It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pakistan troops"In biggest ceasefire violation in 10 years"(India)

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 10:58 AM


You used to be sympathetic with China on your previous posts but i guess now you see the light China can't be trusted by anyone at all.

Here's something interesting i found on liveleak" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">The Six Wars to be fought by China in the coming 50 years

China's main motive is a 'superpower status' and economic development. China has the ingredients to be that.

However communist China has adopted methods which are not conducive to either superpower status or peace in the world.

I reckon communists will never be able to make China a superpower. This will happen only when China becomes a multi-party State.

I seems to me that communist China will throw itself and rest of the world into misery due to its retrograde policies.

posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 10:20 PM
The entire nuclear/missile program of Pakistan is based on Chinese transfers.

Pakistan's real missile arsenal consists of three Chinese missiles - M-9, M-11 and M-18. The rest (Ghauri etc) is just deception. Pakistan's local missile program is designed to fool the world that it has 'indigenous' missile making capability. Pakistan has no scientific or industrial base to make missiles.

India has invested very large sums, and built a lot of infrastructure to be able to build missiles. A nuke capable missile is a complex technology, which requires significant resources to master, in addition to technical and manufacturing prowess.

India has faced a number of difficulties along the way, including several failed tests, as is natural in a 'real' program.

It is true that India's early missiles suffered from several deficiencies. The issues included both accuracy and deployability. It took time to overcome these issues as each technology involved was complex and sophisticated.

However the fact remains that India overcame the difficulties and was inducting missiles based on contemporary technology by 2005. The real story in India's missile program is the 'short' range missiles - Agni I and Shaurya - both with a range of just 700 km. Agni I is the first solid fuelled quick reaction missile, but it still suffered from accuracy and deployability issues. These were fixed in Shaurya which is launched from canister, is solid fuel, and uses very advanced INS for navigation. The Prithvi-2 missile was improved in the meantime. The missile remains liquid fuelled but offers a remarkable variable range of 40-250km.

The conclusion - Pakistan does not have a significant advantage despite its efforts to acquire a pre-emptive nuke capability against India. Pakistan has lost the opportunity. Now with a considerably mature missile program, it is impossible for Pakistan to blackmail India on Kashmir.

posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:41 PM
Cross border raids -

Pakistan has used cross border raids by irregular forces in Kashmir since 1985 actively, and sporadically before that.

This policy has brought diminishing returns over time, as India has reinforced border regions with more troops and improved surveillance technology.

While Pakistan still retains the surprise factor in this area, the overall impact on Indian forces is not significant.

However what is not talked about is the steady rise in India's own commando forces that can respond in kind. India continues to build one of the largest commando force in the world. The force has not been utilized against Pakistan so far, but can be utilized.

posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:41 PM
Cross border raids -

Pakistan has used cross border raids by irregular forces in Kashmir since 1985 actively, and sporadically before that.

This policy has brought diminishing returns over time, as India has reinforced border regions with more troops and improved surveillance technology.

While Pakistan still retains the surprise factor in this area, the overall impact on Indian forces is not significant.

However what is not talked about is the steady rise in India's own commando forces that can respond in kind. India continues to build one of the largest commando force in the world. The force has not been utilized against Pakistan so far, but can be utilized.

posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 02:06 AM
Pakistan and Indian thinking

While indian army (and airforce to some extent) continue to publically worry about Pakistan, the political establishment is largely indifferent.

There is a good reason to it. The army keeps on losing men in tough terrain of the high himalayas, mostly due to weather and accidents. It will prefer a much lighter footprint. The air force worries about being called for 'close air support' and the fact of large number of shoulder fired SAMs in Pakistan's inventory. So defence forces do not have an incentive to go to war. India has no 'incentive system' in place for killing enemy soldiers as is present in Pakistan.

But the political establishment has largely written Pakistan off. The reason is continued mishandling of economy in Pakistan by its rulers. India knows that starting a war is one thing, sustaining it is another. While terrorism creates a problem for India, it is a headache but not a challenge. So while Pakistani PM may shout from the rooftops, I doubt anybody is listening in India.

edit on 26-10-2013 by GargIndia because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 12:13 AM
Rising precision attack capability of India

Three missiles - Brahmos supersonic cruise missile, Prithvi II short range ballistic missile, and Shaurya short range ballistic/hypersonic missile, all with advanced INS and GPS (GLONASS system), give India the capability to strike almost all targets of military significance with conventional warheads.

This puts Pakistan's army top echelons in crosshairs. This capability has been acquired rather recently - Prithvi II inductions began in 2003, Brahmos in 2009, and Shourya in 2011. Pakistan has no defence against any of these three missiles.

In addition, MLRS batteries can now target several Pak army bases, due to induction of longer range rockets.

As I said earlier, the most significant development is Shaurya missile. This missile can be launched from safe locations far from the border/battlefield, and can cover all targets of military significance. It is a Mach 6 missile that travels a highly modified ballistic trajectory, giving it characteristics of cruise missiles.

Of course India continues to have earlier stocks of Prithvi SS150, SS250, SS350, and Agni-1 missiles. These missiles are meant to be used with nuclear warheads. There is some talk that older Prithvi missiles are to be retired. This may mean that nuclear role is transferred to Agni-1. It is also likely that older Prithvi missiles are used in conventional role against large targets like army bases.

India has acquired smart shells from Russia, and has developed LGBs and smart shells locally as well.

All the above give a capability boost to Indian Army that is unprecedented in South Asia. Pakistan's army also has many precision weapons though its arsenal size will be limited by resources and lack of local development.

I reckon that Pakistan has no real offensive capability against India. The small scale skirmishes on the border and sometimes spectacular special force cross border raids do not tilt the balance in Pakistan's favour. If anything, these incidents increase the allocations and seriousness, that may ultimately work against Pakistan if the balloon goes up in near future.

posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 11:07 PM
India vs Pakistan military comparison

1. Pakistan's army has good firepower but low mobility. This was evident in 65 and 71 wars and subsequent mini wars of Siachen and Kargil. The problems are -
a. A shortage of integral air defence in armoured divisions.
b. Below par engineering support
c. Below par logistics

While PA fields impressive numbers of SP artillery pieces and good quality tanks, any spearhead into Indian territory is blocked due to the above three factors mentioned. A towed artillery piece is as effective in a defensive role. So India's lack of self propelled artillery is not such a big problem as it appears.

2. Pakistan prefers to fight in the mountains, where it's army has performed well. This is NOT tank or SP artillery territory. Pakistan's holding of weapons has a lot of historical baggage, as compared to operational needs. A lot of weapons have come as 'aid', deeply influenced by donor country's military strategy. This may not suit PA's operational requirements.

IA had no 'donor', so it has evolved largely due to operational needs. IA's equipment holding may not look impressive but is suited to its defensive mindset and operational requirements.

An example is 105mm field gun. India has large numbers of 105mm pieces for the mountains. This light gun can be carried by Mi-17 helicopters and emplaced where needed. The gun is cheap and locally made, and is quite effective against troop columns.

Pakistan has learned the hard way and is now imitating India's strategy.

3. Indian forces have better mobility due to a simple factor - better engineering support. Indian army has a vast engineering setup. While IA's BMP2 and BMP1 look poorly protected, they have very good mobility. PA's M113 and derivative IFVs have neither mobility nor protection.

Things have changed for Pakistan. Till the last war (71), India did not seriously defend Rajasthan and Gujarat. Pakistan raids in this area failed though. Now the situation is turned upside down as Pakistan will find itself unable to defend huge Thar desert areas which fall within its territory.

4. India has gone from offense to defense in Punjab. India was always defensive in Jammu and Kashmir. India has gone from defense to offense in Rajasthan and Gujarat. This change in strategy has big implications for PA. The first is the cost of war has gone up massively for Pakistan. Second is PA can no longer concentrate forces in Kashmir. PA's units in the north will be forced to move southwards, as India makes quick move through open desert towards the Indus river. PA simply does not have the means to stop IA there.

posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 09:23 PM
The All Important Nuclear Question

I have been reading Pakistani forums and articles for many months now to understand their thoughts on strategy.

Some Pakistani authors talk about using nukes on moving IA columns. (tactical use of nukes).

This strategy brings two factors into play:

a. The availability of nukes - To be able to use nukes tactically and strategically both, you need a very large number.

b. Escalation - India is clear that any attack on it using nukes will result in a massive nuclear counter-attack. India has never defined 'massive nuclear counter-attack' but I believe it represents 25-30 city busters. Each city buster is defined as a nuke that can cause between 50,000 - 100,000 deaths.

So the cost of a tactical nuclear strike is quite high, and it is not a viable option.

Most likely, we shall see a massive nuclear strike from Pakistan - which targets our own nuclear force as well as civilian and military establishments. Such strike will be responded to in an equally massive manner.

Pakistan may want to make a preemptive nuclear strike on India, but it does not have the means, and it will fail.

India was struggling with missile production for quite some time, where China had a massive lead. But India has finally cracked this vital area. Pakistan had better capability to deliver a nuclear missile into India for more than a decade, a time when India had mostly air dropped weapons. This asymmetry and opportunity could not be utilized by Pakistan when it was available. Now I see no way that Pakistan can make a preemptive strike.

posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 09:43 PM
War fighting under nuclear conditions

Can Pakistani army fight in the aftermath of nuclear attacks?

I see a rout as Pakistani army is simply not trained or equipped to fight in NBC environment.

While some elite PA units are well equipped, that does not apply to the whole army. In general, PA soldier is poorly paid and equipped, and has a tendency to run away when faced with superior enemy.

Kashmir war and the winner

My contention is that Pakistan has already lost the long term Kashmir war. This war may go on for some more time, as Pakistan's Army is unable to accept the defeat. But it will eventually accept.

Every war has a winner and loser. Kashmir war looks like a stalemate to a casual observer. But it is not in a careful analysis.

A winner/loser is defined by who has achieved its objectives. Pakistan's objective has been to annexe Kashmir. India's objective has been to stop Pakistan's from achieving that.

1947-2013 is 66 years. For 66 years, Pakistan could not achieve its objective. How much more time does it want?

However Pakistan's fixation on Kashmir and India has caused grievous damage to its social and economic conditions, which continues to reduce its ability to be a significant player on the world stage.

posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by GargIndia

Thank you for taking the time to post your perspective and thoughts. Wish I could give you more than flags !

posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 11:17 PM
Backers of Pakistan

We also need to analyze the backers of Pakistan to understand its military posture, how a poor and populous country has been 'used' by powerful outsiders for their own political ends.

USA was the first powerful backer, 'the protector of Saudi throne', who saw Pakistan as source of soldiers needed for Saudi army. USA provided military umbrella to Pakistan in return of Pakistan's services in the middle-east and central asia. USA provided massive military aid to Pakistan for a very long time - an aid that often represented 50% of official military budget. This backer got fed up after it discovered Pakistan's growing anti-USA activities. The alliance became a burden rather than an opportunity.

China is the second powerful backer. China considers entire Asia as its playground. China's overtures to Muslim states are well known. It saw Pakistan as a means to contain India, as well as to provide connections to the Muslim world. China's military aid to Pakistan has been growing over the years, and has overtaken USA in the last two decades. All critical military programs of Pakistan are now China oriented - battle tanks, artillery, anti-tank missiles, anti-ship missiles, SAMs, Fighters etc. China is the source of Pakistan's bomb design, as well as all 'real' ballistic and cruise missiles in Pakistan's inventory.

With a superpower and a 'near superpower' as its backers, it is natural for Pakistani generals to feel strong and important.

This is what India has faced over the years. The challenge to India's people and government has never been light. The fact that India has achieved a benign democracy in the face of such challenges must be appreciated by the world.

India has always acted with profound caution and reserve to all external challenges. India has never rushed to military options. This is the reason that India has been able to retain control over the north-east region despite an external guided insurgency. India's enablement of local people has created a political structure in those states that most local people are comfortable with. They have the freedoms that Chinese people can only dream of.

India as a nation

India is a young democracy. It has the flaws of democracies like others before it, but it also has the strengths of democracies like enablement of large percentage of people and economic dynamism. Our country is burdened by socialist policies of some of our early leaders which has reduced economic growth. These socialist policies continue as a large segment of the population has grown a vested interest in such policies. But beyond that, the country has evolved a significant and competitive economic structure.

For me the largest plus is evolution of a national identity and a national character. There was no 'India' before 1947. It was a complex mixture of British dominion and some 500 princely states. A lot of people doubted that India will stand up as a nation. Today, after 66 years, the experiment of India has sustained and endured, and created its unique national identity.

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 08:11 AM
The State of Pakistan

Please read the following article from the largest circulated newspaper of Pakistan:


1. "Pakistan collects Rs 200 billion in taxes out of which it pay 130 billion for loan servicing and balance 70 billion to military." (one US dollar = 107 pakistani rupee)

So it has no money to pay the bureaucracy, schools, hospitals etc. The deficit is filled by printing money which creates inflation and devalues the currency.

Can this country fight a nuclear war???? It can kill some Indians for sure but can it fight and win a nuclear war? War is very expensive. The equipment, ammo and fuel costs money. Each dead/injured soldier is a burden on the State as his family has to be paid for life.

India has actually cut military budget this year in view of tough economic conditions. Does India want war? NO. Although I can assure you India can win a war with Pakistan. But India has no desire to go to war.

edit on 1-11-2013 by GargIndia because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in