India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

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.
member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby member_28990 » 06 Jan 2016 22:42

a war in which Pakistan is decimated and divided, reopening the silk route to access markets in Afghanistan and CAR is the only viable long term geostrategic AND economic-political goal for india. In this way we create breathing space for our manufacturing industries to flood new markets with our goods and slowly start shifting gear from a service based economy. The window for decisive action is now, when conflicts have caused a lot of destabilization anyways, oil prices are dirt cheap and Nato is at the weakest it has ever been.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby member_29190 » 06 Jan 2016 22:49

My 2 cents

1. Every attack mainland or loc, every blast, gunmen attack etc should automatically activate high volume artillery fires across the entire border. Continue until PA DGMO calls up for ceasefire. Every post to be targetted for destruction.

2. If PA retaliates, continue the cycle. Budget & stock up for 500K expendable rounds for PA per year.

3. Declare this an offical policy. Have UAV recording the impact and broadcast on national tv.

4. Start arming ANA with artillery to be deployed across their border. India pays for maintaining a large ANA artillery force. Train & arm.

5. Make it an offical policy to coming to aid of Afghanistan if PA. If PA retaliates for ANA, IA opens up on eastern border.

It is cheaper to maintain couple of artillery division than gaurding every inch of India.

There is no need to attack LET or JEM centers. Target the daddy. PA. Every attack and there should be diwali on LOC & IB. Make it a no-mans land for PA.

Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 636
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Raveen » 06 Jan 2016 22:58

The fake currency thing mentioned above really baffles me.

We know they fake our currency, then why don't we make polymer currency that is darn near impossible to fake?
Why are we letting them both undermine our economy, AND use the money to fund terror against us?

Screambowl
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 96
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Screambowl » 06 Jan 2016 23:20

sudeepj wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:
1. Irregular warfare is already being done by India. This should definitely be stepped up.

2. Sword and naadas - it is cheaper to go to war TODAY, than to go to war with Pakistan in 2025. It is definitely going to be a thorn in our sides, like it has been for a lot of time. The way to deal with it is to reduce it and to do it cheaply. 1971 was a one off. Balochistan and Sindh are contiguous entities to the main geography of Pakjab. Better to fund their insurgencies today more.


Disagree.. Fighting a limited war with Pak is going to be far cheaper when we can guarantee by our technological superiority that not many of Pak attacks will reach Indian civilians and even soldiers. I dont think we will ever fight an "aar paar ki ladai", when nukes come into play, with Pak. At best it will be a 65 redux with Indians occupying the outskirts of Lahore and Sialkote and there it will stop.


Agreed. The best way is fund the agitations in Pakistan. That's all. If provocation happens from their side, then India can intervene with limited war. Otherwise no need.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1722
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby ldev » 07 Jan 2016 02:54

sudeepj wrote:Disagree.. Fighting a limited war with Pak is going to be far cheaper when we can guarantee by our technological superiority that not many of Pak attacks will reach Indian civilians and even soldiers. I dont think we will ever fight an "aar paar ki ladai", when nukes come into play, with Pak. At best it will be a 65 redux with Indians occupying the outskirts of Lahore and Sialkote and there it will stop.


Technological superiority?? What is that and when will that be achieved?? 20 years?? 50 years??

Q.And what if in the meantime, there is another 2008 Mumbai, or what about a 2008 Mumbai every 6 months, maybe every 3 months.

Rationalisation: Heck, even in the 1993 blasts only 350 people were killed and only 700 injured. And there are 15 million people in Mumbai alone. Why should their lives be affected right? Let their welfare continue.

Q.Now how about 10,000 people die because of a terrorist attack?

Rationalisation: Hey it's only a terror attack. The Pak Army has not attacked India so we can continue to look after the 1 billion plus other Indians.

Q.What about a terror attack which targets BARC in Mumbai and radiation is leaked such as 2 million people die??

Rationalisation: But that is only 2 million people. What about the other billion and their welfare. We cannot afford to affect our economic growth. There are so many other cities in India which should not be affected. And the Pak airforce is nowhere to be seen over Mumbai. The Pak Army is also in it's barracks except for some small shelling on the border. No, this is some bad terrorists not Pakistan. I think we will give a dossier when Modiji next meets Nawar Sharifji and the matter will be sorted out.

That 65 redux business is exactly what is wrong with this way of thinking. India should not be in the business of occupying enemy territory. It should be in the business of destroying enemy assets, both economic and military. That is how the Indian military should be geared going forward. Million man armies are necessary for occupying ground. India should not ever make the mistake of occupying even a small part of Pakistan and bear all the heavy costs of occupying enemy territory. It should destroy the economic and war making capacity of Pakistan.

As far as Indian technological superiority is concerned. The fact is that in the absence of Pakistani nukes, there would have been a full conventional war. So the question is how does India protect itself from Pakistani nukes. Their delivery will be missiles and aircraft. They are unlikely to be delivered by bullock cart across the border. So India needs close to 100% defence against missiles and aircraft. Once Indian defence planners get that defence in place and the confidence that it works, India will have the confidence of retaliation.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1733
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby sudeepj » 07 Jan 2016 03:24

ldev wrote:
sudeepj wrote:Disagree.. Fighting a limited war with Pak is going to be far cheaper when we can guarantee by our technological superiority that not many of Pak attacks will reach Indian civilians and even soldiers. I dont think we will ever fight an "aar paar ki ladai", when nukes come into play, with Pak. At best it will be a 65 redux with Indians occupying the outskirts of Lahore and Sialkote and there it will stop.


Technological superiority?? What is that and when will that be achieved?? 20 years?? 50 years??


Its something that guarantees that not many of Pak attacks will reach Indian civilians and soldiers.

ldev wrote:Q.And what if in the meantime, there is another 2008 Mumbai, or what about a 2008 Mumbai every 6 months, maybe every 3 months.

Rationalisation: Heck, even in the 1993 blasts only 350 people were killed and only 700 injured. And there are 15 million people in Mumbai alone. Why should their lives be affected right? Let their welfare continue.

Q.Now how about 10,000 people die because of a terrorist attack?

Rationalisation: Hey it's only a terror attack. The Pak Army has not attacked India so we can continue to look after the 1 billion plus other Indians.


Hypothetical, but if it happens at that rate, now you are reaching a cost
(a) delegitimization of the Indian state
(b) economic cost by disruption of large cities
that makes the decision to go for a limited fight look attractive. This was clarified in the original posts themselves.


Q.What about a terror attack which targets BARC in Mumbai and radiation is leaked such as 2 million people die??


I am sorry, but now you are just being silly. Unfortunately, bullshit takes a lot more energy to refute than to produce. Carry on.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1722
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby ldev » 07 Jan 2016 03:32

^^
By your prescription India will never retaliate. Technological superiority is not a constant, it is in a state of flux. Furthermore if your prescription is to wait for AAD/PAD/PDV to mature, to provide that full spectrum defence, you'll have to wait for ever.

But air and missile defence can be bought, whether it is Patriot PAC-3/MEADS or the S400. That can provide us the ability to respond. But spending priorities have to change for that. There was speculation in the media that Modi was supposed to finalize the purchase of 5 S400 systems on his recent Moscow visit, down from the 12 that the Army/Airforce wanted. But no contract was signed on that as yet. This indicates that the armed forces and MOD is aware of the deficiency in this area and is working towards plugging that gap. Will have to wait till those defences are in place before one can hope for a robust Indian response. Maybe this recent attack may spur some quicker movement in the S400 purchase.

Screambowl
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 96
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Screambowl » 07 Jan 2016 04:05

sudeepj wrote:
Its something that guarantees that not many of Pak attacks will reach Indian civilians and soldiers.

ldev wrote:Q.And what if in the meantime, there is another 2008 Mumbai, or what about a 2008 Mumbai every 6 months, maybe every 3 months.

Rationalisation: Heck, even in the 1993 blasts only 350 people were killed and only 700 injured. And there are 15 million people in Mumbai alone. Why should their lives be affected right? Let their welfare continue.

Q.Now how about 10,000 people die because of a terrorist attack?

Rationalisation: Hey it's only a terror attack. The Pak Army has not attacked India so we can continue to look after the 1 billion plus other Indians.


Hypothetical, but if it happens at that rate, now you are reaching a cost
(a) delegitimization of the Indian state
(b) economic cost by disruption of large cities
that makes the decision to go for a limited fight look attractive. This was clarified in the original posts themselves.




Why are we taking things to a nuclear attack/limited war? If we keep Pakistan's ISI and Military under check and busy inside their own territory, there is no chance of any kind of war. Rather fighting a war at IB, fight it inside their own territory. Secure the border and spend more on proxy.

There is then no nuclear war involved. And even due to destabilisation if suppose they launch an attack , their strength will be very limited.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1733
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby sudeepj » 07 Jan 2016 04:11

ldev wrote:^^
By your prescription India will never retaliate. Technological superiority is not a constant, it is in a state of flux. Furthermore if your prescription is to wait for AAD/PAD/PDV to mature, to provide that full spectrum defence, you'll have to wait for ever.

But air and missile defence can be bought, whether it is Patriot PAC-3/MEADS or the S400. That can provide us the ability to respond. But spending priorities have to change for that. There was speculation in the media that Modi was supposed to finalize the purchase of 5 S400 systems on his recent Moscow visit, down from the 12 that the Army/Airforce wanted. But no contract was signed on that as yet. This indicates that the armed forces and MOD is aware of the deficiency in this area and is working towards plugging that gap. Will have to wait till those defences are in place before one can hope for a robust Indian response. Maybe this recent attack may spur some quicker movement in the S400 purchase.


My dear chap.. in this case, we are talking about the same thing. Even if Modi ji were to sign the S400 deal today, it would take nearly 5 years for that capability to be operational and integrated with the rest of our Air Defense system! If we had an S400 (and rafales and LCAs), that could make sure that PAF stayed on the ground, if we have weapons that ensure that Pak Army would be immobilized even before they get together in their assembly area (I think we are approaching this stage with Pinaka II, and sensor fused weapons), if we can ensure that their navy (including their subs) remain bottled up, then it may make sense to rub their nose in the pee, if not to punish but to discredit the Pak affaj.

If someone were to sign a cheque of a few hundred crore Rs. (from the petty cash box that GoI has), its likely that we can launch devastating attacks on Pak forces in the next 5 months.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4001
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby partha » 07 Jan 2016 04:12

Tech superiority or not, one should seize the opportunity when it presents itself. There would have been no Bangladesh in 1971 if IG had waited for full tech superiority. I feel both Kargil and 26/11 were missed "opportunities". We didn't capture even an inch of territory.

Screambowl
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 96
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Screambowl » 07 Jan 2016 04:46

Pak-based groups to face action if role proved: PM

http://www.dawn.com/news/1231105/pak-ba ... -proved-pm

ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif assured his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on Tuesday that Islamabad would not hesitate to take “prompt and decisive action” if the involvement of Pakistan-based elements in the attack on an Indian airbase was proved beyond doubt.

“PM Nawaz Sharif assured PM Modi that his government would take prompt and decisive action against the terrorists,” the Indian Prime Minister’s office said in a press statement after Mr Sharif called Mr Modi from Colombo to condemn the weekend strike in Pathankot and convey Pakistan’s promise to act on the intelligence given by India about suspected handlers and the mastermind of the terrorist attack.

Unlike the Indian statement, the one issued by Mr Sharif’s office did not contain any explicit commitment about action on Islamabad’s part, but said: “Our (Pakistan) government is working on the leads and information provided by the Indian government. We would like to investigate the matter.”


PS: Are they even serious??

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1733
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby sudeepj » 07 Jan 2016 05:06

If you put yourself in NS's shoes, you can kinda predict what he is going to do. Indians arent going to kill him. Jihadis might. At worst, India might yell at him. He's been yelled at before.

Screambowl
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 96
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Screambowl » 07 Jan 2016 07:32

Won’t target Kashmir ultras, Army told Sharif
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/w ... epage=true


Afzal Guru has emerged as a common link between the Pathankot attack and the attack on the Indian Consulate in Afghanistan. Here, a securityman takes position on a rooftop of a building in Pathankot. Photo: AP

Days before Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a surprise stopover in Lahore in December, intelligence agencies had told him that the Pakistan Army had conveyed to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that they would not take action against “Kashmir-focussed groups.”

The Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) is learnt to have made a presentation on the issue for Mr. Modi at the DGPs’ conference in the Rann of Kutch, Gujarat, on December 19. In the presentation, the R&AW said the Pakistan Army was against taking action on terror groups active in Jammu and Kashmir such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hizbul Mujahideen and Jaish-e-Mohammad. By then, the talks between the National Security Advisers had taken place in Bangkok.

Mr. Modi was alerted to the influence of the “deep state” and was also told that the newly created Al Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent was being prepped by Pakistan’s ISI to carry out terror strikes in India. This information assumes significance as the 2001 Parliament attack case convict Afzal Guru, who was hanged in 2013, has emerged as a common link between the Pathankot attack and the foiled attack on the Indian Consulate in Mazar-I-Sharif, Afghanistan.

Attacks in the name of Afzal Guru

The 2001 Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, who was hanged in 2013, has emerged as a common link between the Pathankot airbase attack and the foiled attack on the Indian Consulate in Mazar-I-Sharif, Afghanistan.

The Pathankot attackers left behind a handwritten note in English in the vehicle of the former Gurdaspur Superintendent of Police, Salwinder Singh. It said the ‘A.G.S’ squad of the Jaish-e-Mohammad planned attacks from Tangdhar (in the Kashmir valley) to Samba, Kathua and Rajbagh (in Jammu) and Delhi to avenge the death of Afzal Guru.

The note was dated December 25, the day Prime Minister Narendra Modi went to Afghanistan and later made a surprise visit to Lahore.

A fidayeen squad (suicide bombers), which tried to storm the Indian Consulate, left two messages written in blood on the walls of the building they had occupied. The messages said their mission was to avenge Guru’s hanging.

A senior government official said infiltration of six Pathankot attackers could not have been possible without the help of a government entity in Pakistan.

“One or maximum two persons will be able to infiltrate the border on their own, but it takes state sponsorship to make six persons infiltrate across the border and, that too, with heavy explosives and ammunition,” said an official.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1722
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby ldev » 07 Jan 2016 08:18

sudeepj wrote:
My dear chap.. in this case, we are talking about the same thing. Even if Modi ji were to sign the S400 deal today, it would take nearly 5 years for that capability to be operational and integrated with the rest of our Air Defense system! If we had an S400 (and rafales and LCAs), that could make sure that PAF stayed on the ground, if we have weapons that ensure that Pak Army would be immobilized even before they get together in their assembly area (I think we are approaching this stage with Pinaka II, and sensor fused weapons), if we can ensure that their navy (including their subs) remain bottled up, then it may make sense to rub their nose in the pee, if not to punish but to discredit the Pak affaj.

If someone were to sign a cheque of a few hundred crore Rs. (from the petty cash box that GoI has), its likely that we can launch devastating attacks on Pak forces in the next 5 months.


5 years to be operational!! No problem. Mumbai 1993 happened 23 years ago, the New Delhi Parliament attack happened in 2001, 15 years ago, Kaluchak happened in 2002, 14 years ago and Mumbai 2008 happened almost 8 years ago. So no probem if we have to wait for another 5 years so long as a proper deterrent will be in place to neutralize Pakistani air/missile attacks. But that is also where you are wrong. Because when a country is facing war as India is, you do not wait for 5 years and do the usual pen pushing. And you do not allow your airforce the luxury of a 5 year induction process to full perfection. (OT here, but just think about it, SpaceX changed the design of the 2nd stage of the Falcon 9 in 6 months after the last flight exploded and it performed flawlessly, 2-3 weeks ago. I am sure you will say that something like that should take 5 years because it has to undergo 5 rounds of horizontal ground firing tests and then it should also be fired in a vertical position at least twice and then the software will have to re-checked that there are no bugs and then the launch control crew have to be trained on it and the earliest launch date for what is effectively a new rocket is 5 years) That is the kind of urgency needed to get things done.

Signing a cheque as you blithely claim will never result in any attack into Pakistan because of the fear of escalation all the way to a nuke exchange. That is why Parakram never happened. If India launches a covert op into Pakistan, there will be retaliation and it will escalate. Unlike India, Pakistan is driven by it's hatred of India. Pakistan will not be suicidal in its dealing with any other country but in case of India they will die to kill Indians. Make no mistake about that. India is rational vs all countries. Pakistan is rational vs all countries except India. That is why other countries deal with them and realize that their hatred is confined to India and Indians. That is why a cheque of a few hundred crore rupees will not change anything in 5 months or 5 years. Think about it. Only the assurance that India can be protected from a Pakistani nuke attack. And for that what is needed is air and missile defence.

Remember, all these terror attacks into India are not covert. They are overt. It is Pakistan based terrorists, trained by the ISI and Pakistan army documented as crossing the border into India from Pakistan. Hence Pakistan is sending an overt message to India that they can take Indian lives at any time of their choosing and that India can do nothing about it. Under these circumstances India's response has to be therefore overt. And yet to date in the last 23 years no Indian Government has sent an overt response to Pakistan that Indian forces or operatives trained by India have caused destruction of a public asset in Pakistan. When the raid happened into Myanmar there was public credit taken for it, that the Indian Army had crossed into that country. When will India take similar credit for a raid into Pakistan and under what conditions? I can assure you that will happen only with air/missile defences firmly in place to prevent nuclear retaliation. Not before that. And certainly not by somebody signing a cheque for a few hundred crores.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby manjgu » 07 Jan 2016 08:48

a) there is a price of inaction and a price of action.. b) uff and i thought we had a very credible AD environment with lots of Indian, French and israeli gizmos?? and now suddenly we need S 400 ! . retaliation of any kind in my book will happen if at all in 2018/19 timeframe..in time before next elections...

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Altair » 07 Jan 2016 10:59

The title of this thread says retaliation options for significant terrorist strikes. Well, Atleast for Pathankot strike, we need to send a message across. I agree we need to send a disproportionate response and deploy S-400 and take Baluchistan but these things are strategic response and may take time. I am talking about immediate response. Ideally we should have responded by now. Anyways, Lets say we do want to send an equitable response. We need to target one of their air bases. Pakistan has flying bases in
Mushaf (Sargodha)
Masroor (Karachi)
Rafiqui (Shorkot)
Peshawar (Peshawar)
Samungli (Quetta)
Mianwali (Mianwali)
Minhas (Kamra)
Chaklala (Rawalpindi)
Faisal (Karachi)
Risalpur (Pakistan Air Force Academy) (Risalpur)
Shahbaz (Jacobabad)
Now, I am sure they will all be on high alert expecting an Indian response. It may be a little easy to target their air bases on western sector like Peshawar or Samungli but there are'nt any heavy PAF assets that they would worry about. The real crown jewels are in Chaklala. It is their navel. If we want to send a message we must target Chaklala and destroy some assets. Let them come back and escalate things. Then we can talk about terror.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 788
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Y. Kanan » 07 Jan 2016 22:07

Funny how these threads go. Everyone has settled down now, and the next time we'll do it all over again, like for the very first time as Madonna said. Perhaps this never ending BR ritual is counterproductive?

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7242
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby disha » 08 Jan 2016 00:40

I am surprised that this is not discussed here:

Modi gives Badmash 72 hours deadline to respond!

http://www.firstpost.com/india/well-done-modi-for-placing-pakistan-on-72-hour-deadline-to-respond-on-pathankot-attack-2574972.html

Baikul
BRFite
Posts: 1133
Joined: 20 Sep 2010 06:47

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Baikul » 08 Jan 2016 14:41

In the Pakistani mind, Kargil was a definite victory. 1965 was a stunning victory. 1948 was a conquest. 26/11 was a glorious saga of victory. Pathankot is a victory. 1971 was a stab in the back by enemies without the cojones to fight face to face and it was no big deal to lose, in the words of Niazi a "low lying land with low, lying peoples", aka Bangladesh. Every terrorist they send across the border is a victory.

Where am I going with this? When mutually acceptable definitions of victory are hard to find, Pakistan will bounce back from whatever retaliation we offer secure in the belief that they won anyway. Therefore in my opinion we must first identify what a Pakistani would consider as a defeat and proceed to make that a reality- military, economic or political.

For example, launching an arty barrage across the border is fine because it degrades their abilities and may be a good long term option, but well, what's the 'proof' of an Indian victory? The Pakistani army will claim they launched a counter barrage twice as long and thrice as TFTA. Both sides claim victory and go home.

My proposal is as follows: the thing dearest to a Pakistani is his public face, his izzat/ ghairat. The theme of dignity and self regard as expressed by their leadership in multiple unrelated conversations. Even Zaid Hamid, after he had his arse savagely mauled on a daily basis by uncouth Arabian gaolers, claimed after his return to Pakistan, that he had returned with his izzat intact.

Therefore, as a first step, I believe that our retaliation should focus on whatever publicly strips away this sense of self, this faux izzat/ dignity. Whatever does that will come closest to a defeat in the Pakistani mind, creating the self-recriminatory and implosive impact we wish to achieve in their worldview. I do not have definitive answers but taking strips of their land every time we get hit could be one option. What else?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18863
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Karan M » 08 Jan 2016 14:50

^^ Completely agree.

I spent some time thinking on this in the past. I also conducted a detailed look at how Paks of all kinds online (liberal, secoolar, rabid, mullah) all behaved.

There was a common theme.

IMO, Pakistani sense of self is tied to martial prowess.

Martial prowess is tied to success of their Pakistani soldiers, sailors, and airmen and also fancy kit.

To attrit one, there should be regular b!tch slaps by our Baloch, Sindhi and other bhai log in public view. Interspersed with very visible cross LOC/IB thrashing by IA etc.This should be accompanied by visuals and a lot of talk from Indian side on maar peet. It will be a gradual process to wake these jokers up but it should be a start.

To attrit two, fancy kit needs to suffer regular malfunction, sudden failure thanks to freedom fighting oppressed minorities of Pakistan.

Third, India needs to really crack down on MSM buffoons and Swami types who deliberately float propaganda about Indian capability and kit.

When above becomes a regular cadence, see the wailing start & Pak mil's reality will show up.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Austin » 08 Jan 2016 15:02

disha wrote:I am surprised that this is not discussed here:

Modi gives Badmash 72 hours deadline to respond!

http://www.firstpost.com/india/well-done-modi-for-placing-pakistan-on-72-hour-deadline-to-respond-on-pathankot-attack-2574972.html


Exactly what Modi will do after that cancel the Foreign Sec level talks

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby manjgu » 08 Jan 2016 15:23

He will send a dossier...postpone talks for 2 months... ask High Commisioners to meet for low level talks ... because talks must be uninterrupted and uninterruptible !!

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3898
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby deejay » 08 Jan 2016 15:26

The retaliation against Pakistan need not be seen only in terms of victory and defeat. While victory is desirable and we need to work towards it, other options could be looked at under these envelopes:

a)Economic - Defensive (As in stop FICN, stop illegal Paki drugs, stop Hawala, stop easy access to Indian Markets / goods, etc)
Offensive (As in sanctions, pressurize international partners of Pakistan to stop / diminish aid and support, etc)

b) Diplomatic - Defensive (Demarches and Dosas, counter Paki attacks at all fora and break their alliances, etc)
Offensive (Propaganda on Paki perfidies not limited to terrorism in India but special focus on Paki territory, etc)

c) Military - Defensive (Disproportionate cross border firing, destruction of Paki posts while firing from Indian territory, etc)
Offensive (War is an option but well short of war with an aim to inflict pain - Territory Creep across LOC and even IB, covert raids on Jihadi infrastructure, hitting high value targets in Pakistan, jamming communication, broadcasts at random, etc)

d) Cultural - Defensive (Block Visa for all Pukis, deny space to Amonkey Aasha types and their visiting delegations, etc)
Offensive (Broadcast across TV, Radio about schisms and divisions that promote a social break down in Pakistan, discredit their performing artists through public outing either genuine scams or planted ones, etc)

e) Covert - Defensive (Support to dissenting voice outside Pakistan and special attention to marginalised victims of Pakistan, etc)
Offensive ( Baloch, Pashtun, Gilgiti, Kashmiri, Sindhi separatists recognised by India, trained and funded plus armed and new victim groups identified, encourage Jihadi - Paki army split, etc)

These are just some ideas and suggestion, there can be many more with greater attention to detail. The idea being a break down Pakistan's ability to focus on India and therefore make it impossible for it to support anti India activities in any sustained manner. None of what I write maybe agreeable to the honest, ethically thinking Indian or may not seem very wise to the learned maulaners here. To answer your criticism of these ideas I request you to just change India with Pakistan. All this, Pakistan does to us.

These terrorist attacks on us are overt Special Forces attack on out institutions, population and military targets. We need to respond. Not necessarily with war but something which can be called "total conflict".

My 01 paisa.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby habal » 08 Jan 2016 15:32

news has flowed in bits and pieces that ever since Nawaz Sharif hosted Modi on Dec 25, Sharif of Raheel has not met him hence even once. There have been no meetings between the two till today, which is unnatural as per paki anal-ysts. Yesterday they had a phone conversation, that's it.

does he suspect NS of doing underhand deals with Modi.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9685
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Yagnasri » 08 Jan 2016 16:33


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18863
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Karan M » 08 Jan 2016 16:59

This is what Modi led GOI is facing and fixing... we can all thank the pathetic UPA for getting India to this state.. this is the work of at least a couple of years. IMO, even with contracts signed in 2014, we have at least till 2018 before WWRs etc can stated to be ok.

It can be seen from the CAG report that during 2009 to 2013, 33 per cent to 84 per cent of the high calibre ammunition of Artillery (Arty) and Armoured
Fighting Vehicle (AFV) category were in critical zone i.e. , less than 10 (I) holding, suggesting the seriousness of acute shortage in ammunition for sustaining superior fire power.


IAF serviceability - Standing Committee on Defense 2009-13
AVerage serviceability of 55%.

This is what Parrikar is shooting at.
..

All these are the bare basics that need to be fixed.

Looks like UPA decided Amrika bahadur and CBMs with Pak would be good enough.

As a further CBM and to ensure no IA General got ideas of cold start etc, UPA let MOD dysfunction slide and slide.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3633
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Neela » 08 Jan 2016 17:08

To go with the enemy's definition of victory or defeat seems to be strange for two reasons:
- You are letting the opposite party define the parameters.
- Your reaction is tuned to the way the enemy defines defeat.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18863
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Karan M » 08 Jan 2016 17:09

Re my previous post

Oh before some chap romptly jumps in and starts yelling CT wagehra.. kindly look at the leaks report of previous NSA and his views on IA and Cold Start.. you'll get a good idea of what the prior Govt thought of the services and how they needed to be kept in "control".. with that degree of paranoia and mistrust.. no wonder pliant folks had to be shoehorned in and a tough IA chief removed by any and all means..

This level of jackassery regarding ammunition reserves, serviceability is not some minor thing. There was complete absence of any sort of leadership. Yet, somehow, big ticket deals like Agusta etc got greenlighted. Go figure.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18863
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Karan M » 08 Jan 2016 17:10

Neela wrote:To go with the enemy's definition of victory or defeat seems to be strange for two reasons:
- You are letting the opposite party define the parameters.
- Your reaction is tuned to the way the enemy defines defeat.


Or you are seeking to defeat the enemy in the way they define defeat and hence win the battle. Otherwise, there will be no true victory.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20420
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Philip » 08 Jan 2016 18:04

Karan you're spot on.The UPA according to a reliable source of mine also delayed any progress on the Rafale at US behest. A certain macho "biker" was also allegedly stirring the pot.The US aim was to undermine the nation's mil capability ,preventing it from engaging with Pak militarily in response to terror attacks,allowing Pak off the hook as it got enmeshed with its own Taliban and Afghan ambitions.part of the plan was to sell India big tkt defence items which Snake-oil Singh had promised would happen to Dubya as pay-off for the N-deal. C-17s req. appeared from nowhere to extend prod. at the plant and keep US politicos happy!

This dereliction of duty has allowed the Sino-Pak JV a window of opportunity of a few years before we get our modernisation programme firmly on track.Iytt is why the Pakis are now acting with such "gay" abandon ,pun intended.

What we have to first do is to beef up our strat air defences against Paki missiles,which they will use,and gather together enough ammo/munitions,spares,eqpt.etc. for at least a 3 month long war. The IA in particular has to augment its arty and MBRL assets to take out opportune targets across the LOC and intl. border whenever there is a terror incident. Arty should swing into action automatically whnever there is a Paki transgression.

member_29151
BRFite
Posts: 121
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby member_29151 » 08 Jan 2016 23:32

1.Declare Pakistan a Terrorist state.
2.Anti terror Bill : No Company Should Be Allowed to Do Busniess in India. if it operates in Pakistan too.
3. Divert Water To Punjab, Delhi, Rajasthan... etc.
4.Start Full Scale Covert Operations Against PAK Army Top Brass And ISI & Terror leaders. Execute Them One By One.
5.NO TRADE with Pakistan Policy.
6.Break The Middle East Support Of Pakistan.
7.Empower the balooch Freedom movement.

member_29151
BRFite
Posts: 121
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby member_29151 » 08 Jan 2016 23:35

A Quick Attack On Karachi Port Like 1971. Few Bhramos on the port.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2074
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Picklu » 09 Jan 2016 00:59

Karan M wrote:^^ Completely agree.

I spent some time thinking on this in the past. I also conducted a detailed look at how Paks of all kinds online (liberal, secoolar, rabid, mullah) all behaved.

There was a common theme.

IMO, Pakistani sense of self is tied to martial prowess.

Martial prowess is tied to success of their Pakistani soldiers, sailors, and airmen and also fancy kit.

To attrit one, there should be regular b!tch slaps by our Baloch, Sindhi and other bhai log in public view. Interspersed with very visible cross LOC/IB thrashing by IA etc.This should be accompanied by visuals and a lot of talk from Indian side on maar peet. It will be a gradual process to wake these jokers up but it should be a start.

To attrit two, fancy kit needs to suffer regular malfunction, sudden failure thanks to freedom fighting oppressed minorities of Pakistan.

Third, India needs to really crack down on MSM buffoons and Swami types who deliberately float propaganda about Indian capability and kit.

When above becomes a regular cadence, see the wailing start & Pak mil's reality will show up.


Or we recognize what CFair has said that in any engagement pakis have won so long that they have not been defeated. This getting up even after being punched thoroughly and devise a fanciful yarn so that the population is ever ready to cause the next mischief is what keeps them undefeated.

At the first step, we need to inoculate our population(not govt) that we do not keep on seeking ever lasting peace. Once that is done and our society is ready to have a long drawn slap fest with the pigs till the kingdom comes, we are 90% through. Then the behavior of the pigs will start getting modified by the weight we will bring in (example of such behavior modification is that the ******** do not make the fanciful claim of being conventionally offensive and having tea in lal killa any more that they used to have before '71)

Off course the main challenge would be our peaceniks pointing out that the pigs have already won when our society does not yearn for peace and seek conflict. And that is where we need to have faith on our civilizational root to retain our humanity despite that.

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2797
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby prahaar » 09 Jan 2016 02:58

ABP Live news item which is based on Islamabad's claims. We know what happened with PCB cricket announcement.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby RoyG » 09 Jan 2016 03:18

Retaliation will come. Where and when will surprise them.

With NK validating TN for China and Pak, Pakistan expanding its nuclear arsenal, Chinese moves in PoK, and Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan, how can we not go on the offensive?

Modi is changing not only the structure but the psyche of the gov. This is a huge task especially given the challenge we face from next door. I trust that the PMO will come up with the right formula to permanently deal with these people.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2074
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Picklu » 09 Jan 2016 11:56

RoyG wrote: I trust that the PMO will come up with the right formula to permanently deal with these people.


The more we yearn for such 'permanent deal', the more we loose (within the narrow context of facing aggression from pakistan - both conventional and unconventional).

The day we start to focus on winning the next week by force and develop the mindset to keep on innovating forever to win the subsequent next weeks, we will start to win.

Pakis don't stop artillery duel at the border forever. They stop only for the next week when we hit back with more force on current provocation.

Need to implement the Israel model with suitable modification.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3415
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Aditya G » 18 Jan 2016 00:43

Our options as of 26/11 ... and why none of them were feasible

http://sandbastion.blogspot.in/2015/11/ ... after.html

Image

....

The military options came from an unexpected quarter-M.K. Narayanan, who presented five detailed options. It was possibly the first time in recent times that the Indian government had been presented with a diverse range of military options that fell short of full-scale war. The alternatives ranged from surgical air strikes to covert action and special forces raids.

The first option called for covert action against the LeT leadership in Pakistan. Three other options called for the use of air power against LeT training camps and headquarters in PoK. IAF combat jets would carry out surgical strikes against LeT targets or helicopter-borne special forces commandos could strike the camps to ensure there was no collateral damage. A final option was for a limited war confined to airstrikes in PoK, which a mobilisation by the Indian armed forces would ensure did not spread across the border.

It is unclear whether these alternatives were prepared after consultations with India's military, but the three service chiefs weighed into the discussion, examining the options threadbare. Each military option had been minutely detailed down to the escalation dynamics, meaning the possible Pakistani reaction to each action by India. Significantly, all five options presented by Narayanan were confined to action within PoK, a territory claimed by India.

The first option, a revenge strike on the LeT leadership, was examined but ruled out. India, it was revealed, lacked any covert capability or personnel within Pakistan. Prime Minister I.K. Gujral had shut down RAW's covert operations inside Pakistan in 1997 and subsequent prime ministers had turned down requests by their spy chiefs to revive them. Infiltrating commandos for a special operation meant running the risk of them being captured just like Kasab. India, officials at the meeting feared, risked being put in the same category as Pakistan

Airstrikes like those carried by the IAF on the Kargil heights in 1999 needed exact coordinates of camps. They also needed people on the ground to 'illuminate' targets with laser designators so the IAF bombers could drop their precision weaponry on them without causing civilian collateral damage. "Most of the camps were nothing more than temporary tents. There was the very real risk of the operation killing civilians," said an official present at the meeting.

Indian intelligence officials could not give the military precise whereabouts of the LeT leadership and of the terrorist training camps. They did not have covert operatives inside Pakistan who could illuminate targets. Nor could they procure the intelligence in the short time it was needed for the strike to be effective. The option for airstrikes was discarded.

The last option of a limited war confined to PoK was also debated. The Indian military would mobilise itself along the international border to ensure Pakistan did not attempt to take the battle beyond PoK. Frenzied calls from the Indian public to strike Pakistan had alarmed the Pakistani military which had already put its air force on high alert and prepared anti-aircraft defences.

Another factor complicating an Indian military response was the presence of the US military on three airbases in Pakistan and in their airspace.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13774
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Jan 2016 02:26

Let me toss an IED-Mubarak here.

SUPPOSE.. for a microsecond... that there is a real civilian govt in Pakistan. Who want peace and security, even more than they want Honour, Dignity and Sovirginity. They understand that some of their compatriots appear to have gone across the border and conducted mayhem there. The evidence cited by the neighbors points at certain entities who are powerful and popular herrows.

What can/would u do?

1. If you read the reports on this attack, the name "Jaishe-Mohammed" appeared right on the first day. Checking into this, my take is that it is based on "a note left in the Innova" saying something something, which is a trademark of J-e-M.

OK, if u were J-e-M and you wanted "Kashmiri Mujaheddin" H-u-M (Salahuddin faction) to get the blame/credit, why would you write such a note and leave it conveniently in said Innova? Doesn't this suggest that the 'note' was either made by yindoo polis/army when they took a break from raping 700,000,000 Kashmiri wimmens every day?

2. It is well-known that the neighbors don't like the gentle, herrowic and vastly popular Maulana Masood Azhar. The yindoo fascists who had to suffer the humiliation of their Phoren Minister Jaswant Singh escorting said Maulana in an official VIP bizjet to Kandahar, are now back in power - don't u think they have the knives out for the Maulana? Is he going to get a fair trial at their hands, even if you were to hand him over to them? Look how fast they jumped to conclusions...

3. If you go arrest the Maulana, what are you going to charge him with?
"Oh, my neighbors are mad at you, so I am going to hand you over to them"?
As you said early, on, unless the evidence is solid as the rock between the judges' ears, any Paki judge worth his Rooh Afza will deny any request for extradition to India, and hey, Maulana is not really accused of any crimes inside Pakistan. So what is your basis for arresting him? Remember... u r **NOT** a military dictator - u r elected by parliamentary elections. U have clear memories :eek: of what happens if the military gets too displeased with your efforts to please the Indians.

4. Suppose you arrested the Maulana - and the courts order him released. Where does that leave you? At the end of a rope from a lamppost?

Given all the above, what course of action is open to you? Pls b reasonable and think through this problem, and see if you can give honest advice to the gentle, fair-minded, fairer-assed Sugar Thief.

For those hu don't have the long memory of UBC News: Maulana Azhar was sitting in an Indian jail in 1999, accused, but not tried, much less convicted, of kidnapping and murder - of some British tourists from Kashmir.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13774
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Jan 2016 14:35

Gee! I didn't intend to freeze the flow of fine suggestions.. I did have a followup. :shock:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18863
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist str

Postby Karan M » 18 Jan 2016 14:42

The most simple and achievable solution was posted by an IA SF officer.

He noted most infiltration attempts are attempted via a handful of posts and PA support is a given. After every terror strike, India should take out these posts, completely, with full ruthlessness and maximal casualties for the opponent. That will do more than 100 dossiers and peace talks.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Kakarat, sajaym and 64 guests