Why has Pak lost against India every time?

[Adux]

Here I disagree with my Indian friends. Pak Army ( Northern Light Infantry) was fighting with their hands tied behind their backs. Ostensibly there was supposed to be no PA on the heights; it was supposed to be Mujahideen only. Therefore while India had the full might of the I55 mm BOFORS Artillery and IA Mirage2000, PA could not openly support the jawans of NLI. This was a defeat yes, but due to poltical factors. Nevertheless since war is an extension of politics; Kargil was a defeat and thats all that really matters. As Von Clauswitz says, best wars are the ones that are won without firing a shot.

I agree completly Niaz, If they had the might of the Pak Ground forces, the scenario would have been different, how dittermental it will be i am not sure,It would have made the indian recapture a lot tougher, it would have escalated the war, opening up other fronts.IA and the political front was so determined, so was the international community on indian side...anyways all that is irrelevent now.

Unless and until Pakistani Forces get their act together and make sure they have a substantial qaulitative advantage which will negate Indian Numerical advantage in the conventional sense,like in 60's and 80's, I am afraid in the event of war, superior or comparable technology and Superior Numbers will be on the indian side,therefore will give them definite advantage.

Adu

 

[blain2]

hiya there blain2,

I could agree to some of your viewpoints, but if it is a no holds barred war, that is not like kargil, I would be very much inclined to say IA could take it down, Pakistani Forces would be too scattered.The military gap between the two forces have never been this wide. That is my view point and patriotism comin to play to some extent.

And I agree with you, that arty and tank support siachin context can only do so much, but it can be effective lower heights(arty) if it all there is an encirclement plan. Without Utter failure from pakistani side, takin down siachin from pakistani hands by no means would be easy task,

IA wont allow the GOI to vacate heights, this year there has been no casualities in Siachen especially since the clothing, equipment and infrastructure has vastly improved.

Anyways, Can you give me link where Gen VP Malik said those words and in what context

Cheers

Adu

Friend I am sorry but you guys need a dose of reality. In terms of ground forces, the ratio is basically 1:1.5, the lowest ever in the Indo-Pakistan history due to the fact that IA has to maintain a fairly serious presence in IOK and then in the Northeast...you do not have enough boots on the ground to take Siachen in case of a full blown war. Across the IB and LoC, the Armies are matched up very evenly and this is an issue which came to fore during the 2002 buildup. In general too, I believe that Pakistani Armed forces are evenly matched in many aspects and actually exceed Indian Armed forces in a few ways...

I quote from an article called "Wrap science in the tricolour and you legitimise mediocrity" on Indian Express a while back:

ABOVE all, it results in dangerous technology gaps vis-a-vis the smaller, swifter and more pragmatic rivals. Both, the air force and the army today acknowledge that the Pakistanis have an edge over them in jamming, electronic counter measures, radar coverage and anti-aircraft missiles. Even their individual soldiers are better armed — better helmets, boots, kit-bags, personal weapons, wireless sets and so on. I am not betraying any secrets by speaking the truth because this is exactly what so many responsible generals and air marshals have been saying since Kargil.

Siachen and the lower lying areas of Pakistan are not the best places for conventional warfare (its a terrain very much like the one in Afghanistan) and the example of NATO forces getting bogged down in Afghanistan is the most likely scenario you would see IA getting into if they came across the IB to encircle Siachen.

The military gap on paper as you may think to be growing is actually very theoretical....qualitatively nothing has changed in terms of the land forces.....Pakistan Army matches up the IA very well on that account...air power could play a role in this but only a limited one just because most of the work has to be done by boots on the ground....IAF just does not have the capability for a shock&awe type of a campaign against Pakistan simply because air superiority would be highly contested...in terms of IAF providing CAS, at least at this point in time, IAF does not even have enough PGMs to make a substancial impact on the situation and that too in a tough terrain like the lower lying Northern Areas of Pakistan (leading upto Siachen Glacier on the Pakistani side).

Being on the defensive in the above terrain has immense advantages (as was amply proven in Kargil)...and given the fact that an encirclement would have to traverse Pakistani territory with Pakistani population (and that too a fairly independent, triabal population), things will be all extremely difficult (impossible to be exact) for the IA to get inside Pakistan and take over Siachen.

The VP Malik interview was printed in Rediff or so I believe on the anniversary of the Kargil war this year. I have tried searching for it and could not find it....the question was simply, if IA wanted to, could it take over Azad Kashmir? And his answer was no!

Will look for it...I am not fibbing, I read it thus I mentioned it.

 

[Adux]

Friend I am sorry but you guys need a dose of reality. In terms of ground forces, the ratio is basically 1:1.5, the lowest ever in the Indo-Pakistan history due to the fact that IA has to maintain a fairly serious presence in IOK and then in the Northeast...you do not have enough boots on the ground to take Siachen in case of a full blown war. Across the IB and LoC, the Armies are matched up very evenly and this is an issue which came to fore during the 2002 buildup. In general too, I believe that Pakistani Armed forces are evenly matched in many aspects and actually exceed Indian Armed forces in a few ways...

I quote from an article called "Wrap science in the tricolour and you legitimise mediocrity" on Indian Express a while back:




Siachen and the lower lying areas of Pakistan are not the best places for conventional warfare (its a terrain very much like the one in Afghanistan) and the example of NATO forces getting bogged down in Afghanistan is the most likely scenario you would see IA getting into if they came across the IB to encircle Siachen.

The military gap on paper as you may think to be growing is actually very theoretical....qualitatively nothing has changed in terms of the land forces.....Pakistan Army matches up the IA very well on that account...air power could play a role in this but only a limited one just because most of the work has to be done by boots on the ground....IAF just does not have the capability for a shock&awe type of a campaign against Pakistan simply because air superiority would be highly contested...in terms of IAF providing CAS, at least at this point in time, IAF does not even have enough PGMs to make a substancial impact on the situation and that too in a tough terrain like the lower lying Northern Areas of Pakistan (leading upto Siachen Glacier on the Pakistani side).

Being on the defensive in the above terrain has immense advantages (as was amply proven in Kargil)...and given the fact that an encirclement would have to traverse Pakistani territory with Pakistani population (and that too a fairly independent, triabal population), things will be all extremely difficult (impossible to be exact) for the IA to get inside Pakistan and take over Siachen.

The VP Malik interview was printed in Rediff or so I believe on the anniversary of the Kargil war this year. I have tried searching for it and could not find it....the question was simply, if IA wanted to, could it take over Azad Kashmir? And his answer was no!

Will look for it...I am not fibbing, I read it thus I mentioned it.

hey,

thanks for the reply blain2, i was actually waiting for it. I am not over-jingoistic i dont believe India can Kick ***..lol, but at the same time i hope you are not doing that yourself. It is very hard to acknowlege ones weakness.Esp in our political secanrio

I will give you couple of plus points i saw, India has been very sucessfull in integrating its boots and birdbrains together, achiving objectives, a very recent example being CONGo campign under the UN banner which recieved a lot reviews from differnt generals in NATO.No matter what you tell about China, I believe Pakistani's are better soldiers than them, That is the amount of respect I have for them, ie Politics aside.

Pakistani Airforces in its current form are no match for Indian counterparts, If i envision a war, I would have the Navy attacking from the Sea, Landing troops, opening up fronts in rann of kutch and Thar desert, Punjab as well as Kashmir. You are very wrong about the PGMs, LGB and other ground munitions present in the Indian Armoury. They are in ample quantity, The only thing i am happy about Indian Military Purchase is the admance on TOT.

India will get bogged down, but Pakistan would not be able to handle the pressure from all the fronts. Indian Accquistions of Landing Crafts, is a matter of concern for you as it certinally shows a change in mindset and doctrine.So is the plan to increase the number of marines.

Shock & Awe is a far cry for India, We are in no position to do it. Pakistan knows it very well, but at the same time;they cannot hold us for long, One of the main reasons Pakistan is not ready to sign a NO First Use policy of Nuclear Weapons.Boots on the ground is 1.5, But you are forgetting the Enormous Para-Military in India, Police and other structure is so huge, The same idea was used during Kargil, When a Para-Military and Police Contigent from The southern state of Kerala was sent. India has its options. Political Will in India is something which has always favored Pakistan.

Pakistan can Hold off, but the biggest threat to them is Time, They cant hold off for long.

I really wish i could structure my reply as well as you. Forgive me if have put my points here and there.

Just a suggestion : Please dont compare yourself with the Chinese, I believe military speaking They have more to learn from you than vice versa. they might have the toys, but not the vision. Even the toys are not the good. Indian Generals are more interested in your command structure, Planning and vision than Chinese. We are lucky in this case cuz of our British legacy.

Adu

 

[Adux]

I just read yours again,

I agree with you India Cant take siachin, unless and until it secures area surrounding in a very subtantial way.All out of War, Time is Pakistan's Enemy.

Adu

 

[vnomad]

Once Pakistan sits on the glacier, just like it sat on positions in Kargil, it would have to be a unilateral withdrawl....no amount of Indian action can get it back. Pakistan first of all would never allow IA to come across to encircle the glacier...you can't shove Tanks and Artillery all over that terrain...the only thing you can bring to bear is air support but that too goes only so far......Gen VP Malik was asked if IA can go into Azad Kashmir and take it over (essentially meaning the same route that IA would need to take to get to the Glacier from the Pakistani side) and he emphatically stated NO! So lets not get too carried away with what the IA can do....

I'd like to discuss it with Gen. Malik if I could. I did not imply a direct assault from the Pakistani side. I never referred to an assault on Siachen it was an assault on Pakistan administered Kashmir I was talking about.

Indian re-occupation of Kargil was only made possible because Pakistani forces were told to vacate the heights....its was not Indian Military pressure, rather diplomatic pressure...there is only so much that you can achieve with military force.

There is no way the infiltrators would have been able to survive up there. Not with the IA field arty regiments hammering their positions day and night. The Indian Artillery fired over 250,000 shells, bombs and rockets during the Kargil conflict. Approximately, 5,000 Artillery shells, mortar bombs and rockets were fired daily from 300 guns, mortars and MBRLs.
This is in addition to the assaults carried out by the IA infantry and strikes by the IAF.

 

[blain2]

There is no way the infiltrators would have been able to survive up there. Not with the IA field arty regiments hammering their positions day and night. The Indian Artillery fired over 250,000 shells, bombs and rockets during the Kargil conflict. Approximately, 5,000 Artillery shells, mortar bombs and rockets were fired daily from 300 guns, mortars and MBRLs.
This is in addition to the assaults carried out by the IA infantry and strikes by the IAF.

Vnomad,

IA took over at max 5 positions on the Kargil front...Pakistani units were on the watersheds along the entire LoC and had occupied close to 120 or so big and small positions....had PA wanted to, it could have sat in regardless of the firepower being brought down. Not all IA positions were immune to PA artillery fire...your fire support was made possible only on those positions which had a rather deep ingress thus stretching Pakistani logistics.

For the level of Artillery brought down, IA had to actually mothball many of the other FH-77s. There was definetly an impact on the overall Artillery efficacy along the LoC and IB for other units.

Secondly, IA was forced to concentrate Artillery fire on some of the positions and it did so simply because it could not afford to do the same along the entire front...this was done to ensure that at least some of the heights with direct oversight of the Kargil Leh hwy could be interdicted. In doing so, IA ran out of 155mm ammo right in the middle of the campaign and had to import more.

I'd like to discuss it with Gen. Malik if I could. I did not imply a direct assault from the Pakistani side. I never referred to an assault on Siachen it was an assault on Pakistan administered Kashmir I was talking about.

Taking Siachen is hard enough, you can forget about going into AK! You can't use massed armoured columns to get in that terrain. The local population dynamics as well as the positioning of the Pakistani forces is as such that IA would be meeting formidable resistance. That area which falls under the FCNA is probably one of the most heavily militarized areas of Pakistan along the Indian border.

In my humble opinion, both undertakings are impossible militarily...the same goes for any Pakistani attempts of seizing IOK or Indian occupied part of the glacier.

 

[sword9]

Vnomad,

IA took over at max 5 positions on the Kargil front...Pakistani units were on the watersheds along the entire LoC and had occupied close to 120 or so big and small positions....

The 5 positions were hill complexes occupied by company + strength, deployed in section posts. The 120 odds posts include section posts that made up these hill complexes. Tiger hill was made up of 6 such posts & Tololing complex was made up of two spurs, with 6 posts on the main Tololing spur and 7 posts on the left spur.

had PA wanted to, it could have sat in regardless of the firepower being brought down.

Not likely, looking at the results. The NLI were human not made of stone.
Lets look at the deployment of the NLI in Op Badr and the places they were evicted from, and places where they remained, as generally claimed on the internet.

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 80 Brigade sector.
Mushkoh valley - Tiger hill complex - NLI evicted
Dras - Tololing 5148 height complex - NLI evicted
Kaksar subsector (south of Dalunnag) - NLI evicted

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 62 Brigade sector.
Batalik/Yaldor subsector - Includes Jubar top, 4812, 5203 and Muntho Dalo at the rear near the LOC - NLI evited from all these hights.
Chorbat La & Turtok - NLI evited.

The battles on these features mauled 4 battalions of the NLI. Were you refering to NLI withdrawal from logistic bases?

Not all IA positions were immune to PA artillery fire...

What positions are you refering to? Only the NH 1A and areas along it were under PA observation.

your fire support was made possible only on those positions which had a rather deep ingress thus stretching Pakistani logistics.

You have lost me here. What has IA arty range got to do with the length of your line of communication?

For the level of Artillery brought down, IA had to actually mothball many of the other FH-77s. There was definetly an impact on the overall Artillery efficacy along the LoC and IB for other units.

Now that is guessing and hoping.

Secondly, IA was forced to concentrate Artillery fire on some of the positions and it did so simply because it could not afford to do the same along the entire front...this was done to ensure that at least some of the heights with direct oversight of the Kargil Leh hwy could be interdicted.

The heights were taken piecemeal, a luxury granted since there were no re-enforcements or counter-attacks coming from Pakistan.

In doing so, IA ran out of 155mm ammo right in the middle of the campaign and had to import more.

Do you have any source to coroborate this claim?

 

[Contrarian]

Even if they did or did not.
Like i posted above. IA got its leassons froM Kargil and were implemented for a change.

They got Smerch MRBL's after kargil. And all you know the field trials going on for the arty's. The israeli and swedish guns cometing.

Like i said, IA got its heavy lessons from Kargil and all have been used in a constructive form. IA will be so so much better prepared next time in any such mountanous conflict. They are re establishing their technological superiority in the Army over PA. you can judge that from the army modernization programme. And the acquisitions going on.

All of IA's arty regimens are now going to be 155mm. THey are simply removing the old guns as the could not be upgraded to 155mm std. ALL the arty guns!
I hope you can now gauge the fact. They are setting up an immense C4I network with Israel's help.

I specially like the new chief's smart moves by leaking reports to the media to put pressure on the govt! Both IAF and IN chiefs did this! !

The Inidian Armed Forces are going in for SUCH a huge overhaul, spending so much money, you would think they plan to go to war very soon!

 

[Adux]

The 5 positions were hill complexes occupied by company + strength, deployed in section posts. The 120 odds posts include section posts that made up these hill complexes. Tiger hill was made up of 6 such posts & Tololing complex was made up of two spurs, with 6 posts on the main Tololing spur and 7 posts on the left spur.

Not likely, looking at the results. The NLI were human not made of stone.
Lets look at the deployment of the NLI in Op Badr and the places they were evicted from, and places where they remained, as generally claimed on the internet.

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 80 Brigade sector.
Mushkoh valley - Tiger hill complex - NLI evicted
Dras - Tololing 5148 height complex - NLI evicted
Kaksar subsector (south of Dalunnag) - NLI evicted

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 62 Brigade sector.
Batalik/Yaldor subsector - Includes Jubar top, 4812, 5203 and Muntho Dalo at the rear near the LOC - NLI evited from all these hights.
Chorbat La & Turtok - NLI evited.

The battles on these features mauled 4 battalions of the NLI. Were you refering to NLI withdrawal from logistic bases?

What positions are you refering to? Only the NH 1A and areas along it were under PA observation.

You have lost me here. What has IA arty range got to do with the length of your line of communication?

Now that is guessing and hoping.

The heights were taken piecemeal, a luxury granted since there were no re-enforcements or counter-attacks coming from Pakistan.

Do you have any source to coroborate this claim?

Sir,

Did you hear about UN commanders commending Indian Forces after congo forces abandoned their post, Indian Army and Airforce together cleaned up the area, 75 rebels killed with 0 casualities on our side. Mi25 was used extensively along with army. Showing a very good integration of forces. What can we deduce from this very good display by the indian forces.

 

[blain2]

The 5 positions were hill complexes occupied by company + strength, deployed in section posts. The 120 odds posts include section posts that made up these hill complexes. Tiger hill was made up of 6 such posts & Tololing complex was made up of two spurs, with 6 posts on the main Tololing spur and 7 posts on the left spur.

Even if you include the hill complexes with multiple posts, it still does not even come close to the many other positions taken over along the frontage. As I mentioned, the positions taken over by the PA included many that were vacated unilaterally by the PA. There is no denying that.

Not likely, looking at the results. The NLI were human not made of stone.
Lets look at the deployment of the NLI in Op Badr and the places they were evicted from, and places where they remained, as generally claimed on the internet.

You keep on going back to the point about the positions taken back by IA...who is debating that? The number of positions taken over by the Pakistani side was enough to keep the IA busy till the winters of 2000 had they tried to take them over.

Also "as generally claimed on the Internet" is a skewed argument. Most of the stuff on the Internet in any case is biased Indian propaganda mixed with hyped up jingoism about this being a great military victory etc. The truth is far from it.

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 80 Brigade sector.
Mushkoh valley - Tiger hill complex - NLI evicted
Dras - Tololing 5148 height complex - NLI evicted
Kaksar subsector (south of Dalunnag) - NLI evicted

The below are areas of intrusion opposite PA's 62 Brigade sector.
Batalik/Yaldor subsector - Includes Jubar top, 4812, 5203 and Muntho Dalo at the rear near the LOC - NLI evited from all these hights.
Chorbat La & Turtok - NLI evited.

The battles on these features mauled 4 battalions of the NLI. Were you refering to NLI withdrawal from logistic bases?

The above are the areas of intrusion as claimed by the Indians to have been cleared. There were other positions along the LoC taken over during the same operation that were unilaterally left by the Pakistani side. Taken in the appropriate context, the ones you mention are a small fraction of the total.

The battles on these features mauled 4 battalions of the NLI.

Mauled 4 battalions worth? Who says so aside from one sided Indian publications? PA did not lose more than 1 bn worth of men during the entire operation. Individual companies from the NLI units may have received mauling due to the intensive Arty fire, however in turn, they too dogged various Indian units sent to dislodge them.

What positions are you refering to? Only the NH 1A and areas along it were under PA observation.

"Areas along it" is what I am referring to. This is why until the ceasefire, aside from the positions stated above, many were still under Pakistani control.

You have lost me here. What has IA arty range got to do with the length of your line of communication?

The farther in the ingress was, the further away it was from own arty support (at least from a Pakistani standpoint). Not sure where you brought in the point about IA arty range?

Also my point was actually about the concentration of a rather large proportion of Indian Med regts. into the above mentioned areas. Approx 130 or so 155mm guns were moved to support Indian 121 bde. Don't tell me that there was no imbalance on the Indian side with so much Arty being concentrated in one area. Not saying that you guys were left bereft of Arty support along the IB, rather the possibility of concentrating this kind of firepower against other positions taken over was limited (not taking into account other guns being mothballed to support the wear and tear on the deployed guns). Thus there was more focus on the positions that had incurred the deepest ingress across the LoC while leaving the majority of others untouched.

Now that is guessing and hoping.

See above.

The heights were taken piecemeal, a luxury granted since there were no re-enforcements or counter-attacks coming from Pakistan.

Agreed on no re-enforcements coming from the Pakistani sides, but counter-attacks happened throughout till the very end. The NH posthumously awarded to a Pakistani Capt was just for such ops. They went on till the very end.

Do you have any source to coroborate this claim?

The task of reliable logistics and induction of technology has become a challenge and the Army displayed its unhappiness during the Kargil War when massive imports of ammunition and supplies had to be resorted to from South Africa, Russia and Israel especially for the 155 mm gun.
http://www.indiadefence.com/OFB.htm

There were many other references to the same.

 

[sword9]

Even if you include the hill complexes with multiple posts, it still does not even come close to the many other positions taken over along the frontage. As I mentioned, the positions taken over by the PA included many that were vacated unilaterally by the PA. There is no denying that.

You keep on going back to the point about the positions taken back by IA...who is debating that? The number of positions taken over by the Pakistani side was enough to keep the IA busy till the winters of 2000 had they tried to take them over.

Now lets not start throwing fits all over again, I do not know who you are till you give me reason to follow protocol.

Also "as generally claimed on the Internet" is a skewed argument. Most of the stuff on the Internet in any case is biased Indian propaganda mixed with hyped up jingoism about this being a great military victory etc. The truth is far from it.

Tell me something, you chaps have had some of the best plans since 1948, 1965 and 1999, but still manage to bungle up in the end. Why?

The above are the areas of intrusion as claimed by the Indians to have been cleared. There were other positions along the LoC taken over during the same operation that were unilaterally left by the Pakistani side. Taken in the appropriate context, the ones you mention are a small fraction of the total.

If you look at the maps, we have given the regions of intrusion, however, since you all never claimed to be there officialy there are no maps from your POV. It would help if you could give names of the areas, if you can help it.

Mauled 4 battalions worth? Who says so aside from one sided Indian publications?

The bodies of men and POWs from those units.

PA did not lose more than 1 bn worth of men during the entire operation.

Is that a small amount.

Individual companies from the NLI units may have received mauling due to the intensive Arty fire, however in turn, they too dogged various Indian units sent to dislodge them.

Yes Indian units did suffer in the initial stages, but not after the scale and level of the intrusion was realized.

"Areas along it" is what I am referring to. This is why until the ceasefire, aside from the positions stated above, many were still under Pakistani control.

Which areas?

The farther in the ingress was, the further away it was from own arty support (at least from a Pakistani standpoint). Not sure where you brought in the point about IA arty range?

It should'nt have been a problem since your OPs were sitting at prime real estate.
The furthest intrusion was of 8 km from the LOC and most pak FDLs were 2-3 Km across the LOC (on the Indian side).

Why were'nt light batteries catered for? ...since Musharraf was a gunner, he should have known that.

Also my point was actually about the concentration of a rather large proportion of Indian Med regts. into the above mentioned areas. Approx 130 or so 155mm guns were moved to support Indian 121 bde. Don't tell me that there was no imbalance on the Indian side with so much Arty being concentrated in one area. Not saying that you guys were left bereft of Arty support along the IB, rather the possibility of concentrating this kind of firepower against other positions taken over was limited (not taking into account other guns being mothballed to support the wear and tear on the deployed guns). Thus there was more focus on the positions that had incurred the deepest ingress across the LoC while leaving the majority of others untouched.

The stuff that came form the plains were from strike corps not in immediate contact with the enemy, stuff like the MBRLs and some medium regiments.

Agreed on no re-enforcements coming from the Pakistani sides, but counter-attacks happened throughout till the very end. The NH posthumously awarded to a Pakistani Capt was just for such ops. They went on till the very end.

You know section and platoon minus counter-attacks don't count.
Capt. Karnal Sher Khan, made a brave but desperate attempt to counter attack with 20 odd men, but it was too small a force and had no fire support, and hence was doomed.

The task of reliable logistics and induction of technology has become a challenge and the Army displayed its unhappiness during the Kargil War when massive imports of ammunition and supplies had to be resorted to from South Africa, Russia and Israel especially for the 155 mm gun.

Don't take it word for word, its a generalised OFB bashing article. The Bofors ammo was low not because we fired too much, but because there was a ban on Bofors since to the 1988 due to the kick back scandal. The Russian sold us Krasnopol smart ammo, and the Israelis gave us the Barak. After the war the ban on Bofors was lifted.

The 130mm medium regements had more than enough ammo to last the war.

 

[blain2]

Even if they did or did not.
Like i posted above. IA got its leassons froM Kargil and were implemented for a change.

They got Smerch MRBL's after kargil. And all you know the field trials going on for the arty's. The israeli and swedish guns cometing.

Like i said, IA got its heavy lessons from Kargil and all have been used in a constructive form. IA will be so so much better prepared next time in any such mountanous conflict. They are re establishing their technological superiority in the Army over PA. you can judge that from the army modernization programme. And the acquisitions going on.

All of IA's arty regimens are now going to be 155mm. THey are simply removing the old guns as the could not be upgraded to 155mm std. ALL the arty guns!
I hope you can now gauge the fact. They are setting up an immense C4I network with Israel's help.

I specially like the new chief's smart moves by leaking reports to the media to put pressure on the govt! Both IAF and IN chiefs did this! !

The Inidian Armed Forces are going in for SUCH a huge overhaul, spending so much money, you would think they plan to go to war very soon!

There is upgrading going on both sides. The difference is that the Indian defence establishment is a bit more open about procurement, whereas the Pakistan side like it kept under the wraps.

Pakistan is also evaluating its next gen 155mm Artillery. Your point with regards to IA replacing all of the other calibers aside from 155mm is an interesting one. It is one that requires considerable time and money. Lets see how that pans out.

Like i said, IA got its heavy lessons from Kargil and all have been used in a constructive form. IA will be so so much better prepared next time in any such mountanous conflict. They are re establishing their technological superiority in the Army over PA.

Lessons learnt is a two way street. As far as technological superiority over PA, I am not sure how you are going about that? As I have mentioned many times over, PA and IA in terms of quality are pretty much at par and that will not change in the future.

I do not see any major superiority on the Indian side on the land forces side...you will have qualitative edge and that wont change....quality wise, both have very similar capabilities, plus, minus here and there.

 

[blain2]

Now lets not start throwing fits all over again, I do not know who you are till you give me reason to follow protocol.

I could care less if you follow protocol or not to be very honest. I am not the one getting all bent out of shape here.

Tell me something, you chaps have had some of the best plans since 1948, 1965 and 1999, but still manage to bungle up in the end. Why?

Bungle up to the point of keeping you guys on your toes. That is the point of these conflagarations from time to time. For as long as the Kashmir issue remains, such issues will arise and admittedly to the detriment of both sides, but such is the cost of resolving the Kashmir issue for Pakistan.

If you look at the maps, we have given the regions of intrusion, however, since you all never claimed to be there officialy there are no maps from your POV. It would help if you could give names of the areas, if you can help it.

Absolutely, why should the Pakistani side reveal anything about its operational planning? To bolster your propaganda about the intrusions? The LoC is not IB....thus the differences exist in what we think is legitimately a contentious area. Why should Pakistan accept any Indian control over the LoC? It helps Pakistan to keep the LoC up for discussion for as long as we do not accept any of the Indian positions. Kargil was part of Pakistan prior to the 1971 war...going by "Maps", why does the Indian side not do the honorable thing by returning the area to Pakistan?

The bodies of men and POWs from those units.

Bodies of men tell you that you "mauled" 4 NLI bns? Nice joke. How many PoWs did you guys have? Not more than 10 from what I can recall. Nicely exaturated to the point of making it sound like 4 bns of the paramilitary NLI were decimated by the Mighty Indian Army.

Is that a small amount.

No even one man is a great loss, however in the context of overall conflict, IA definetly lost quite a lot more.

Yes Indian units did suffer in the initial stages, but not after the scale and level of the intrusion was realized.

Yes but the initial stages lasted a while...until IA realized that infantry in frontal assaults was not going to yield anything and then relied on the Artillery to soften up the positions. In any case, a perfect example of bungling up by way of underestimating the opposition and sending many, many young men to their deaths.

Which areas?

All along the FCNA areas of responsibility....the positions were taken up in quite a few sectors.

It should'nt have been a problem since your OPs were sitting at prime real estate.
The furthest intrusion was of 8 km from the LOC and most pak FDLs were 2-3 Km across the LOC (on the Indian side).

Yeah the OPs sitting on the prime real estate did pretty good for as long as they were there...interdicting traffic on NH-1. Obviously like others, the men on the OPs also became casualties. The ones that were closer were not all taken over by the IA action. That is my point. Conceed that and we can move on instead of going rounds and rounds over the same point.

Why were'nt light batteries catered for? ...since Musharraf was a gunner, he should have known that.

For that matter why did the IA not use Arty in the initial phases of the war? I am sure there were many on the IA side who thought that the job could be done better by softening up the positions prior to the infantry slogging through to the positions. You plan and think its ok until you are in the middle of it...in any case, FCNA had fire support in the form of 105mm and 25 pdrs and later on additional med arty (130mm) was brought in. In any case, stop insinuating that Musharraf was the actual planner behind this. Musharraf was not the one sitting in the MO directorate. The Arty in that area is an integral part of the FCNA and its suitable for its defensive needs. The point simply is that in many cases, the OPs were manned by men and officers who actually faught on to the last man. That impacted the accuracy and effectiveness of Pakistani arty fire. Many of the positions did not receive support due to these issues.

The stuff that came form the plains were from strike corps not in immediate contact with the enemy, stuff like the MBRLs and some medium regiments.

You pulled at a minimum, 6 Fld regts and 9 Med regts of arty (plus 2 more Med regts providing a battery each for this effort) out from strike corps only?? Come on, lets get real here. I am sure you had another 1000 FH-77s in reserve at that point.

You know section and platoon minus counter-attacks don't count.
Capt. Karnal Sher Khan, made a brave but desperate attempt to counter attack with 20 odd men, but it was too small a force and had no fire support, and hence was doomed.

The positions were manned with section strength in certain cases...obviously you can't expect a larger counter-attack to come given the terrain. Read my point about the OPs suffering casualties for the point about no fire support.

Don't take it word for word, its a generalised OFB bashing article. The Bofors ammo was low not because we fired too much, but because there was a ban on Bofors since to the 1988 due to the kick back scandal. The Russian sold us Krasnopol smart ammo, and the Israelis gave us the Barak. After the war the ban on Bofors was lifted.

The 130mm medium regements had more than enough ammo to last the war.

[/QUOTE]

Hmm ok so if I post something that is in disagreement with you, then the onus is on me to not believe it?...(eventhough I have stated that this was not in one news report, but in many others as well). Fairly typical to be very honest.

 

[sword9]

I could care less if you follow protocol or not to be very honest.

Rather unbecoming, and disappointing that all you have in mind is confrontation. A marked contrast to officers like MuradK sir.

I am not the one getting all bent out of shape here.

Really lets see...

Bungle up to the point of keeping you guys on your toes. That is the point of these conflagarations from time to time.

How does it serve your national interest?....and not forgeting the near mutiny you all had in the shia units after the way things turned out. We can leave out the international isolation that it put your nation in.

There was more damage than good done. We were not the ones hopping in the end.

For as long as the Kashmir issue remains, such issues will arise and admittedly to the detriment of both sides, but such is the cost of resolving the Kashmir issue for Pakistan.

Its an obsession towards destruction, and breach of trust of the agreement signed on 17 Dec 72, stating that..
"In Jammu and Kashmir, the Line of Control resulting from cease fire on 17th December, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides undertake to refrain from threat of use of force in violation of this Line."

Absolutely, why should the Pakistani side reveal anything about its operational planning? To bolster your propaganda about the intrusions? The LoC is not IB....thus the differences exist in what we think is legitimately a contentious area. Why should Pakistan accept any Indian control over the LoC? It helps Pakistan to keep the LoC up for discussion for as long as we do not accept any of the Indian positions.

Accepted.

Kargil was part of Pakistan prior to the 1971 war...going by "Maps", why does the Indian side not do the honorable thing by returning the area to Pakistan?

I am not one to give history lessons, but the answer to your query lies in events after the December 1971 during the Delineation of the Line of Control, by teams led by Lt Gen PS Bhagat, PVSM, VC for India and Lt Gen Abdul Hamid Khan S Pk, SQA for Pakistan.

Major areas captured by Pakistan (specific to J&K), was in Chamb, and for India there were major gains in Kargil, Turtok and Poonch sectors. Lt Gen PS Bhagat, recommended to India that the hill regions captured should be swapped for Chamb, Pakistan accepted this proposal, and gains in Kargil, Turtok and Poonch sectors were kept and Chamb given to Pakistan.

Bodies of men tell you that you "mauled" 4 NLI bns? Nice joke. How many PoWs did you guys have? Not more than 10 from what I can recall. Nicely exaturated to the point of making it sound like 4 bns of the paramilitary NLI were decimated by the Mighty Indian Army.

Keeping denying reality, its your perogative, just as your army did in 1988 in Baltistan, and Zia paid the price. In 1971 the Pakistan nation paid a bigger price. Now how many PAF officers were arrested for mutiny?....50 as per some news reports. How many are shia? Were the NLI made cannon fodder since they were shia? If not how many ethnic NLI troops got decorated, almost each one deserved one for what they were put through.

No even one man is a great loss, however in the context of overall conflict, IA definetly lost quite a lot more.

The loss is soothed by the achievement of the objective. Mission fulfilled.

Yes but the initial stages lasted a while...until IA realized that infantry in frontal assaults was not going to yield anything and then relied on the Artillery to soften up the positions. In any case, a perfect example of bungling up by way of underestimating the opposition and sending many, many young men to their deaths.

That was due to poor intelligence, the infilrations were thought to be militants and not regular troops.

All along the FCNA areas of responsibility....the positions were taken up in quite a few sectors.

Yeah 80, 62 & 323 Bde elements.

For that matter why did the IA not use Arty in the initial phases of the war?

See above, we thought that they were militants at first. We don't use arty for COIN ops.

In any case, stop insinuating that Musharraf was the actual planner behind this. Musharraf was not the one sitting in the MO directorate.

Op Badr was his op, if it succeeded then he would get the accolades not the DGMO, hence in loss he faces the brickbats not the DGMO.

You pulled at a minimum, 6 Fld regts and 9 Med regts of arty (plus 2 more Med regts providing a battery each for this effort) out from strike corps only?? Come on, lets get real here.

You are mixing up arty assets of a mountain div that was moved in and has remained there.

The positions were manned with section strength in certain cases...obviously you can't expect a larger counter-attack to come given the terrain. Read my point about the OPs suffering casualties for the point about no fire support.

Point taken.

Hmm ok so if I post something that is in disagreement with you, then the onus is on me to not believe it?...(eventhough I have stated that this was not in one news report, but in many others as well). Fairly typical to be very honest.

Still its an interesting debate.

 

[Srirangan]

I think because PA never learns from it's mistakes.
PA has built a delusion of invincibility around itself.
It always overestimates itself & underestimates IA.
Pakistani population is brainwashed from childhood and from their Pak studies.
PA runs the Army- which is fine,since this is what an army is supposed to do. BUT it also runs the Government, the Economy, the biggest Real Estate Business, schools, factories. It's (retired & serving officers) are head of all the corporations, and the civilians are treated like 2nd class citizens.

No! They are right!

Pakistanis are tall, white, brave meat eaters.
India is weak, thin dark vegetarians.

Yes yes!