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: 52586
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ramana » 23 Oct 2018 22:58

nam which book was that from?


Aditya_V, To add to your views, 21 Corps was moved in full daylight on Indian Railways in view of the US satellites from its locations.
This is why Sam Berger called Brajesh Mishra modern day Yoda.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 24 Oct 2018 01:02

The book is from Nazim Zehra, "Events that shook Pakistan".

If that book was to believed, PA was not expecting Nawaz to agree to a full withdrawal. Bill Clinton forced NS to agree to it and NS really wanted to prevent a larger war and he agreed to it. Moreover it was on July 4, that Tiger hill fell and this was during NS's was watching this in Washington. Before the July 4 meeting there had been no discussion on full withdrawal.

Mush, as usual cunning, hedged his bet. He just said to NS, I will do what you order me to do. If you want me to withdraw, I will withdraw! This was his line ever since NS found out about the depth of the op.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Oct 2018 10:26

nam wrote:The book is from Nazim Zehra, "Events that shook Pakistan".

If that book was to believed, PA was not expecting Nawaz to agree to a full withdrawal. Bill Clinton forced NS to agree to it and NS really wanted to prevent a larger war and he agreed to it. Moreover it was on July 4, that Tiger hill fell and this was during NS's was watching this in Washington. Before the July 4 meeting there had been no discussion on full withdrawal.

Mush, as usual cunning, hedged his bet. He just said to NS, I will do what you order me to do. If you want me to withdraw, I will withdraw! This was his line ever since NS found out about the depth of the op.


Nazim Zehra's view of the "Events that shook Pakistan" needs to be corroborated with evidence from other writers, contemporary articles in the print media of the time or later, interviews and news channel discussions, both in India and pukestan.

Some of the more plausible sources may be in urdu, some written by senior generals, other knowledgeable journos, think tank discussions in western locations, academic and govt sources etc.

Even now, some juicy little nugget of kargil information or the other makes its unexpected way to the rare sunlight on the surface of the politically incestuous, darkly convoluted, incessantly conniving, obsessively secretive, inherently paranoid and compulsively controlling society that pukiland actually is.

It is also a cancerous society torn apart by its real sense of inferiority and its publicly acknowledged failure to thrive as a modern state. The last word on this subject may not have been spoken as yet.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10785
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Oct 2018 12:25

Nasim Zehra is a RAPE. She will not care for facts or truth and cannot admit that PA and PAF loose battles.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 24 Oct 2018 13:05

I don't know the motive of Nazim, however based on what i read, the book is very critical of PA's Kargil adventure. The information is quite detailed. I haven't read any other source, who have stated when ops actually began. It was in Oct 98 and this can come only from offical source in PA.

There are even comparison of heavy artillery deployed by each country, where we we were 1.5-2 times what PA could deploy. Details about the first recon on to our side etc. Good details.
Last edited by nam on 24 Oct 2018 13:11, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10785
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Oct 2018 13:09

Some truth yes, but read Indian accounts as well as details of the intercepts and even Kaiser Tuffail retired from PAF blog. Militarily Pakis needed the withdrawal ceasefire more than us by the time Nawaz went to the US, they had no other choice. Indian Politicans needed a quick victory and cessation of casualties. The rest is Paki spin.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Oct 2018 13:14

nam wrote:I don't the motive of Nazim, however based on what i read, the book is very critical of PA's Kargil adventure. The information is quite detailed. I haven't read any other source, who have stated when ops actually began. It was in Oct 98 and this can come only from offical source in PA.

There are even comparison of heavy artillery deployed by each country, where we we were 1.5-2 times what PA could deploy. Details about the first recon on to our side etc. Good details.


This is not on you, saar. No fingers are being pointed at you.

It is just that paki "authors" usually write on behalf of someone or a particular point of view, representing a specific vested faction. That is why the corroboration is essential.

I think that this lady is somewhere on youtube, in some kargil discussions.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 24 Oct 2018 13:18

There was no specific objective of Kargil by PA. It was grab as you go and get a ceasefire and hold on to what you have. It was "do something across LoC", something similar to what we had done. We moved the LoC 1 km in PoK around year or two before Kargil!

As I have mentioned earlier, PA had lost more troops in it Kashmir insurgency adventure and other LoC firefight till 99. Plus it's losses in Afghanistan.

Compared to this, Kargil losses are much less and were NLI, who were not even regular PA unit! As long as we kept our response limited to LoC, PA could keep it going. It is no different from regular firefight on the LoC, just the defence line was shifted to Indian part of LoC.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Oct 2018 13:38

nam wrote:There was no specific objective of Kargil by PA. It was grab as you go and get a ceasefire and hold on to what you have. It was "do something across LoC", something similar to what we had done. We moved the LoC 1 km in PoK around year or two before Kargil!

As I have mentioned earlier, PA had lost more troops in it Kashmir insurgency adventure and other LoC firefight till 99. Plus it's losses in Afghanistan.

Compared to this, Kargil losses are much less and were NLI, who were not even regular PA unit! As long as we kept our response limited to LoC, PA could keep it going. It is no different from regular firefight on the LoC, just the defence line was shifted to Indian part of LoC.


the pakis always have some objective, mostly based on their lopsided understanding of bania and their own mythical warfighting prowess.

That they got their unwashed butts handed to them by the bania IA, in every war that they have foolishly and needlessly initiated and fought with us, does not seem to have sunk in.

Did you read the whole book or just some excerpts of it??
Last edited by chetak on 24 Oct 2018 13:45, edited 1 time in total.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 24 Oct 2018 13:43

I read part related to Kargil. Was not interested in other topics.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 24 Oct 2018 13:55

nam wrote:I read part related to Kargil. Was not interested in other topics.


Interesting how musharraf showed his mardangi in kargil by getting mostly and specifically shia troops butchered, callously abandoning them to their fate, condemned by his abject failure to re supply or even reinforce them.

Do you have the book??

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 24 Oct 2018 18:31

^^it was also discussed that he was showing is true pakiness by attacking india despite being a mohajir

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3352
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Kashi » 25 Oct 2018 06:01

That is being redundant isn't it, after all Mohajirs were the ones who sought to create Pakistan and then migrated there in hordes, forsaking their homes and neighbourhoods, so they thought themselves to be uber Bakis.

It's a different matter that the orchestra changed and the "locals" took over that they found themselves the proverbial dhobi ka kutta.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 25 Oct 2018 13:01

chetak wrote:
nam wrote:I read part related to Kargil. Was not interested in other topics.


Interesting how musharraf showed his mardangi in kargil by getting mostly and specifically shia troops butchered, callously abandoning them to their fate, condemned by his abject failure to re supply or even reinforce them.

Do you have the book??


Unfortunately I don't have the book and it was beg+borrow. Was not planning to spend money to enrich Paks!

Some some pages on Kargil

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 25 Oct 2018 13:04

ArjunPandit wrote:^^it was also discussed that he was showing is true pakiness by attacking india despite being a mohajir


Given he had super seeded couple of Punjabis generals, he had to go along with the Kargil plan to cement his authority in PA. Along with NLI troops, not from Punjab, there was nothing to loose. When it went downhill, NS got the blame for withdrawing.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 25 Oct 2018 19:49

nam wrote:
chetak wrote:
Interesting how musharraf showed his mardangi in kargil by getting mostly and specifically shia troops butchered, callously abandoning them to their fate, condemned by his abject failure to re supply or even reinforce them.

Do you have the book??


Unfortunately I don't have the book and it was beg+borrow. Was not planning to spend money to enrich Paks!

Some some pages on Kargil



put your email here and delete it when I have seen it.

I will send it to you.

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 321
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby parshuram » 25 Oct 2018 23:24

nam wrote:There was no specific objective of Kargil by PA. It was grab as you go and get a ceasefire and hold on to what you have. It was "do something across LoC", something similar to what we had done. We moved the LoC 1 km in PoK around year or two before Kargil!

As I have mentioned earlier, PA had lost more troops in it Kashmir insurgency adventure and other LoC firefight till 99. Plus it's losses in Afghanistan.

Compared to this, Kargil losses are much less and were NLI, who were not even regular PA unit! As long as we kept our response limited to LoC, PA could keep it going. It is no different from regular firefight on the LoC, just the defence line was shifted to Indian part of LoC.


May be they did not have the objective when they started infiltration . But when they were able to reach unopposed with NH in sight . Cannot believe that then there objectives were not realigned and focused . IMHO PA never anticipated use of IAF along with heavy pounding of IA . Also to there surprise GOI very successfully used tele media to bring war to homes of not only Indian eyes but abroad as well . GOP by then was in denial of PA involvement and even how desperate they were to send Pakistani Punjabi Regiments to fronts . Political brains in PA + GoP somehow managed not to do it else IA Would have been forced to open other front

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 25 Oct 2018 23:50

nam wrote:we moved the LoC 1 km in PoK around year or two before Kargil!
.

Do you have any source for it? First time I'm hearing it. There was also us support because we were able to show loc maps to the world community, may be in a few places but not overall ,taking alibi of pencil thickness in Shimla treaty

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 26 Oct 2018 00:17

ArjunPandit wrote:
nam wrote:we moved the LoC 1 km in PoK around year or two before Kargil!
.

Do you have any source for it? First time I'm hearing it. There was also us support because we were able to show loc maps to the world community, may be in a few places but not overall ,taking alibi of pencil thickness in Shimla treaty


It has been a while, but I think i saw this in "Asymmetric Warfare in South Asia"(Peter Lavoy), when i was doing google books search. I am not sure though, as it has been a long time.

The 90s were quite volatile on LoC. There was lot of cross LoC action by both sides. In one of this action, the line on a part of LoC was moved 1km in PoK.

A reason why Mushraff commented about Kargil that "Indians over reacted".

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19312
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby chetak » 26 Oct 2018 01:47

IIRC, after the kargil ops was completed, a bit later, a second kargil type ops was done by the IA to straighten out the lines and further push back the pakis from some of their more prominent vantage points.

This was largely unreported in the media because many of them were not even aware of it.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3352
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Kashi » 26 Oct 2018 05:29

chetak wrote:IIRC, after the kargil ops was completed, a bit later, a second kargil type ops was done by the IA to straighten out the lines and further push back the pakis from some of their more prominent vantage points.

This was largely unreported in the media because many of them were not even aware of it.


I do remember some peaks were captured in Siachen area, particularly one named "Bilal Top" that was taken by the Rajput regiment (I think) in 1999. Lt. Gen. Panag even penned an article about this.

Is this what you are referring to?

g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1763
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby g.sarkar » 26 Oct 2018 07:11

chetak wrote:IIRC, after the kargil ops was completed, a bit later, a second kargil type ops was done by the IA to straighten out the lines and further push back the pakis from some of their more prominent vantage points.
This was largely unreported in the media because many of them were not even aware of it.

Chetakji, On the contrary, I read in some articles that one or two peaks that were under Indian control pre-Kargil, were left in Puke hands. This is because India did not want to disturb the new cease fire. What is true?
Gautam

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Oct 2018 09:26

g.sarkar wrote:
chetak wrote:IIRC, after the kargil ops was completed, a bit later, a second kargil type ops was done by the IA to straighten out the lines and further push back the pakis from some of their more prominent vantage points.
This was largely unreported in the media because many of them were not even aware of it.

Chetakji, On the contrary, I read in some articles that one or two peaks that were under Indian control pre-Kargil, were left in Puke hands. This is because India did not want to disturb the new cease fire. What is true?
Gautam

One of it was pt 5353. Brf and India today would have news reports of lead shower being done by is on these posts. An ia operation retook a nearby post. Will find and post in evening

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Oct 2018 09:29

chetak wrote:IIRC, after the kargil ops was completed, a bit later, a second kargil type ops was done by the IA to straighten out the lines and further push back the pakis from some of their more prominent vantage points.

This was largely unreported in the media because many of them were not even aware of it.

There were two such ops one was loonda post where iaf dropped pgm to jhatka Many pigs.
Another one whole not equated commonly was op sarp vinash on hilkaka. We found weapons dump but not many ununiformed jihadi

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 26 Oct 2018 13:09

g.sarkar wrote:Chetakji, On the contrary, I read in some articles that one or two peaks that were under Indian control pre-Kargil, were left in Puke hands. This is because India did not want to disturb the new cease fire. What is true?
Gautam


If you are referring to 5353, IA captured the two nearby heights, fundamentally providing a line of sight to 5353 and making it irrelevant.

Fundamentally we can shoot from two side on to 5353, whenever we want.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9917
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby sum » 26 Oct 2018 14:06

^^ Why not take the 5353 itself then instead of leaving it in paki hands?

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby nam » 26 Oct 2018 14:32

sum wrote:^^ Why not take the 5353 itself then instead of leaving it in paki hands?


Why waste lives trying to capture a occupied height, when you can outflank them?

The access to 5353 is easier from Pak side and very difficult from ours.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Oct 2018 15:10

Iirc it was a political decision by vajapayee govt

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 731
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby krishna_krishna » 29 Oct 2018 06:54

Since lot has been debated here , I will point in summary what was the number one reason to initiate this operation :

"To capture the supply routes that supports Siachin, that will force India to vacate siachin posts in winter which then would be taken over by Pakistan. Once Pakistan captures siachin that would force India to compromise on Kashmir. Timing was critical since being now a n. power no one will force Pakistan (India or the world) or intervene to force them loose their wins (or gains). Please also note this plan was bought up many times in the past (so these design existed long ago , but no one implement it (for one reason or the other, see the video below) "

The flawed assumptions were :

1) India will not respond above certain level, it is assumed that it lacks will/capability to dislodge well entrenched forces sitting on heights.
2) There was no alternate support line to supply siachin except for Kargil-drass road. Which there head of ISI debated in a meeting with Mush and showed their assumptions(or calculations ) had flaws.

I am positing DG ISI of that time in a discussion , he was also involved in military coup after kargil:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwmfJ6teIk0

One more thing comes out of this is Mush convinced or cannived with other with a reason that NS knew about Kargil and he was on board. He used NS's lack of knowledge or limited knowledge to prove that he knew everything and when things went south he tried to put Army Chief under the bus. How can a mediocre civilian dare to do that to most powerful man in the county and the most powerful person of the institution they all admire and swore allegiance to. It was more of the love and respect for their institution that motivated others to join the mush's gan of four. Now in the hindsight they all curse that mush took them for a ride.

g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1763
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby g.sarkar » 29 Oct 2018 10:28

This explains the situation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_5353
Point 5353
Gautam

g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1763
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby g.sarkar » 29 Oct 2018 10:40

Another question: Did the Tibetan Special forces contribute in the Kargil conflict? If so, what was done?
Gautam

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10785
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 29 Oct 2018 11:02

Intrestign so the Marpo La pass, Pt 5070 near which we have our post now is what enabled to PA to cross over the to Sundho Nala and take posts near Tiger hill.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 29 Oct 2018 12:04

Aditya_V wrote:Intrestign so the Marpo La pass, Pt 5070 near which we have our post now is what enabled to PA to cross over the to Sundho Nala and take posts near Tiger hill.

Quoting some interesting parts from the section, which has also been discussed earlier on BRF
Ashok Mehta, in his article in The Tribune, said, "Parakram had opened a window of opportunity in the Kargil sector for the new 14 Corps to complete the Army's unfinished agenda for the Kargil war: seize Point 5353. While throughout April and May 2002, Point 5353 was pulverised with metal from Bofors guns, sometimes 10,000 rounds a day, Concourse missiles, cargo ammunition and air defence guns in direct fire, by May-end, Point 5070, a pivotal feature about 10 km west of Point 5353, was quietly seized in a brilliant stealth operation. The post was named Balwan after the Jat regiment that took it. Balwan had turned the flank of Pakistani defences in the Dras sector. The Indian Army now had a grand view and domination of the Gultari valley through which Pakistani posts are maintained in Dras."[14]

The surprise loss of Point 5070 drew furious reaction from Pakistan Army, who used to occupy this peak during summer. The Pakistani troops launched several counter-attacks, in which the Indians suffered heavy casualties, but failed to retake Point 5070. Consequently, an enraged General Pervez Musharraf removed entire Pakistani chain of command, including the Pakistani Brigade Commander and GOC of the Northern Areas for losing this peak. Subsequently, a new Commander of the Northern Areas was appointed.[14][37]

On 10 June 2002, an Indian Army patrol managed to make their way to Point 5353, where they found several wounded Pakistani soldiers crying for help. Afterwards, the date of the attack on Point 5353 was fixed for 17 June. The then Indian Army's northern area commander, Lieutenant general R.K. Nanavaty went to New Delhi with the final plan and for the green signal. Richard Armitage, then American Deputy Secretary of State had arrived in Delhi a few days earlier, where he had revealed General Musharraf's pledge, in his words: "To end cross-border terrorism permanently, visibly, irreversibly and to the satisfaction of India."[14][38] Hence, George Fernandes, then India's defence minister denied permission to General Nanavaty to attack Point 5353 and thus the attack was called off

Foreign policy 101: Never trust a pakistani statement/agreement

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10785
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Aditya_V » 29 Oct 2018 17:50

Not so simple, there was another event called Gujarat riots and some related myths created at that time. GOI had its hands full and was looking to disengage. The Godhra train burning 1 day after UP elections ended during operation Parakram was very convienient for Musharaf

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 731
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby krishna_krishna » 07 Jan 2019 08:05

Mushy on last leg of its mysterious illness, when he meets his maker I hope justice will we done to all the martyr's of our armed forces who suffered multilation and dishonor :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIx0FsZ6WVk

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2497
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby ArjunPandit » 07 Jan 2019 22:21

^^if you're talking about saurabh kalia and co., apparently, they were avenged. was it enough that's the question.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9917
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby sum » 08 Jan 2019 05:16

Trishul blog has put out a big compilation of all IA cross border raids since 90s including Saurabh Kalia's retaliation. Very big list compiled

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7354
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 19:15

Capt Naveen Nagappa reply to a lady who said, “Vikram Batra died becoz of you”
https://indiandefencenews.info/naveen-n ... y-to-lady/

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1716
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Kargil War Thread - VI

Postby Vips » 27 Jan 2019 04:21

No doubt this lady is either a Lutyens circuit pasand JNU pass-out or a jhola wali journalist, or a congressi or just a frustrated socialite b i t c h who dares to disrespect a national hero.



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chiru, Khalsa, nits and 42 guests