of our Indian friends find hard to kick. But I will address it never the less.

Kargil was not nearly has retarded as Siachen for a host of reasons:
1) Pakistani forces actually had something to GAIN by advancing to those heights even if the plan party failed because of political reasons.
2) More Indian regular Indian soldiers died in the Kargil fighting than Pakistani paramilitary/irregulars combined, so militarily it was sound. But in Siachen weekly Indians lose 4 times as many men than Pakistan to the harsh conditions.
3) Through Kargil Kashmir gained prominence on the international stage, which it did thanks to Siachen too but unfortunately for India that is something that obviously works in Pakistan’s favour.

 

[Vinod2070]

Siachin is a strategically important piece of real estate.

The life of each Indian soldier is important but the Indian army has accepted to make sacrifices for strategic gains, same as Pakistan.

The situation now is far better than earlier for all we know. The deaths are far fewer and the soldiers are much better supplied with the required equipment.

It can be demilitarized after the actual ground positions are recorded and validated. What is wrong with this perfectly logical approach?

 

[Contrarian]

Karskin get your facts straight. Indian Army celebrated their first year last year or last to last year-of absolutely no fatalities in Siachen due to the climate. DRDO has developed a lot of technology for the soldiers in Siachen. And things are only going to get better, as India changes its chopper fleet of Cheetah/Chetak's along with building infrastructure in the lower lying areas.

 

[Kasrkin]

It can be demilitarized after the actual ground positions are recorded and validated. What is wrong with this perfectly logical approach?

Perhaps that question will be better suited to your leaders in Delhi.

Indian Army celebrated their first year last year or last to last year-of absolutely no fatalities in Siachen due to the climate.

Some more substantive proof in the way of links to that interesting claim will be most appreciated.

 

[su-47]

At Siachen, casualties come to all time low

It is a sad day at the Siachen base camp. A soldier died at the Kaziranga post on the glacier two days ago and his body has still not been brought down due to bad weather and heavy snowfall.

A Cheetah helicopter has been flying daily from base camp to the post but has not been able to land and pick up the body. Despite a rigorous selection procedure and extensive medical examinations before the posting, the soldier suffered a heart attack. Another one, doctors say, of the unpredictables while serving at extreme altitudes.

While days like these bring out the cost India is paying for maintaining troops at the highest battlefield in the world, casualty rates at the Siachen glacier have come down to an all time low.

Casualties peaked to almost 70 per year during the 1999 Kargil war but the rate has come down to single digits in the past two years.

New equipment, better medical facilities, faster evacuations and the ceasefire agreement has brought down fatality rates in the glacier to about four a year.

Till 2003, before the ceasefire agreement came into place, the army was losing close to 30 soldiers on the glacier every year. The figure went down to 10 a year after the agreement. However, heavy snowfall and the earthquake in 2006 brought up the casualties to 26 in 2006.

The past two years have, however, been stable. The army lost four men on the glacier in 2007 – two cases of medical complications and two pilots who died in a helicopter crash on the LoC. This year also, four soldiers have died on the glacier, again mainly due to medical complications.

The main reason, officers say, is the good quality of clothing and special equipment procured in recent years to equip men on the glacier. Most of the clothing - special down feather jackets, gloves, sleeping bags – has improved over the past two years and is being imported from Italy, France and Austria.

“We now have better medical facilities and equipment. Any case that looks bad is evacuated immediately. We don’t need to take any chances on the glacier anymore,” a medical officer says.

At Siachen, casualties come to all time low

Here you go. Malay wasn't 100% right, but he got the gist of it.

 

[third eye]

You change track pretty quickly, first you proclaimed that its sound military logic and then you attempt to dilute my reality check by suggesting that Pakistan has no sense?

What importance are ground positions to you when it is a bloody desolate waste land completely insignificant in terms of any military application and no use to anyone other than the most dedicated mountaineers? Indian soldiers DIE horrible, lonely and cold deaths on a daily basis, why so you can keep a grasp on something insignificant that was never even yours? Do you value the lives of your men so lowly? What is this if not vain pride I ask you?



Your understanding of the situation seems to be retarded. Indian forces are essentially check-mated and have been for decades. Lower heights gives Pakistan an advantage because it’s 10 times cheaper and easier for us to keep our men properly supplied than it is for you. Also because lower heights mean our soldiers are less likely to die pointless, natural deaths as opposed to your soldiers.



Pathetic and predictable attempt at changing the topic that is an impulsive quality some of our Indian friends find hard to kick. But I will address it never the less.

Kargil was not nearly has retarded as Siachen for a host of reasons:
1) Pakistani forces actually had something to GAIN by advancing to those heights even if the plan party failed because of political reasons.
2) More Indian regular Indian soldiers died in the Kargil fighting than Pakistani paramilitary/irregulars combined, so militarily it was sound. But in Siachen weekly Indians lose 4 times as many men than Pakistan to the harsh conditions.
3) Through Kargil Kashmir gained prominence on the international stage, which it did thanks to Siachen too but unfortunately for India that is something that obviously works in Pakistan’s favour.

I suggest you be a little careful with your verbiage. We are only exchanging views not fighting a war.

Having spent time there I am acutely aware of the significance of that piece of real estate. The net is not he place to dicuss / explain them & most defintely not his forum.

Any military man will explain the advantages of gaining heights in the mountains.

When you use words like ' retarded" all you communicate is your own sense of retardation, it does not show you as a stronger man as you might wish to show.

Pakistan tried to do a Siachen in kargil which misfired. Despite all that is claimed, nothing has changed on the ground.. & never will. The LAC cannot change in peace time..even a cadet in IMA would know than.

As for the highlighted portion above, why are things aways out of sync ?