Why Pak army entered so late into the 1948 war of Kashmir?

[MastanKhan]

Good so see that at least one more member knows about this though this info is there in Altaf Gauhar's book only if one bothers to read. For making mention of tribals looting, and its affect on Kashmir movement, I was awarded one (and only so far) negative rating by an ethnic member who blamed me of being racist. Lets see if after reading this he also gives you a negative rating or not.

Hi,

Let me be a little more clearer----the fact was that the superiors were begging the lashkar please stop looting this small city---there is a 1000 times more loot and plunder to be had if that is what you wanted just 12 miles ahead---.

Now---were all the people in the lashkar corrupt looters---absolutely not----there were many an honorable pushtun in that lashkar ( not enough ) but they were as helpless as the superiors---.

This has been the history of the lashkar even 10 years ago---they started hunting the terrs and then start making peace once getting paid----.

A nation with a military does not need any lashkar. These private armies need to be disbanded.

 

[Chakram Indian]

Tribal invasion is a disputed fact and Pakistan didn't have a functional Army till the mid 50s.

thats bogus ...........

Pak army invaded balochistan also

 

[Samandri]

Hi,

The general was the reason for the delay---.

The reason there maybe not mention of the tribals is to hide the shame of most of them----. What happened was just 10 0r 12 mils from Srinagar----the tribals starting looting a small town----the professionals were begging them to move into sri nagar and take it----but greed and shortsigtedness overcame nationalism---indian military was given roughly 12 hours of respite and they were able to land troops in sri nagar---.

The tribal lashkar is the casue of this major problem----for that reason I am against all kind of tribal lashkars---. Their goals are only dictated by greed---.




There is nothing wrong with his face. He looks like a respectable well dressed man----.

I am not talking about that delay at baramullah, of two days according to brigadiar akbar khan. The two days stay at baramulla happened on november 1947. In the same month India enters into the war. From november 1947 to may 1948 , why pak army didnt enter into the war and forwarded tribals to face indian army with armoured vehicles and air force for whole 5 months?. Why blaming tribesmen, who were not an army, for the failure at very first month while the war was stretched to janaury 1949?. Historians tell us that indian army found tribesmen difficult enemy in terrain of kashmir while the war went into favour of india when pak army entered war on May 1948, after 5 months delay. From May 1948 to janaury 1949, pak army lost many territories that tribals had previously wrested for them. Sir let go of karachiite mindset for an instance and you would realize that only and only pak army is to be blamed. Pashtuns did a good job in their capacity in wresting azad kashmir and skardu from india. Dont malign heroes of kashmir.

 

[Pride]

I still feel whatever happened at that time good or bad should be left there as it is and people on both side should have moved on but it was armed general who was busy in arm wrestling and started attack in 1965. This is the reason we had so many wars. I dont have problem with either side of Kashmir people are having, lets make it international border and move on. Pakistani generals and politicians utilized kashmir issue way more than necessary and it was the main reason for involvement of IA in such large role in1971. Also, making G&B as pakistan's state and gifting Karakoram area to China lost the case for Pakistan.

I am not talking about that delay at baramullah, of two days according to brigadiar akbar khan. The two days stay at baramulla happened on november 1947. In the same month India enters into the war. From november 1947 to may 1948 , why pak army didnt enter into the war and forwarded tribals to face indian army with armoured vehicles and air force for whole 5 months?. Why blaming tribesmen, who were not an army, for the failure at very first month while the war was stretched to janaury 1949?. Historians tell us that indian army found tribesmen difficult enemy in terrain of kashmir while the war went into favour of india when pak army entered war on May 1948, after 5 months delay. From May 1948 to janaury 1949, pak army lost many territories that tribals had previously wrested for them. Sir let go of karachiite mindset for an instance and you would realize that only and only pak army is to be blamed. Pashtuns did a good job in their capacity in wresting azad kashmir and skardu from india. Dont malign heroes of kashmir.

You know that IA did not get a chance to fight with Tribals.. Dont you? Tribals were mere tools by PA and dont have sufficient weapon. If Nehru doesn't come in between then story would have been different. Also, it was your heroes who killed, raped and looted people and this is the reason first generation of Kashmiri were always with India.

 

[halupridol]

Pashtun warriors entered into Kashmir on october 1947. Indian army entered into kashmir to deal with tribesmen on november 1947 while pak army entered into the war after five months, in May 1948.
1- Why few thousands ill-equipped tribesmen were forwarded to face Indian army with tanks and air force for whole five months?. What were the activities of pak army in this interval?.
2- On official website of Pak army, on page about 1948 war of kashmir, there is not a even single mention of pashtun tribals. What does it mean?. They want to tell us that tribals acted independently and pak army had nothing to do with them? Or that "fodders" are not worthy of mention and credit?.
Kashmir War 1947 - 49

Edit: Was general gracey the reason of that long delay? Why general gracey was not fired for insobordination?

1-once british gen. of PA opted against sending troops in kashmir,,,,the idea of lashkar came in....
compared to pukhtuns,apart from a big mouth, martial paindoos of Pakistan had nothing to show in terms of guts n glory
thus the lashkar was made up of tribals(pukhtoons)
2-they want to show the world that tribals acted independently,,,,n ofcourse,tribals were used as canon fodder,the equipment provided to them and there omission from PA records,explains that,,,,,they were expendable,,somethng which PA can afford to forget.nothing more ,nothing less

 

[Samandri]

I still feel whatever happened at that time good or bad should be left there as it is and people on both side should have moved on but it was armed general who was busy in arm wrestling and started attack in 1965. This is the reason we had so many wars. I dont have problem with either side of Kashmir people are having, lets make it international border and move on. Pakistani generals and politicians utilized kashmir issue way more than necessary and it was the main reason for involvement of IA in such large role in1971. Also, making G&B as pakistan's state and gifting Karakoram area to China lost the case for Pakistan.


You know that IA did not get a chance to fight with Tribals.. Dont you? Tribals were mere tools by PA and dont have sufficient weapon. If Nehru doesn't come in between then story would have been different. Also, it was your heroes who killed, raped and looted people and this is the reason first generation of Kashmiri were always with India.

Abay read the operational history of 1948, tribesmen were even assissting gilgat scouts in seige of skardu, while all the combats of indian army till May 1948 are with tribals. While poonch was defended by combined forces of poonchis and tribesmen

 

[ghoul]

Kashmir was liberated by ex-British Indian army officers. Tribals only assisted in bolstering the ranks of existing rebels, who were led by a Sudhan. The domino effect of rebellion was initiated by Gilgit Baltistanis and the chaos that erupted in Punjab and rest of the India. Qabaylis are said to have fought chiefly in Bagh, Muzafarabad and the Kashmir valley sector. Mirpur and Bhimber were liberated exclusively by the native rajputs(rajas). They were persuaded into a "Jihad" by ex-Indian national army officers Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib ur Rahman Khan(famously known as "Fateh-e-bhimber").

There's a widespread propaganda that qabaylis liberated Kashmir and that the local people were born cowards incapable of fighting for themselves. It's blatant revisionism and ANP style delusional bigotry, nothing else. AJK rebellion was started by a Sudhan, and qabaylis and Tanolis only bolstered their forces. Qabaylis didn't fight in southern AJK(Azad Kashmir). The Chibh Rajas of Mirpur and Bhimber are born warriors. The defeated and routed the Bhangi Missal of Sikhs twice in Mirpur, and were only invaded by Dogras after Gulab Singh Dogra killed their king at an invitation via treachery. One of the worst and most dreaded, but undeniably brave, terrorist of Pakistan, Ilyas Kashmiri was a Chibh Raja. The guy who threw Taliban soldiers off helicopters in Swat, General Haroon Aslam(SSG) is also a Chibh Raja.

1-once british gen. of PA opted against sending troops in kashmir,,,,the idea of lashkar came in....
compared to pukhtuns,apart from a big mouth, martial paindoos of Pakistan had nothing to show in terms of guts n glory
thus the lashkar was made up of tribals(pukhtoons)
2-they want to show the world that tribals acted independently,,,,n ofcourse,tribals were used as canon fodder,the equipment provided to them and there omission from PA records,explains that,,,,,they were expendable,,somethng which PA can afford to forget.nothing more ,nothing less

You don't know anything about AJK war. The main rebels of Kashmir liberation war were Sudhans and Rajas; who were both designated martial races. Google Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib-ur-Rahman Khan. I forgot the name of that Sudhan rebel, whose forces were bolstered by Qabaylis.

 

[halupridol]

You don't know anything about AJK war. The main rebels of Kashmir liberation war were Sudhans and Rajas; who were both designated martial races. Google Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib-ur-Rahman Khan. I forgot the name of that Sudhan rebel, whose forces were bolstered by Qabaylis.

sirji,my post was for samandri bhai n his specific question,,,,,,,non tribals may have been in key posts but anyway the bulk of the lashkars were tribals

 

[Samandri]

1-once british gen. of PA opted against sending troops in kashmir,,,,the idea of lashkar came in....
compared to pukhtuns,apart from a big mouth, martial paindoos of Pakistan had nothing to show in terms of guts n glory
thus the lashkar was made up of tribals(pukhtoons)
2-they want to show the world that tribals acted independently,,,,n ofcourse,tribals were used as canon fodder,the equipment provided to them and there omission from PA records,explains that,,,,,they were expendable,,somethng which PA can afford to forget.nothing more ,nothing less

I have to agree with you on this. Tribals got used like cannon fodder by pakistan and now pakistanis are argueing that tribal intervention was for loot and plunder at baramullah, and that they have nothing to do with them. Intestingly it was performance of pak army which was very bad from May 1948 to janaury 1949. Pak army actually had lost 1948 war of kashmir, the initial sucesses were due to pashtun tribesmen against dogra forces.
I am not a fan of bacha khan but his face palm made sense as same brigadier akbar khan from charsada was involved in killing of wazir tribe in 1937 operation. Akbar khan exploited wazir-mehsud differences. Brigadiar ayub khan started operation against faqir of ipi and his wazir tribesmen, while brigadiar akbar khan led rival mehsuds to kashmir. We pashtuns had not learnt our lessons, we are pawns in the games of players. We are desposible tissue paper.

 

[ghoul]

sirji,my post was for samandri bhai n his specific question,,,,,,,non tribals may have been in key posts but anyway the bulk of the lashkars were tribals

Wrong. The bulk was that of Sudhans, Tanolis and Khakhas and Bombas. And no Tribal fought in Kotli, Bhimber and Mirpur sector(souther Kashmir). It was exclusively fought by local rajput militias.

 

[Samandri]

Kashmir was liberated by ex-British Indian army officers. Tribals only assisted in bolstering the ranks of existing rebels, who were led by a Sudhan. The domino effect of rebellion was initiated by Gilgit Baltistanis and the chaos that erupted in Punjab and rest of the India. Qabaylis are said to have fought chiefly in Bagh, Muzafarabad and the Kashmir valley sector. Mirpur and Bhimber were liberated exclusively by the native rajputs(rajas). They were persuaded into a "Jihad" by ex-Indian national army officers Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib ur Rahman Khan(famously known as "Fateh-e-bhimber").

There's a widespread propaganda that qabaylis liberated Kashmir and that the local people were born cowards incapable of fighting for themselves. It's blatant revisionism and ANP style delusional bigotry, nothing else. AJK rebellion was started by a Sudhan, and qabaylis and Tanolis only bolstered their forces. Qabaylis didn't fight in southern AJK(Azad Kashmir). The Chibh Rajas of Mirpur and Bhimber are born warriors. The defeated and routed the Bhangi Missal of Sikhs twice in Mirpur, and were only invaded by Dogras after Gulab Singh Dogra killed their king at an invitation via treachery. One of the worst and most dreaded, but undeniably brave, terrorist of Pakistan, Ilyas Kashmiri was a Chibh Raja. The guy who threw Taliban soldiers off helicopters in Swat, General Haroon Aslam(SSG) is also a Chibh Raja.



You don't know anything about AJK war. The main rebels of Kashmir liberation war were Sudhans and Rajas; who were both designated martial races. Google Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib-ur-Rahman Khan. I forgot the name of that Sudhan rebel, whose forces were bolstered by Qabaylis.

Its true, poonch uprising is a fact. It triggered the war. I think the poonchis started armed resistance on august-september while tribesmen entered into kashmir on 28 october. Poonchis and tribesmen tried to hold poonch as long as they could but they were bound to fail in the absence of pak army.

 

[halupridol]

I have to agree with you on this. Tribals got used like cannon fodder by pakistan and now pakistanis are argueing that tribal intervention was for loot and plunder at baramullah, and that they have nothing to do with them. Intestingly it was performance of pak army which was very bad from May 1948 to janaury 1949. Pak army actually had lost 1948 war of kashmir, the initial sucesses were due to pashtun tribesmen against dogra forces.
I am not a fan of bacha khan but his face palm made sense as same brigadier akbar khan from charsada was involved in killing of wazir tribe in 1937 operation. Akbar khan exploited wazir-mehsud differences. Brigadiar ayub khan started operation against faqir of ipi and his wazir tribesmen, while brigadiar akbar khan led rival mehsuds to kashmir. We pashtuns had not learnt our lessons, we are pawns in the games of players. We are desposible tissue paper.

bhai saab,,,u were not the first in history n nor will u be the last.
fact of the matter is pukhtoons have a reputation similar to gurkhas in fighting,,,,,paindoos cud never compensate that.also PA/GOP cud easily deny any participation with tribal lashkars doing there job.

Wrong. The bulk was that of Sudhans, Tanolis and Khakhas and Bombas. And no Tribal fought in Kotli, Bhimber and Mirpur sector(souther Kashmir). It was exclusively fought by local rajput militias.

ok!tribals did nothing...it was all locals

 

[Samandri]

bhai saab,,,u were not the first in history n nor will u be the last.
fact of the matter is pukhtoons have a reputation similar to gurkhas in fighting,,,,,paindoos cud never compensate that.also PA/GOP cud easily deny any participation with tribal lashkars doing there job.

They are denying it, there is no mention of any role of pashtun tribesmen (or sudhans etc) on official website of Pakistan army, the page there on 1948 war is filled with performance of pak army only. They even awarded highest medal, nishan e haider, to a pak army soldier .

 

[KingMamba]

Pashtun warriors entered into Kashmir on october 1947. Indian army entered into kashmir to deal with tribesmen on november 1947 while pak army entered into the war after five months, in May 1948.
1- Why few thousands ill-equipped tribesmen were forwarded to face Indian army with tanks and air force for whole five months?. What were the activities of pak army in this interval?.
2- On official website of Pak army, on page about 1948 war of kashmir, there is not a even single mention of pashtun tribals. What does it mean?. They want to tell us that tribals acted independently and pak army had nothing to do with them? Or that "fodders" are not worthy of mention and credit?.
Kashmir War 1947 - 49

Edit: Was general gracey the reason of that long delay? Why general gracey was not fired for insobordination?

General Gracey was the main reason, he was not fired because for all his greatness Jinnah was not perfect. He made two critical mistakes during partition namely not throwing Gracey out when he refused orders and secondly not allowing Pashtun tribes to enter Punjab.

 

[ghoul]

bhai saab,,,u were not the first in history n nor will u be the last.
fact of the matter is pukhtoons have a reputation similar to gurkhas in fighting,,,,,paindoos cud never compensate that.also PA/GOP cud easily deny any participation with tribal lashkars doing there job.


ok!tribals did nothing...it was all locals

Don't be the typical passively aggressive Indian. I bet you're from UP or Bihar. And "paindoos" could not fight as good as Pashtuns or Gurkhas? Google Gakkhars. The first guerilla war in South Asia was fought by the peindoo Gakkhars against Sher Shah Suri, whose son was raping the women of weak Indians in Delhi. And not to mention that they won the war too along with inflicting heavy casualties on Sher Shah's army. All these Gurkha-Phurkas are recent mercenary races largely protected by their geography rather than some sort of extreme martialiness lol.

Oh and did I mention that Gakkhar cavalry was rated to be the best in all "upper India"? And Gakkhars are just one of the peindoo clans. I will mention Gheba, Janjua and Mair Minhas of Chakwal some other day. But I feel your pain. It must suck to belong to a weak race. This is what a racist anti-Indian gang in New Jersey once wrote:

"I'm writing about your article during July about the abuse of Indian People. Well I'm here to state the other side. I hate them, if you had to live near them you would also. We are an organization called the Dotbusters. We have been around for 2 years. We will go to any extreme to get Indians to move out of Jersey City. If I'm walking down the street and I see a Hindu and the setting is right, I will hit him or her. We plan some of our most extreme attacks such as breaking windows, breaking car windows, and crashing family parties. We use the phone books and look up the name Patel. Have you seen how many of them there are? Do you even live in Jersey City? Do you walk down Central avenue and experience what its like to be near them: we have and we just don't want it anymore. You said that they will have to start protecting themselves because the police cannot always be there. They will never do anything. They are a week [sic] race physically and mentally. We are going to continue our way. We will never be stopped."

Not to mention the colonial writers such as James Mills describing "the hindhus of India" as a weak, cowardly race. We paindoos have been called anything, but a coward. Lol.