The War Correspondents.

[Windjammer]

Regarding, 1965 Indo-Pakistan Air War, so much has been written, published and claimed by both sides but how did the world media reported this war makes an interesting read. I have accumulated following reports from various newspapers and networks.


SUNDAY TIMES, London, September 19, 1965.

"Pakistan has been able to gain complete command of the air by literally knocking the Indian planes out of the skies if they had not already run away.
Indian pilots are inferior to Pakistan's pilots and Indian officer's leadership has been generally deplorable. India is being soundly beaten by a nation which is outnumbered by a four and half to one in population and three to one in size of armed forces".

 

[Windjammer]

Peter Preston, The Guardian, London.
September 24, 1965.

"One thing I am convinced of is that Pakistan morally and even physically won the air battle against immense odds.
Although the Air Force gladly gives most credit to the Army, this is perhaps over-generous. India with roughly five times greater air power, expected an easy air superiority. Her total failure to attain it may be seen retrospectively as a vital, possibly the most vital, factor of the whole conflict.
Nur Khan is an alert, incisive man of 41, who seems even less. For six years until July he was on secondment and responsible for running Pakistan civil airline, which in a country, where now means sometime and sometime means never, is a model of efficiency. He talks without the jargon of a press relations officer. He does not quibble about figures, immediately one has confidence in what he says. His estimates proffered diffidently, but with as much photographic evidence as possible, speak for themselves. Indian and Pakistani losses, he thinks are in something like the ratio of ten to one.
"The Indians had no sense of purpose, the Pakistanis were defending their country and willingly taking greater risks. The average bomber crew flew 15 to 20 sorties. My difficulty was restraining them, not pushing them on".
" This is more than nationalistic pride. Talk to the pilots themselves, and you get the same intense story".

 

[Windjammer]

Patrick Seale, The Observer, London.
September 12, 1965.

"Pakistan's success in the air means that she had been able to deploy her relatively small army___ professionally among the best in Asia___ with impunity, plugging gaps in the long front in the face of each Indian thrust.
By all accounts the courage displayed by the PAF pilots is reminiscent of the bravery of the few young and dedicated pilots who saved this country from Nazi invaders in the critical Battle of Britain during the last war".

 

[pak-yes]

Just i wish that in the future Pakistani pilots would repeat the history blowing Indian mki's on the ground.Israel style.

 

[Windjammer]

Roy Meloni, Correspondent of ABC,
September 15, 1965.

"I have been a journalist now for 20 years and want to go on record that i have never seen a more confident and victorious groups of soldiers than those fighting for Pakistan right now.
"India is claiming all out victory, i have not been able to find any trace of it. All i can see are troops, tanks and other war material rolling in a steady stream towards the front.
If the Indian Air Force is so victorious, why has it not tried to halt this flow?
The answer is that it has been knocked from the skies by Pakistani planes. These Muslims of Pakistan are natural fighters and they ask for no quarter and they give none.
In any war, such as the one going on between India and Pakistan right now, the propaganda claims on either side are likely to be startling, but if i have to take bet today, my money would be on Pakistan side.
Pakistan claims to have destroyed something like one third of the Indian Air Force, and foreign observers, who are in a position to know say that the actual kills may be even higher, but the PAF authorities are being scrupulously honest in evaluating these claims. They are crediting PAF only those killing that can be checked and verified from other sources.

 

[New Shivaji]

For all these victories what does pakistan have to show off ??

India does have Bangladesh to show off .

 

[Windjammer]

Everett G Martin, General Editor, Newsweek,
September 20 1965.

"One point particularly noted by military observers is that in their first advances the Indians did not use Air power effectively to support their troops. By contrast, Pakistan, with sophisticated timing swooped in on several Indian bases and destroyed dozens of planes without any resistance from the Indians.
By the end of the week, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own".

 

[ice_man]

@windjammer please give him a source so he can just be quiet!

& as for "bangaldesh" to show off my friend you involved yourself in a civil war! in other words backstabbed and you are PROUD OF IT???? hmmmm interesting view point

 

[Windjammer]

INDONESIAN HERALD,
September 11 1965.


"The chief of Indian Air Force could no longer ensure the safety of Indian air space. A well known Indian journalist, Frank Moraes, in a talk from All-India Radio also admitted that Indian Air Force had suffered severe losses and it was no use hiding the fact and India should be prepared for more losses.........".

 

[Windjammer]

Whatever satisfies you, I am not a history man. I like in current, history is for learning lessons that it, and seems like we have learned it well.

My dear, what ever floats your boat,
You may learn from history, but you also build on your proud heritage,
Only future will reveal who has reaped the benefits.

 

[mrwarrior006]

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.

 

[mrwarrior006]

go through this link

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/20694-1965-war-different-legacy.html

 

[Windjammer]

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.

Perhaps you would also care to disclose the figure of Indian losses.
If i recall correctly, it was Indian PM Shastri who perused a ceasefire known as Simla agreement and Pakistan agreed as it also was keen to pursue the path of peace.

 

[Windjammer]

For future today will be history, between you use to be not like this, what happened?
I mean all I am seeing you do now a days is hate India campaign. I remember your post use to be well balanced.

Indi, instead of being merely juvenile, i try and post material with substance. Otherwise i feel one looses their credibility.
I regret that you feel i am on India bashing mission. If anything in my short stay, i have discovered MODS are pretty strict when it come to hate mail. REGARDS.

 

[mrwarrior006]

go through this link

http://pakistaniat.com/2007/09/06/1965-war-a-different-legacy/