Pakistan Army Information

[Ratus Ratus]

Originally Posted by enigma947

You are mixing LIC/Internal Security with a conventional war.

No I am not.

Moreover, we dont use helis to transport troops from one theater to another under 'normal' conditions.

I am not as naive as you would like to portray me. I was not referring to transport ex the local AO, but to embedded rotor transport at best else assigned rotor transport within the AO.

[xeric]

Originally Posted by Ratus Ratus

I am not as naive as you would like to portray me. I was not referring to transport ex the local AO, but to embedded rotor transport at best else assigned rotor transport within the AO.

Well if you yourself are assuming that you are naive, i can't help it out
Othertweise i never intend to make you feel 'insecure' lolzz.i m sory if you did.

Now Sir, i just gave you an exmple as you were talking of mechanizing evertthing that we have. We as a nation can't afford it. So what i was trying to make you understand was that most of our forces (espacially the Army) has to fight a "conventional and standard" war ( as for now-unless this WoT thing becomes a full time job for our military)

Now as i said something about the usage of helis for transportation, i was actually referring to the kind of spec ops and COIN ops being conducted by our Army in the Tribal regions, Yes! there we do need what you said 'Rotors' as the operations and situations demands as such, BUT when and as we under normal conditions have to fight a 'one to one' war with india (or any other intruder) we can't afford the luxuries that you have mentioned.

BTW we do have the kind of mechanization that we require as far as countering india is concerned! But as someone was talking here of a 3rd Armor Division and as you are suggesting us to go more 'mobile'-it won't hurt us..

[wave69]

Gentlemans,
You are again talking without seriously thinking what all this mech and raising another armored division is going to cost !!! My earlier messg was on this subject. I think non of you got the hint when I mentioned about how the British and French are maintaining their Milatary superirioty !!! not by raising armor div or infantary divs, but there NUCLEAR STRIK FORCE !!!

[xeric]

Originally Posted by wave69

Gentlemans,
You are again talking without seriously thinking what all this mech and raising another armored division is going to cost !!! My earlier messg was on this subject. I think non of you got the hint when I mentioned about how the British and French are maintaining their Milatary superirioty !!! not by raising armor div or infantary divs, but there NUCLEAR STRIK FORCE !!!

You are absolutely right when you say that raising an armored division and mechanizing is not a child's play. You are also right that maintaining a Nuke Strike Force is also of paramount importance, but i think you forgot that before india and Pakistan reach a nuclear threshold they have to fight a conventional war!!
What do you say..friend?

[wave69]

No No No, The whole goddamn idea of having a Nuclear deterent is not to have a WAR !!! kabish??? USA and USSR having big armies and thousand of Tanks and other equipment NEVER went to war , or did they??? India will not stage a war on pakistan when it knows for sure that it can be wiped out !!! You people are sounding that its OK to have short war... what the Hell all of you thinking , is it some wrestling match over the weekend... NO. its not.... any short war will push the country back decades economically,, how far do you want to go.. we are already living in 2nd century...

[xeric]

Originally Posted by wave69

No No No, The whole goddamn idea of having a Nuclear deterent is not to have a WAR !!! kabish??? USA and USSR having big armies and thousand of Tanks and other equipment NEVER went to war , or did they??? India will not stage a war on pakistan when it knows for sure that it can be wiped out !!! You people are sounding that its OK to have short war... what the Hell all of you thinking , is it some wrestling match over the weekend... NO. its not.... any short war will push the country back decades economically,, how far do you want to go.. we are already living in 2nd century...

Okay!
That's it. You are now slipping away from the topic and also from your mind.
What you want to say can be summarized in the following phrase: Minimum Credible Deterrence

We do have that deterrence and it is because of this that india can't come inside Pakistan even for an inch except just mongering and shouting as it did after Mumbai attacks.

Larger Armies are kept as a tool to deter the enemy.
The ideas behind this is, you spend Rs 1 today (have professional armed forces-of course to be effective they have to be large)to save Rs 5 (the event of War) tomorrow.

[wave69]

MR, Iam not sliping from mind, its you who have no damn idea what you are barking, which pind school did you go to , to learn ur economics???? I have never heard such a stupid analogy of saving money !!!! If you have Nuclear deterrence why in the world you will have a big army??? your thinking and understanding is extremly shallow !!!

[xeric]

Originally Posted by wave69

MR, Iam not sliping from mind, its you who have no damn idea what you are barking, which pind school did you go to , to learn ur economics???? I have never heard such a stupid analogy of saving money !!!! If you have Nuclear deterrence why in the world you will have a big army??? your thinking and understanding is extremly shallow !!!

Hey relax dude!
Getting emotional will not get you far on this forum.

So you want to suggest that as we have nukes we can disband all the armed forces, send the Army PAF and the Navy home, FC and rangers are also not required.

Just kep the ASFC (Army Strategic Force Command) intact so that when someone attacks us we can just nuke them. Wonderful!
Go see some doctor.

[wave69]

I dont need to see the doctor.. But what you need is more education.. Maybe you are one of those chaps who dont listen, learn or understand.. I have seen ur kind many times before,, believe me i have !!! People like you have one track mind with extremly limited vision !!! I have never suggested that you disband PA,PAF and PN (although not a bad idea) !!! we are in a race with india where we will never win !!! when do you think we should draw the line !! ha.. tell me if you have the answer..

[moha199]

Originally Posted by wave69

I dont need to see the doctor.. But what you need is more education.. Maybe you are one of those chaps who dont listen, learn or understand.. I have seen ur kind many times before,, believe me i have !!! People like you have one track mind with extremly limited vision !!! I have never suggested that you disband PA,PAF and PN (although not a bad idea) !!! we are in a race with india where we will never win !!! when do you think we should draw the line !! ha.. tell me if you have the answer..

Buddy first of all please choose the respectable words when you are talking to other members, No personal attacks please. Now coming to your post i am totally against your theory of cutting army size. Now you have only india as of your enemy but Pakistan poses more enemies then india! What if same way world come to us as they did to Iraq? answer me this question so i will further debate on your points. Please just give us the battle plane how could Pakistan encounter 1 million soldiers and the threat of getting nuke from NATO forces in case this happens??????????????

[Ratus Ratus]

From and including post #48 you are all going off into Never-Never land to join Peter Pan and Captain Hook.
Well done keep it up as it is now becoming mildly entertaining even if off the original topic.

getting nuke from NATO forces
Just love that one. Why would they bother to waste a nuclear bomb/missile on Pakistan, please tell.

I would have thought it more important to see why a new armoured Div needs to be created considering the ongoing problems along the westren border.

[Ratus Ratus]

Well if you yourself are assuming that you are naive, i can't help it out
Othertweise i never intend to make you feel 'insecure' lolzz.i m sory if you did.
Keep it up and you my just kill me with laughter.

My comment on naivety was a polite way to tell you I have enough years of expedience at command level in the military not to be naive.
I do apologise that it went over your head.
As for insecure, You would not know how to make me feel insecure.

Now Sir, i just gave you an exmple as you were talking of mechanizing evertthing that we have. We as a nation can't afford it. So what i was trying to make you understand was that most of our forces (espacially the Army) has to fight a "conventional and standard" war ( as for now-unless this WoT thing becomes a full time job for our military)

I was NOT talking of mechanising everything. In fact if you bother to read it correctly I was suggesting that instead of going full track go to motorised, that is wheeled based, systems.
There is room in both conventional and unconventional, read counter insurgency, warfare for motorised units. AT present and for I suspect the foreseeable future you will not be fighting sweet old India. They can not afford it and it may have a bit of a back lash at present with old USA.

Your understanding of COIN is limited. COIN goes beyond basic military fighting. COIN is a combination of military security and a process of reconstruction in simple terms.
Now it is necessary as S-2 was trying to say just to get to the military security level you will need to do some serious military fighting, which is not specifically COIN, it is counterinsurgency. Now counterinsurgency is a totally different ball game.

As to fighting a war with India I seriously doubt that will occur for at least 5 years if not more. If you care to note I said India will do a lot of sabre rattling but that is just to keep you, Pakistan, under stress and so far it looks as if that is succeeding. It is also taking many people’s mind of the most local and critical issues, your western border problems.

[xeric]

Originally Posted by wave69

suggested that you disband PA,PAF and PN (although not a bad idea) !!!

You really need a doctor!

[xeric]

Originally Posted by Ratus Ratus

Keep it up and you my just kill me with laughter.

I don’t need to kill someone who is already dead

My comment on naivety was a polite way to tell you I have enough years of expedience at command level in the military not to be naive.

I bet, I have more experience than you in the fields of command, staff and the execution!

I do apologise that it went over your head.

Please also accept my apology for not understanding your gullible ideas

As for insecure, You would not know how to make me feel insecure.

Lets leave this to others judgment….

I was NOT talking of mechanising everything. In fact if you bother to read it correctly I was suggesting that instead of going full track go to motorised, that is wheeled based, systems.

Oh wow, now you are trying to eat your own words.
Don’t tell me the difference between wheeled and tracked equipment.
BTW where did you specifically mentioned this precise form of mechanization..??

There is room in both conventional and unconventional, read counter insurgency, warfare for motorised units.

Done that a few years back!

AT present and for I suspect the foreseeable future you will not be fighting sweet old India.

We know that, come up with something new.

Your understanding of COIN is limited.

Thnx for the compliment.
BTW how many times have you fought an insurgency in Australia???
You sure have lots of experience in COIN Ops.

COIN goes beyond basic military fighting. COIN is a combination of military security and a process of reconstruction in simple terms.

Lovely! I like that. I think that’s exactly what I was trying to make Mr S-2 understand when you jumped in!

Now it is necessary as S-2 was trying to say just to get to the military security level you will need to do some serious military fighting,

If you have read my post carefully, you must have known that I never said that we are fighting in the tribals areas “un-seriously”

which is not specifically COIN, it is counterinsurgency. Now counterinsurgency is a totally different ball game.

We understand the difference quite well..... Now.

India will do a lot of sabre rattling but that is just to keep you, Pakistan, under stress and so far it looks as if that is succeeding.

I think if you replace the word Pakistan with india in the above referred sentence, you will probably get a better understanding of what actually is happening on ground!

BTW, we don’t need an expert on our internal security matters.
Thnx for your cooperation, but no thnx!!

[S-2]

I promised a response to some comments made by our and perceptions that I believe may be possessed by you reference the U.S. Army and marine/army infantry.

"i forgot you are from the great US military(no sarcsim please) and you don't use infantry and armor as we do in the sub-continent."

First, I'd argue that utilization is a function of need. To that end, most of the central operating tenets of combined arms operations IN ANY BATTLE ENVIRONMENT have been well-covered by our forefathers.

Whether you're engaged in a LIC, MIC, or HIC, we'll need a mix of forces on the battlefield-engineers, artillery, light and heavy infantry, armor, and attack aviation to succeed. These pure companies must be doctrinally inculcated to create "teams" (a formal military term in the U.S. Army's operational lexicon) of mixed infantry/armor platoons at the company level and "task force" at the battalion level. Thus any company or battalion level commander must be prepared to structurally integrate elements from other branches into a team or task force by order of higher headquarters.

This could include the allocation of an M1A2 company to an airborne infantry battalion, for example or vice versa. We routinely practice cross-attachments and do so to always optimize our available forces for the most likely contingencies from mission to mission.

Other armies operate the same from mission to mission. This "combined arms integration" is simply "best practices" management as it seeks to tailor local and flexible solutions to narrow requirements within a given area of operations. Nobody knows the ground so well as the battle commander, so he should have the freedom to shape his forces as necessary.

This is important because...

"For you and your force differentiating these two things might not possible because your forces are trained accordingly and are best suited for a specific type of operation."

This isn't remotely true. We operate to support global policies and obligations of the United States government under constraint of budget and law. We cannot afford to train, with the exception of our SOF, forces allocated to specific operations or mission type at the expense of others.

We are an expeditionary army-an extension of our marine corps, if you will. All of our forces- light, medium, or heavy must train to deploy into any possible contingency from peacekeeping and humanitarian aid (OOTW) through the full spectrum of conflict to global thermonuclear combat.

Our troops must be able to "throw the switch" from directing vehicle traffic in security ops through full blown urban combat back to patrolling a neighborhood at sunset.

A myriad of skills and sub-sets of skills encompassed just there and they must be sufficiently mentally and physically agile to do so quickly.

The army I trained in thirty years ago might have reflected some of your thoughts. We had a goodly number of guys who knew little else besides the Fulda Gap in central Germany and had spent near-half (if not more) of their careers there.

Different ball of wax now. When artillery batteries pull infantry patrols you know that we're adjusting to ground realities off a considerably broader skill-set than once was the case.

Just a couple of thoughts...