Kargil War Thread - VI

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ramana » 08 Oct 2017 02:06

X-post....
Rakesh wrote:Wow, I am sure BRF oldies remember how many artillery competitions were held in the past 20 years of BR's existence. And now to see this. A truly amazing day for India. A pretty interesting facebook excerpt on the use of artillery during the Kargil War...for some weird reason I am not able to copy the text from the link below. Sorry!

Facebook LINK




Manish_P wrote:Rakesh sir, here you go

#Know_your_hero

28 September, Artillery day, we are honored to make a post about one of the finest artillery officer of our time and a war hero of Kargil war - Maj Gen (R) Lakhwinder Singh (USM), Yuddha Sewa Medal

=================

The role of artillery in the battlefield during the Kargil war cannot be forgotten and will forever be etched in golden letters.

India’s victory in Operation Vijay was not achieved without major sacrifices. Three valiant officers and 32 brave soldiers of the Regiment of Artillery laid down their lives in the true spirit of Izzat-O-Iqbal. The problem faced by the Gunners was the rarefied air and strong wind currents in the upper atmosphere, the accuracy of the Bofors gun, especially over longer distances of 20 km or more, caused problems.

For this exceptional and exemplary valour and grit in heroic battles in Kargil, the chief of the army staff honoured 11 Infantry battalions, three units of Regiment of Artillery namely 141 Field Regiment, 197 Field Regiment and 108 Medium Regiment and two Reconnaissance and Observation Squadrons of the Army Aviation with special award of Unit Citations.

=========================

Maj Gen (R) Lakhwinder Singh was the commander of Artillery Brigade of India's 8 mountain division and known for few innovative tactics and pioneering 100 guns concept

================================

What he did was akin to using a sledgehammer to shell a peanut. After all when he has a powerful gun like Bofors, capable of hurling over 40 kg of deadly explosive to a distance of over 30 km, ever been used like a sharpshooter to knock down well-entrenched enemy soldiers sitting on top of peaks? Or which recent battle has seen over 100 artillery guns both big and small lined up and fired simultaneously to pulverise the enemy in a small target area into submission?

In a war the ends usually justify the means. Singh unabashedly admits that he took a page out of history to use what even his Corp Commander Krishan Pal describes as one of the most innovative artillery tactics to win a war.

He remembers reading how famous warriors like Babar and Ranjit Singh employed rows of master gunners to fire cannonballs directly at the enemy. His logic: if such simple tubes could be utilised in controlled direct firing then why not sophisticated gun systems?


So he first tried out the technique during the battle for Tololing. A battery of six guns were lined up and told to make direct hits at targets on top of the peak where Pakistani intruders were holed up. It made the final assault by the infantry much easier - casualties were lower too - to give India its first major victory in the Kargil war.

Yet it was on a neighbouring peak called Point 5140 where Singh's brigade demonstrated how an ancient war tactic still held good. Singh ordered all available guns, including Bofors, 105 mm field guns and 120 mm mortars, to line up.

In all they numbered over 100. He then told his gunners to fire them continuously at the positions held by Pakistanis on the heights. Singh even had rockets launched against them. So effective was the firepower that the infantry was able to regain the positions without a single casualty.


With the infantry getting more confident of the artillery's prowess it was even willing to cut down the safety margins and take some daring risks. Normally the soldiers stay at least 350 m away from a spot towards which the shells are directed. But with the guns proving so accurate they would call for shelling even when they ventured to within 50 m of the targeted enemy positions.

It was night when the brigade targeted Tiger Hill and the entire sky lit up like Diwali as they resorted to nonstop firing for several hours. The pounding saw the Pakistani soldiers running for cover though many of them were killed by the deadly fusillade. Intercepts of conversations had one of them saying: Hell has fallen on us.

The continuous firing made the infantry's task of capturing the hill much easier. Major-General Mohinder Puri, general officer commanding of the 8 Division, acknowledges that it was the preponderance of the artillery fire that helped us score many victories.

Credit - India today and Rediff


Rediff original article

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/defen ... 150726.htm

How artillery helped India win the Kargil war
July 26, 2015 13:53 IST

Accurate and sustained firepower against Pakistan during the Kargil War helped Indian soldiers to reduce the enemy to rubble, notes SD Goswami, defence spokesperson, ministry of defence.



The role of artillery in the battlefield during the Kargil war cannot be forgotten and will forever be etched in golden letters.

India’s victory in Operation Vijay was not achieved without major sacrifices. Three valiant officers and 32 brave soldiers of the Regiment of Artillery laid down their lives in the true spirit of Izzat-O-Iqbal. Pakistan lost is estimated 69 officers and 772 OR, mainly of Northern Light Infantry. Over 1,000 Pakistani soldiers were wounded.

The young company commander and artillery’s Forward Observation Officers led from the front by personal example and thus motivated their troops to perform outstanding acts of gallantry. For this exceptional and exemplary valour and grit in heroic battles in Kargil, the chief of the army staff honoured 11 Infantry battalions, three units of Regiment of Artillery namely 141 Field Regiment, 197 Field Regiment and 108 Medium Regiment and two Reconnaissance and Observation Squadrons of the Army Aviation with special award of Unit Citations.


By honouring these regiments the army acknowledged the immense part played by all the units of the Regiment of Artillery in the gallant fight to re-capture Indian territory from Pakistan intruders.

Despite the controversy over its induction, 155mm FH 77-B Bofors performed remarkably well and was mainstay of artillery in the operations. Its maximum range of 30 km enabled deep strikes on the enemy’s gun positions, administrative installations, ammunition dumps, and headquarters, besides neutralizing forward positions held by the intruders. By moving up these guns, 105mm field guns, 160mm and 120mm Mortars and 122mm GRAD BM 21 Multi Barrel Rocket Launcher’s into forward guns positions for ‘direct’ fire on enemy localities, literally under the nose of the enemy and thereby inviting certain enemy artillery fire onto themselves, the gunners exhibited unparalleled courage in battle.

The gun positions came under heavy enemy counter-bombardment from time to time, many a times causing serious casualties. But the gunners there stood fast and continued to respond to the requirements of the Battery Commander/ Observation Posts. It was unique in the history of 286 Medium Regiment that all its 18 guns barrels wore out their life in 25 days since Operation Vijay commenced. They continued to fire as extensively with newer guns that they received from 163 Medium Regiments while operations were on.

The Kargil conflict once again established beyond doubt that artillery firepower plays a major part in achieving victory on the modern battlefield. Accurate artillery fire reduces the enemy’s defences to rubble. Sustained artillery fire gradually wears the enemy’s resistance and ultimately breaks their will to fight. By systematically degrading the enemy’s fighting potential before a physical assault is launched, the artillery helped to reduce the casualties suffered by assaulting infantrymen. Throughout the offensive phase of Kargil conflict, artillery was called upon to respond to emerging situations and it did so with alacrity and telling lethality. The infantry battalions involved in the fighting were the first to acknowledge the immense debt of gratitude that they owe to their artillery comrades.

The Indian artillery fired over 2,50,000 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 while 9,000 shells were fired the day Tiger Hill was regained.

During the peak period of assaults, on an average, each artillery battery fired over one round per minute for 17 days continuously. Such high rates of fire over long periods had not been witnessed anywhere in the world since the World War II. Even during the World War-II, such sustained artillery firing was not common at all.

The men at the guns had blisters on their hands from carrying and loading shells and cartridges. Very few of them got more than a couple of hours of sleep in every 24 hours cycle. They had no time for proper meals and were often themselves under enemy artillery fire. Yet, they carried on relentlessly. No soldiers better than these exist anywhere in the world. Last but not the least artillery was, in fact, the prime killer since 80 per cent of the casualties suffered by the enemy were on account of artillery fire.


There were limited gun areas available for conventional deployment. Perforce, recourse had to be taken to split the batteries, often in two’s and three’s. At places there was a height differential of almost 40 to 50 feet between the first and sixth fun of a battery. On the other hand, there were occasions when guns had to be deployed wheel-to-wheel.

In the final analysis, while all arms and services contributed significantly to the concerted effort to evict the Pakistani regulars from Kargil sector, the victory belonged to the indomitable courage and selfless devotion to duty of the Indian infantryman and the overwhelming firepower of the artillery and the Indian Air Force.

SD Goswami



And one last one from Lt. Gen H.S. Panag(R)

The total casualties suffered by us during the Kargil War were 527 killed (out which 462 were due to actual combat) and 1363 wounded. This includes casualties of all troops in the Kargil battle zone. Approximately 30 Infantry Battalions took part in the operations. Assuming that 90 % casualties were from the Infantry, on an average each battalion suffered 16 killed 41 wounded ie just 6 % of the unit strength of approximates 800 personnel. Pakistan suffered approximately 453 killed and 665 wounded out of approximately 5000 soldiers in battle ie about 20% of the total strength. Pakistani casualties were unusually high due to our much higher artillery fire power.
Approximately 70% of our casualties were due to Pakistani artillery and mortar fire despite the meagre resources employed. These figures should have led to a serious debate with respect to the structure, organisation and equipment of our infantry battalions. Also, that better mortar and artillery locating systems were required for counter bombardment to neutralise enemy mortars and guns.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2058
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Prem Kumar » 08 Oct 2017 12:43

Moderation is a fatal thing;
Nothing succeeds like excess!

(I think it was Oscar Wilde who said this)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ramana » 09 Oct 2017 05:40

My wonderment is no cases of barrel burst or muzzle strikes?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9668
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 22 Nov 2017 19:26

Just a question does anyone if these 2 posts are Indian or Pakistani 34°32'00.0"N 75°40'28.5 and 34°31'56.6"N 75°40'49.0"E

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3401
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby saip » 22 Nov 2017 21:16

Aditya_V wrote:Just a question does anyone if these 2 posts are Indian or Pakistani 34°32'00.0"N 75°40'28.5 E and 34°31'56.6"N 75°40'49.0"E


Any reason? Google maps puts them in Pakistan.

viveks
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 17 Nov 2004 06:01

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby viveks » 23 Nov 2017 00:42

Here is my take on the Kargil episode after so many years of witnessing peace in the sub-continent area with the last major incident occurring in Nov, 2007. I think that the Indian Army should bring Gen. Musharraf and his fellow top brass into India and hold a trial, thereby sentencing him for being responsible for orchestrating an event that took out so many lives in our side as well as their side.

If you want to start a war, then you better have consensus among your fellow colleagues to see it to the end. They made decisions to murder soldiers in the name of serving the country. India retaliated ...and that sort of retaliation was an expected thing. Honestly, I dont think there was any surprise in that. They claim our response took them by surprise and live every single day being responsible for it. Nothing that was not out of the ordinary. Lives were lost...the war effort succeeded in our side.

He couldn't influence the PAF to participate which by far from is something of a failure from the onset. The Pakistani navy did also nothing. Gen. Musharraf and his fellow top brass who took the decision to occupy the Kargil Heights is nothing but a mass murderer living properly outside his country. They are criminals who should be brought to be accountable.

The action of PAF not taking part parallels our decision to not deploy the IAF in the Indo-China conflict. In our case, we were defending our territories and were loosing ground steadily. It is these clowns from Pakistan top brass who thought about a possible mis-adventure with us and are living scott free. When someone plans something like this, which is coming right from top order, there must be an inclination to see a full blown action. To not engage any of the other resources in the war amounts to an inclination of overseeing a mass murder of people who were brought in to the job in the first place.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1125
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 23 Nov 2017 03:32

viveks wrote:The action of PAF not taking part parallels our decision to not deploy the IAF in the Indo-China conflict. In our case, we were defending our territories and were loosing ground steadily. It is these clowns from Pakistan top brass who thought about a possible mis-adventure with us and are living scott free. When someone plans something like this, which is coming right from top order, there must be an inclination to see a full blown action. To not engage any of the other resources in the war amounts to an inclination of overseeing a mass murder of people who were brought in to the job in the first place.

The thing is in fog of war, the fire behind leadership is such that these actions become secondary. We are still not israel when it comes to determination in protecting our interests, forget it 20 years back(in '99)
The perfidy of Mush only deserves a gruesome and grisly death by some low level street goon

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9668
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Nov 2017 11:38

saip wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Just a question does anyone if these 2 posts are Indian or Pakistani 34°32'00.0"N 75°40'28.5 E and 34°31'56.6"N 75°40'49.0"E


Any reason? Google maps puts them in Pakistan.


These Posts are close to LOC where Pt 5353 should be? Through the valley gap from these posts you can probably see a very small stretch of NH1, to the east of this some of our Army tracks roads run close to them linking to our posts. From these posts the ridge lines are connected all the way till Tololing top.

If Pakistani, these posts are alarmingly well supplied and pretty big, ripe for some 155mm if Pakis try something funny next time in some other place along the LOC.

If you searching google maps from India, google maps will not recognize the LOC, so it will not tell which country, Pakistan, India or China in Kashmir. It probably tells you when searching from USA so you where the LOC is? Hopefully atleast when using google maps from USA if it is in our side of LOC at least it should say India.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9668
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Nov 2017 11:46

For those Outside India what does it say for these coordinates 34°31'32.0"N 75°48'18.1"E ?

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 23 Nov 2017 14:08

viveks...its was not a question of Mush not able to influence PAF...he did not keep them in loop for secrecy purposes. The PAF did mount sorties...but clearly could not cross LOC to protect its troops and influence outcome of the battles. The PAF was clearly at a disadvantage wrt IAF more than even today. PAF crossing LOC would be act of war ( same reason IAF did not cross LOC). Troops crossing LOC either way is of a lesser dimension than Air Forces crossing LOC. Crossing LOC by either air force would be a quantum escalation which neither side wanted espicially the Napakis. The whole thought was it will be localised action with a fait accompli to the indians ..

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 23 Nov 2017 14:11

the Indian retaliation was not as expected by Mushy..he thought that soon Indians will negotiate. ( This was the whole thought behind Kargil..that India will not retaliate so heavily). PN had anyway a little role to play...as compared to IN its is really puny and inconsequential. i am sorry your deductions are not quite correct.

viveks
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 17 Nov 2004 06:01

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby viveks » 23 Nov 2017 15:01

Our point of view is different. I read the same rhetoric coming out of those clowns as that coming out from you. You seem to be sympathetic to them even after they orchestrated so much blood shed. That mis-adventure was in itself an act of war. Why do you think our soldiers fought that battle...why do you think the IAF got involved. Was Kargil episode not an act of war against us? It brought our meat grinding machines into action. Your perception of them gives them the comfort of justification for their decision making process. Thereby asking people to go in...do their job...and then say...sorry...your on your own.

You talk of not crossing LOC. That pressure (or that notion of not crossing LOC) was put forth as a goal only by us. The top brass in Pakistan did not instruct the PAF to participate and assist in the ground operation. They were thus shying away from assisting the folks who were doing their jobs in the intruded Kargil heights. Do you really think that it was entirely impossible for a battle ready aircraft to intrude into our airspace and assist their ground folks in those days? If they wanted to do so, they would have their tactics ready even as we had ours.

Please do not argue further with me or try to correct my so properly termed deductions. It is my personal thought about the event. I think he and his fellow top people should be held accountable.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 23 Nov 2017 15:15

vivkes ..pipe down..dont lose ur shirt. How did u conclude I am sympathetic to the pakis?? listen to ACM Tipnis..read article by Kaiser Tufail. Use of air power takes war to another dimension and thats why Tipnis was reluctant to use it and sought GOI clearance and even then GOI said dont cross LOC since we wanted to keep the battle localised. PAF only flew to deter IAF from crossing LOC or going deep.They withdrew once their spares etc were going down and wanted to conserve in case full scale hostilties broke out. they did not cross LOC just as IAF did not cross LOC. that constraint did limit IAF's interdiction but they found ways to overcome it. I am only explaining the thinking behind the events. Did i say dont hold him accountable?? hang him for all i care :mrgreen:

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 23 Nov 2017 16:06

We did not cross the LOC because ABV, in his wisdom, decided to tie the hands of his own army and he decreed so. Maybe he thought it both good diplomacy as well as staying below the nuclear threshold.

musharraf did not keep the PAF and the PN in the loop because he planned a secret operation with only a very small handful of paki army brass in the loop. Whether he even informed nawaz shariff or not is still being hotly debated. The minute the operation went pear shaped, mushy started to whine and blame everyone but himself. He was a serious disaster for the pakis, vain and stupid, blaming all but himself even today.

PAF did not take to the skies because they feared grave losses from an already mobilized IAF spoiling for a fight and they did not want to provoke the IAF into any large scale retaliation.

PN stayed quiet because the IN had already mobilized. For some strange reason the pakis, even those in their controlled press seem to have a morbid fear of the IN, even to this very day.

Every paki soldier knew which way the ill wind was blowing and that a serious mistake had been made by a foolhardy, egoistical commander. The PAF and the PN actually did not have a dog in the fight, so to speak, because they were so completely and insultingly excluded by musharraf.

Most of the pakis who died on the heights of kargil were expendable shia soldiers thereby proving that even ten supermen sunni pakis are not worth a single paki shia.

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3401
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby saip » 23 Nov 2017 21:28

Aditya_V wrote:For those Outside India what does it say for these coordinates 34°31'32.0"N 75°48'18.1"E ?

Ok, thanks now I understand. Google maps shows this to be inside India approx 1000' from the LOC/Border. ( I am in the USA)

In the case of other two they are shown to be in Pakistan again about 1000' from the border.

What does this link show in India? TIA

Link

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9668
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Nov 2017 22:04

Logging in from mobile. It does not say anything just says dropped pin. In satellite mode you can zoom in and see those tents/miltary posts. Given the locations I suspect these posts are very close to point 5353

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya G » 24 Nov 2017 01:31

chetak wrote:We did not cross the LOC because ABV, in his wisdom, decided to tie the hands of his own army and he decreed so. Maybe he thought it both good diplomacy as well as staying below the nuclear threshold.

....


What ABV did right was to issue clear instructions to the armed forces "do what you have to but not cross LoC".

It allowed the political leadership to confine the scope of the conflict and work towards achieving victory - which we did. We could however have done cross-LoC air strikes at least as that does not require boots crossing over and occupying land, and hence in a way is less escalatory.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 07:07

Aditya G...cross LOC strikes by air is highest on escalatory ladder..and thats the reason why IAF didnt bomb across LOC...artillery was anyway shelling cross LOC. Arty shelling/boots across LOC is less escalatory than cross LOC by air.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ramana » 24 Nov 2017 09:12

manjgu wrote:Aditya G...cross LOC strikes by air is highest on escalatory ladder..and thats the reason why IAF didnt bomb across LOC...artillery was anyway shelling cross LOC. Arty shelling/boots across LOC is less escalatory than cross LOC by air.


Also Swaran Singh negotiated some agreement about combat aircraft near LOC.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9668
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Nov 2017 10:35

Just trying to map LOC which is unmarked in google maps in India. Can some one tell me What does google maps says for this cordinates 34°31'07.0"N 75°42'33.7"E and this one 34°31'17.8"N 75°42'19.8"E.

Availability of satellite images makes the aam aadmi appreciate what was done in Kargil far better than it was 17 years ago.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 11:08

Aditya G wrote:
chetak wrote:We did not cross the LOC because ABV, in his wisdom, decided to tie the hands of his own army and he decreed so. Maybe he thought it both good diplomacy as well as staying below the nuclear threshold.

....


What ABV did right was to issue clear instructions to the armed forces "do what you have to but not cross LoC".

It allowed the political leadership to confine the scope of the conflict and work towards achieving victory - which we did. We could however have done cross-LoC air strikes at least as that does not require boots crossing over and occupying land, and hence in a way is less escalatory.


What ABV did is a matter of history. No one is disputing that. Right or wrong is a matter of conjecture and sacrificing lives for mere optics and political expediency is not the way to support the IA, at least not until battlefields are airconditioned like lootyens drawing rooms.

Imagine a scenario where we had crossed the LOC and held position just deep enough to encircle the pakis on the heights. With our troops dug in and the pakis aware that we would not advance further than what was required for the encirclement, would the nuke threshold been breached??

Surely we would have been able to politically and diplomatically justify that in any international forum, especially when countering an unprovoked aggression that was wantonly thrust upon us by a stupid, egoistic and warmongering general, more so just when the political pundits on both sides were opening up promising new initiatives on the peace front??

would we have taken lesser casualties?? and perhaps inflicted more damage?? and evicted the buggers much earlier than what was achieved without crossing the LOC??

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1358
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Manish_P » 24 Nov 2017 12:01

Have we gained territory as a result of the Kargil war ?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 13:02

Manish_P wrote:Have we gained territory as a result of the Kargil war ?


There was some unpublicised IA action after kargil where the pakis were vacated from many vantage points and pushed further back.

net net we have gained territory.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 14:03

chetak ..are you out of ur mind !! even if we had trapped entire paki intruding force , there was 0 zilch chance of N exchange. I dont believe that a knowledgeable hand like you can make the N exchange comment/question. There was 0 loss of territory for Pakis...its heartland was not threatened.. the NLI was shia and expendable..worst case NLI could been killed or captured and returned soon after. Crossing the N threshold is not so easy whatever the Paki bluster. on the LOC, land is routinely captured or fought for , exchanged. soldiers dying is also nothing special..both sides suffered huge casualties but the N thingy never came up.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1358
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Manish_P » 24 Nov 2017 14:15

Right, Chetak sir. Pushing the LOC westwards. That IMVHO is the Victory for us, of the Kargil war.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 14:27

manjgu wrote:chetak ..are you out of ur mind !! even if we had trapped entire paki intruding force , there was 0 zilch chance of N exchange. I dont believe that a knowledgeable hand like you can make the N exchange comment/question. There was 0 loss of territory for Pakis...its heartland was not threatened.. the NLI was shia and expendable..worst case NLI could been killed or captured and returned soon after. Crossing the N threshold is not so easy whatever the Paki bluster. on the LOC, land is routinely captured or fought for , exchanged. soldiers dying is also nothing special..both sides suffered huge casualties but the N thingy never came up.


It was ABV covering all his bases. That's all. In any situation appreciation, there are multiple points and perceptions depending on who is doing the appreciation and why.

If this is your appreciation, I respect it. I would not deride you for it.

My inputs and views may be colored by various factors, as indeed are yours or anyone else's for that matter. From those embedded colors emerge the appreciation.

I merely said that the nuke threshold may have been a major consideration for the govt of the day in international political and diplomatic terms to show the amrekis and the whiteys that we were mindful of their backsides as well and if anyone was endangering those precious whitey butts it was the madman musharraf and not us peace loving Indians. We were successfully cast as the unfortunate victims of a regional bully.

This policy undoubtedly had a cost in terms of lives. Pity that the politicians were not the ones who paid that cost.

I still maintain that, ABV notwithstanding, we should have crossed the LOC, encircled the pakis on the kargil heights, dug in on the reverse slopes wherever available and picked them off one by one post at a time. The IAF would easily have kept the PAF at bay.

The IA action, sometime after kargil, removed some paki vantage points and also somewhat straightened out the local LOC to the tactical liking of the IA.
Last edited by chetak on 24 Nov 2017 14:38, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 14:38

the whole idea of not escalating has been appreciated by many military hands. that was a well thought out decision. The issue was the moment the fight escalates into a full blown indo pak war there were chances of foreign intervention / mediation to bring a ceasefire as both sides were N powers . GOI didnt want a ceasefire with Pakis holding areas dominating our highway. India of 1999 was not so confident of itself as it is today. also the indian army was unbalanced as a result of pushing troops into Kargil area ( across Zoji La) as well as artillery plus a raging kashmir insurgency. Dont think vajpayee just woke up and said dont cross LOC...lot of heads must have gone into it ...many inputs..and only then the decision was taken. India wanted to tell the world we are clearing intrusion into our side of LOC, so there is no rationale of any mediation/intervention.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 14:46

manjgu wrote:the whole idea of not escalating has been appreciated by many military hands. that was a well thought out decision. The issue was the moment the fight escalates into a full blown indo pak war there were chances of foreign intervention / mediation to bring a ceasefire as both sides were N powers . GOI didnt want a ceasefire with Pakis holding areas dominating our highway. India of 1999 was not so confident of itself as it is today. also the indian army was unbalanced as a result of pushing troops into Kargil area ( across Zoji La) as well as artillery plus a raging kashmir insurgency. Dont think vajpayee just woke up and said dont cross LOC...lot of heads must have gone into it ...many inputs..and only then the decision was taken. India wanted to tell the world we are clearing intrusion into our side of LOC, so there is no rationale of any mediation/intervention.


yes, we are all aware of how often the IA is consulted on matters such as this. Its usually the MoD, MEA, MHA and the cabinet meaning the PM.

When things go pear shaped, then its all IA only. the baboo(n)s retire hastily to their single malts, they are back to morning golf and evening cocktails in lootyens drawing rooms.

Can you spot the baboo(n)s in cashmere now??

It is only the forces doing the long overdue hunting now.

We should get real and know that the pakis are certain that any nuke escalation will result in the complete annihilation of the pakis, while we may still be able to limp along. It is not a card that they will ever play.

So nuke threshold and nuke exchanges is a play more for the whiteys and their perceptions.

ABV simply played the nuke card well before the pakis did, thereby, defanging musharraf very early in the game.

Otherwise, musharraf would have gone to town, shouting from the roof tops about how India was going to launch nukes and how the pakis may have to launch first to deter evil Indian intentions, blah blah....

Panicked whiteys would have descended on India, urging restraint and insisting that we withdraw from kargil to remove all provocation on the poor pakis who were just trying to defend themselves.

ABV moved first and publicly cutoff musharaff's nuclear testicles.

From there on, it was all downhill skiing for the swaggering momeen (na)mard musharraf.

That said, we should have crossed the LOC.
Last edited by chetak on 24 Nov 2017 16:00, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 16:00

chetak... actually its when shit hits the fan that GOI consults IA, IAF..remember kargil..the kashmir floods..etc etc !! many instances. no need for u to remind about annihilation of pakis..they know it we know it. This was not ABV's decision but a collective decision of people entrusted with national security. By constantly saying its ABV's decision is ridiculing the systems, institutions. i rest the case....

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 16:10

manjgu wrote:chetak... actually its when shit hits the fan that GOI consults IA, IAF..remember kargil..the kashmir floods..etc etc !! many instances. no need for u to remind about annihilation of pakis..they know it we know it. This was not ABV's decision but a collective decision of people entrusted with national security. By constantly saying its ABV's decision is ridiculing the systems, institutions. i rest the case....


However "collective" it may be, the boss either gets garlanded or he carries the can. It was ABV all the way, just like its Modi all the way now.

History will credit only ABV. All others, if indeed there were any, will remain faceless and nameless.

BTW, ABV was right about playing the nuke card. Despite what you think, he did deliberately did play that card and he followed it up well by managing the diplomatic thrust to sideline musharraf in every international fora.

A little more thought would have saved some lives.

Look at musharraf. Don't you think that he had advisors and his decision was also "collective"?? Yet today he is a lonely man, hated and reviled as a failure by the very pakis who once hailed him for his anti India swagger.

musharraf was the beloved of the momeen for his hatred of India and yet MMS tried to divide Indian cashmere with him, not even mentioning the paki cashmere in passing. Was that also a "collective" decision??

Karma is truly a biatch
Last edited by chetak on 24 Nov 2017 16:30, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 16:26

a) Actually it was not ABV all the way...thought he was captain of the team.. it was a collective decision agreed to by ABV and taken in ABV's name. Ofc we remember Kapil Dev for 1983 victory..dont we?? Even Modi listens to Doval etc. on matters of national security.Do you really think Modi makes economic decisions on his own? he consults Jaitley ..etc. By making an assertion like its Modi all the way is making India look like a banana republic. Like these guys just wake up in the morning..chalo aaj ye karte hain !! I am not sure if an escalation could have saved more Indian lives?? right now maybe we lost 600 and they lost the same number..if there was to be a full escalation maybe we would have lost 2000 and they 20000 ..does that give you more satisfaction?? i think the mandate of any sober leader is to minimise casualties of self and achieve the stated goals. In 1999 the stated goal was to evict the intruders. b) i didnt get which nuke card did ABV play??

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 16:27

actually Mushy decision was the decision by gang of four..if you call that collective then it was indeed collective.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 16:32

manjgu wrote:actually Mushy decision was the decision by gang of four..if you call that collective then it was indeed collective.


either both decisions were "collective" or they were not. No ifs and buts.

sauce for the goose and the gander should be the same.

kargil was too complex to be planned and executed by just four people. Men and material was moved, people would have asked questions because that is the nature of army logistics and working culture of armies the world over.

equipment and transport requisitions would have to be signed at some level or the other. Drivers and porters talk to their friends and family members and their mistresses.

It was not such a deep secret as you may like to think that it was. galley news from the NLI would have carried wind of some big forthcoming operation against India centered around the kargil area. It would have spread to nearby formations and units as well as into the main body of paki army itself. They all bloody well knew.

Some intelligence guys on our side were fast asleep at the wheel, for sure as were many others in our own organisations.

truth be told, it was a bloody effup that matters got to the stage where IA blood had to be shed.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2017 21:35

chetak..pray tell me who is responsible for intelligence on the LOC and a few kilometers on enemy side?? IA was also sleeping on the wheel. no extra troops were inducted on the Paki side ..to maintain operational secrecy. Whose job is to collect tactical intelligence across the LOC surely not ABV??Some in IA also lied even after knowing extent of intrusion ( Gen KishanPal). A few in IA also lied in a way saying we will kick the intruders within 48 hrs !! even without ascertaining extent of intrusion. So things are not so black and white.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 21:57

manjgu wrote:chetak..pray tell me who is responsible for intelligence on the LOC and a few kilometers on enemy side?? IA was also sleeping on the wheel. no extra troops were inducted on the Paki side ..to maintain operational secrecy. Whose job is to collect tactical intelligence across the LOC surely not ABV??Some in IA also lied even after knowing extent of intrusion ( Gen KishanPal). A few in IA also lied in a way saying we will kick the intruders within 48 hrs !! even without ascertaining extent of intrusion. So things are not so black and white.



Some intelligence guys on our side were fast asleep at the wheel, for sure as were many others in our own organisations.

truth be told, it was a bloody effup that matters got to the stage where IA blood had to be shed.


I will not make it clearer. Either you understand it or you don't.

Don't go on and on about ABV like a broken record. I know that he did his job all right but he sure as hell could have done it much better by crossing the LOC .

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1074
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 24 Nov 2017 22:36

By not crossing the LOC, we made it difficult for us to cross the damn LOC in the future.

Now if we do a Kargil on the Pakis, they will run off to US and shed crocodile tears.

Our leaders will meekly ask our troops to come back.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1125
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 25 Nov 2017 00:32

India of 2020 is different from India of 1999 and so are US, Pakistan and China. A govt which openly publicized surgical strikes openly doesnt look like it will step back. Earlier others had leverage on us, i doubt US, UK and russia have that much leverage on us today.
There is a reason why there has no major terrorist attack on any city so far.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ramana » 25 Nov 2017 01:17

nam wrote:By not crossing the LOC, we made it difficult for us to cross the damn LOC in the future.

Now if we do a Kargil on the Pakis, they will run off to US and shed crocodile tears.

Our leaders will meekly ask our troops to come back.



Only for leaders who want excuses. Every situation requires appropriate response.
Same response all the time is predictable.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1545
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby manjgu » 25 Nov 2017 12:08

to the armchair warriors ...cross LOC could have been useful militarily but the political leadership has to weigh in on political, diplomatic and most importantly economic impact of escalation ( in 1999 we were implementing nascent economic reforms started by PVN) and inspite of mobilisation after parliament attack, war didnt break out. Most important was to get the intrusion vacated. Prima facie cross LOC looks to be the obvious choice but ABV had to factor in other aspects. ofc every one of us can have their opinions on the matter. Just wanna let u guys know that the then IAF chief was as much at PMO as at AHQ right from the days when we promised to kick the intruders in 48 hrs. there were intense meetings lasting hours to discuss these matter. My cousin bro was PSO to ACM.. so i do know a bit. Not just ABV woke up and said "aaj kuch toofani ho jaye ". !! my last post on the matter ( hopefully) and dont lose your shirt so quick chetak...

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17089
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 25 Nov 2017 12:35

manjgu wrote:to the armchair warriors ...cross LOC could have been useful militarily but the political leadership has to weigh in on political, diplomatic and most importantly economic impact of escalation ( in 1999 we were implementing nascent economic reforms started by PVN) and inspite of mobilisation after parliament attack, war didnt break out. Most important was to get the intrusion vacated. Prima facie cross LOC looks to be the obvious choice but ABV had to factor in other aspects. ofc every one of us can have their opinions on the matter. Just wanna let u guys know that the then IAF chief was as much at PMO as at AHQ right from the days when we promised to kick the intruders in 48 hrs. there were intense meetings lasting hours to discuss these matter. My cousin bro was PSO to ACM.. so i do know a bit. Not just ABV woke up and said "aaj kuch toofani ho jaye ". !! my last post on the matter ( hopefully) and dont lose your shirt so quick chetak...


cousin bro?? really?? That's all you've got??

what next ?? the neighbour's dog??

Everyone on the forum is aware of the economical, botanical, hydrological, zoological, physical, mechanical, cartographical, political and international constraints the ABV was operating under. It does not mean that he was a 100% right all the time. It also does not mean that he did not do his job. It is only that he could have done it a shade better by exercising other options that would have reduced casualties on our side.

and yet you shamelessly and repeatedly named names and called them liars?? was cousin bro part of that input too?? or was it your intention all along to use this as an excuse to humiliate ranking IA brass?? Why take names?? and why not tell us cousin bro's name??

Move on.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bhaskar_T, disha and 33 guests