The 1965 War — revisited

[blackops]

Rasul Bux Rais, a Pakistani[ 106] political analyst wrote[ 106] – political analyst wrote – The 1965 war with India proved that Pakistan could neither break the formidable Indian defenses in a blitzkrieg fashion nor could she sustain an all-out conflict for long Moreover, Pakistan had lost more ground than it had gained

 

[third eye]

This is disinformation. There is the testimony of captured Pakistani soldiers, U.N. observers who witnessed Pakistani infiltrators cross the border, and finally the arguments of Pakistani leaders Z.A. Bhutto and Ayub Khan in declassified U.S. diplomatic records. (Google them all.) The simple truth is that these two Pakistani leaders started the 1965 war because they wanted to, made a mess of it, and tried to cover it all up afterward.

The drubbing India had recently got at the Chinese hands three years ago and the actions in the Rann of Kutch in April 65 also contributed to Ayub's thinking that Gibraltar would work.

 

[blackops]

e of the most far reaching consequences of the war was[ 113][ 114] the wide-scale economic slowdown in Pakistan.[ 113][ 114] The the wide-scale economic slowdown in Pakistan The cost of the 1965 war put an end to the impressive period economic growth Pakistan had experienced during early 1960s. Between 1964 and 1966, Pakistan's defence spending rose from 4.82% to 9.86% of GDP, putting tremendous strain on Pakistan's economy. By 1970–71, defence spending comprised a whopping 55.66% of government[ 115] expenditure.[ 115] expenditure

 

[blackops]

The drubbing India had recently got at the Chinese hands three years ago and the actions in the Rann of Kutch in April 65 also contributed to Ayub's thinking that Gibraltar would work.

62 Was the very reason india started giving its army a good shape it happend for good but pakistan wanted to score some good points after the war but what happend they failed to achive there targets lost more men more material more land and most imp lost there economy

 

[Windjammer]

62 Was the very reason india started giving its army a good shape it happend for good but pakistan wanted to score some good points after the war but what happend they failed to achive there targets lost more men more material more land and most imp lost there economy

Some with the know how at the time had a different prospectus to the situation.

"India cannot stand alone against Pakistan, much less against China".

This interesting disclosure was made in the New York Times by the paper's once United Nation's correspondent, Drew Middleton.
Middleton said, "In the case of India, there is little question in the minds of the officials that the US will be able to maintain increasingly close relations. If nothing else, the recent events demonstrated that India was dependent upon the West and Soviet Russia for Diplomatic, Military and Economic support and could not stand alone Pakistan much less against Communist China.

 

[punit]

OBJECTIVES;
for PAkistan : capture kashmir . result : failure.
for India : save kashmir result : sucess
rest are for dil bahnale ke liye

 

[blackops]

Some with the know how at the time had a different prospectus to the situation.

Yawn mate still you got nothing in 65 lost more men and land 71 you were made half in size siachin you tried your level best what happen you lost there too ia contorols sll of it kargil you were forced to step down hell you didnt even took your soldiers body back

 

[kingdurgaking]

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..
Indo-Pakistan War of 1965

This is the exact issue ( there history is twisted).. which they will never accept... Some truth will come out.. if Pakistanis have access to the sensitive 1965 war book which was brought by there own ISI and Army citing sensitivity...

 

[Windjammer]

Yawn mate still you got nothing in 65 lost more men and land 71 you were made half in size siachin you tried your level best what happen you lost there too ia contorols sll of it kargil you were forced to step down hell you didnt even took your soldiers body back

Oops, seems i have touched some sensitive issue, before digressing in every direction, reading the thread title should help.
Guess there is no mention in your history of some General not making it to the Lahore victory toast party.

 

[ramu]

What was Pakistan's Objective in 1965 : Take control of Kashmir ...

Did Pakistan succeed ? NO.

Indian aim was to use its infrastructure, men and money to defend the country.

Did India succeed ? Yes.

What happened in the air war was the initial attack by Pakistan that eliminated a large number of aircrafts even before they were used in anger. Pakistan was the agressor and it had the element of surprise with it. This article is such a misinformation medium that it should be shredded and fed to cattle.

 

[ramu]

Oops, seems i have touched some sensitive issue, before digressing in every direction, reading the thread title should help.
Guess there is no mention in your history of some General not making it to the Lahore victory toast party.

WJ, when he makes a valid point you have no answer and you digress. It has been a year but your habits don't change.

BTW, how is life treating you ?

 

[blackops]

Oops, seems i have touched some sensitive issue, before digressing in every direction, reading the thread title should help.
Guess there is no mention in your history of some General not making it to the Lahore victory toast party.

Dude deriously who is saying we didnt lost men and material but taking all the wars in account with independent authors we can see who did what and how the world saw it

 

[blackops]

And sorry for the typos am online through my cell

 

[Windjammer]

WJ, when he makes a valid point you have no answer and you digress. It has been a year but your habits don't change.

BTW, how is life treating you ?

Hey Ramu, how goes it , I see you still jumping in to salvage your country fellows, suffice that old habits die hard.
Life is surely honky dory in bony Scotland.

 

[Najam Khan]

There is a interesting thing Pushpindar singh's writes in book 'Fizaaya', IAF tried to attack Sargodha at least 10 times...none was successful. The author has shown base's aerial picture captured by them at a very high altitude....each time they tried to attack, the ever vigilant falcons changed their plans.

Oh BTW the encounter near Sangla Hill, Sargodha is a similar example!