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

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby RoyG » 21 Sep 2016 00:00

High Mark 2016 is going on right now in Punjab. No coincidence the attack was timed 2 days before.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54168
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby ramana » 21 Sep 2016 00:24

deejay wrote:^^^ Wait till November???



Could very well be.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby sivab » 21 Sep 2016 00:26

https://twitter.com/asifsuhaf/status/778198127572426752

aasifsuhaf News24 ‏@asifsuhaf 7h7 hours ago
Army moving heavy artillery weapons towards LOC in Uri North Kashmir, 8 Militants Killed so far in URI Sector Army Sorcs to @news24tvchannel


https://twitter.com/asifsuhaf/status/778198127572426752

aasifsuhaf News24 ‏@asifsuhaf 4h4 hours ago
10 #Pak Armymn Killed by #IndianArmy Nr #LOC in URI Sectr of North #Kashmir 2 days aftr #UriAttack, #PakArmy Cl bk soldiers on leave Sources


Kolahoi ‏@PawanDurani 8m8 minutes ago
Breaking : In Pakistan flights to Gilgit, Skardu & Chitral have been cancelled .

This is very significant !

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

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby RoyG » 21 Sep 2016 00:31

At the end of the day, as long as we make inroads into Afghanistan, Balochistan, PoK and Sindh, Pakistan will cease to become a nation. They know it. They have to pull stupid stunts like this to bring about some semblance of national unity under the rule of army.

The noose is tightening and soon they will asphyxiate. The project has already started and PMO along w/ security establishment will ensure its success.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8480
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Rakesh » 21 Sep 2016 00:31

ramana wrote:
deejay wrote:^^^ Wait till November???
Could very well be.

Honestly, I have no patience till November. Maybe deejay feels the same way. I will leave it him to answer.

But what I think and feel, matters not to the powers that be. But I have faith that this PM is going to do something.

sivab wrote:https://twitter.com/asifsuhaf/status/778198127572426752

aasifsuhaf News24 ‏@asifsuhaf 7h7 hours ago
Army moving heavy artillery weapons towards LOC in Uri North Kashmir, 8 Militants Killed so far in URI Sector Army Sorcs to @news24tvchannel

I strongly believe we are going to respond with an artillery strike at militant camps in PoK and at military establishments in Pakistan.

vayu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 04 Apr 2008 11:48

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby vayu » 21 Sep 2016 00:33

Kolahoi ‏@PawanDurani 8m8 minutes ago
Breaking : In Pakistan flights to Gilgit, Skardu & Chitral have been cancelled .

This is very significant !


https://www.geo.tv/latest/114115-PIA-grounds-four-ATR-aircraft-multiple-flights-to-be-rescheduled

The flight cancellation is probably related to this. There are some aircraft which have been grounded for maintenance reasons.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby sivab » 21 Sep 2016 00:33

Kolahoi ‏@PawanDurani 3m3 minutes ago
Approximately 20 goals scored by Indo team so far ..... with 'surgical ' precision .

News from the 'stadium'

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3417
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Aditya G » 21 Sep 2016 00:44

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... t-3039886/

Image

High-level meeting at PM Narendra Modi’s residence on Monday. (Photo-PIB)

A day after 18 soldiers were killed in a terror attack on an Army camp in Uri, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and key ministers received counsel against rash military action at their first full-scale meeting Monday, government sources said.

Top military commanders warned that Pakistan’s army had raised its defensive posture along the Line of Control (LoC). Few details emerged from the meeting, but senior government figures pushed back against calls from their ranks for immediate military strikes against Pakistan.

The meeting, attended by Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, however, heard from National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and Army chief General Dalbir Singh on possible long-term options to retaliate against jihadist logistics and the Pakistani military infrastructure.

The Prime Minister briefed President Pranab Mukherjee on the discussions late Monday.
Indian Air Force chief Arup Raha, who is also chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, was not present at the main meeting, a sign some security experts took to signal that the government was not, at this stage, considering air strikes across the LoC.

Following the 26/11 strikes, the IAF had drawn up elaborate plans to carry out retaliatory attacks on jihad training camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which it has rehearsed several times in liaison with the intelligence services.

Foreign diplomats based in New Delhi read the government’s decision to allow the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service to proceed as scheduled as another sign that India is not contemplating immediate escalation of hostilities along the LoC.


http://indianexpress.com/article/opinio ... y-3039560/

Forty-eight hours after the 26/11 attacks, Mumbai still burning, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chaired a meeting of grim-faced security officials to consider the most important decision leaders can make. The evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba was involved, National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan pointed out, was irrefutable. India, he argued, had to punish the perpetrators — or open itself up to further assault, time and again.

Fali Homi Major, the then Air Force chief, told the prime minister he was prepared to strike inside Pakistan — but could not do so because the intelligence services could not provide adequate digital data on Lashkar camps. Army vice-chief Milan Naidu insisted on waiting for his boss, then out of the country, to return — and when General Deepak Kapoor was consulted, he flatly said the army could not wage a surgical strike.

“They did nothing,” said the man who is now India’s Prime Minister, in a campaign speech centred on 26/11, “Indians died and they did — nothing”. “Talk to Pakistan in Pakistan’s language,” he said, “because it won’t learn lessons until then”.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi now has the opportunity to deliver the message he advocated — but he’s still searching for the right words. Inside hours of Sunday’s terrorist attack in Uri, National Security Advisor Ajit Doval called top military and intelligence officials to prepare options for inflicting retaliation on jihadist groups in Pakistan. Those options will be refined, discussed, torn up, and redrawn many times in coming days; many, if not most, we will never learn of.

Logic, though, tells us that the prime minister’s advisors have five basic options on the table. The first is the old-fashioned one: Retaliate along the Line of Control, using eye-for-a-tooth rules that both the Indian and Pakistani armies understand well.
The Pakistan army posts that help infiltration — ideally, the same ones that aided Sunday’s attack — will be identified, and obliterated, using missiles or special forces. This is the option the army prefers, knowing that it serves its main purpose — deterrence — with the least risk of escalation.


India has, indeed, sometimes staged unpublicised retaliatory actions across the LoC — for example, destroying Pakistani forward posts after the kidnapping and beheading of its soldiers in raids by that country’s special forces in 2011 and 2013.

The Indian Army is also alleged to have avenged the torture and killing of Captain Saurabh Kalia, and five soldiers — sepoys Bhanwar Lal Bagaria, Arjun Ram, Bhika Ram, Moola Ram and Naresh Singh — during the Kargil war, by executing seven Pakistani soldiers captured in a raid on the Nadala enclave, on the Neelam river.

From the point of view of the political leadership, though, this is the least attractive option, for the simple reason that it cannot be bragged about. Talk about raids, and the other side will be compelled to retaliate. Fighting along the LoC will hurt Pakistan — but it will hurt India even more, since it will let jihadists slip through counter-infiltration defences with relative ease, as they used to before a ceasefire went into force in 2002.

The second option — the one most attractive to politicians — are air or missile strikes on jihadist targets across the LoC, which are highly visible but stop short of outright conflict. In the years since 26/11, India’s ability to conduct such strikes has been significantly enhanced.

However, the tactic isn’t always successful. In August 1998, the US fired missiles into Afghanistan, seeking to avenge bombings which killed 224 people. In all, 75 missiles, each priced at $1.5 million, killed six minor jihadists.

Even worse, Pakistan could hit back, targeting Indian industrial infrastructure, which is much more expensive than tent-and-donkey cart training camps. India could, of course, hit back yet again — but this course is fraught. Every step up what is called the escalation ladder — the set of steps that lead from a sub-conventional conflict, like terrorism, all the way up to outright confrontation — has to be carefully thought through when nuclear weapons are involved.

Like Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee before him, Prime Minister Modi has a third choice — to use coercion, but stop short of full throttle escalation. In 2001, after terrorists attacked Parliament, India mobilised troops. Pakistan was forced to respond in kind. Its nuclear weapons stopped India from attacking, its smaller economy suffered disproportionately. The stratagem is time-tested. In 1953, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru mobilised troops in Punjab to deter a Pakistani attack into Kashmir.

The Vajpayee strategy worked, forcing Pakistan to dramatically scale down the jihad in Jammu and Kashmir. But it was hideously expensive, in money and lives — and for a prime minister who is relentlessly focused on economic growth, this is a
real issue.

Fourth, Prime Minister Modi could try covert means, like bomb-for-bomb strikes in Pakistan, or targeted assassination of jihadist leaders. The problem is, jihadists India targets will hit back — and as Indian citizens die, there will be a public outcry. If the government had invested in growing India’s police and intelligence capacities to absorb the backlash, this might be less of a concern — but Central support for police modernisation has actually been slashed.

Finally, there’s the fifth option: Do nothing. This sounds callous — but it isn’t as worthless an idea as it seems. In the grand scheme of things, securing Kashmir’s internal security, and maintaining counter-infiltration defences, are what are important to India — not vengeance.

Both those ends, it could be argued, might be best served by soaking in the terrible blow India received at Uri — and focusing on the main task, which is stilling the street violence, and degrading the ranks of jihadists who have infiltrated into the state under its cover.

Lawrence Freedman, in his magisterial work on strategy, defines it thus: “Identifying objectives; and about the resources and methods for meeting such objectives”. Prime Minister Modi’s real problem is that while India knows its objectives — deterring Pakistan — it lacks the resources to do so.

For this, successive governments, including this one, are to blame. The modernisation of India’s military has been painfully slow, denying it the ability to stage precision operations. The Central government has cut funding for police modernisation, and the intelligence services are short-staffed — denying it the capacity to soak up retaliatory blows.

Leadership in difficult times should be a cold-blooded business. Prime Minister Modi’s decision should be driven by a clinical apprisal of what can be achieved — not what India wishes might be won.


Both above articles are by Praveen Swami. I find his writing to be good quality nowadays.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3417
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Aditya G » 21 Sep 2016 00:51

This piece in Firstpost beautifully summarises our options:

http://www.firstpost.com/india/uri-terr ... 11862.html

....

1. A sitting ducks strategy
2. Learn-no-lessons strategy
3. The hugs-and-kisses strategy
4. The outrage-and-bluster routine
5. The playing-by-our-rules strategy
6. The dossier strategy :mrgreen:
7. The diplomatic isolation gambit
8. The turn-the-other-cheek strategy
9. The look-at-root-causes strategy
10. The good boy strategy

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4003
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby partha » 21 Sep 2016 01:02

^
>>Fali Homi Major, the then Air Force chief, told the prime minister he was prepared to strike inside Pakistan — but could not do so because the intelligence services could not provide adequate digital data on Lashkar camps

Should India be striking at Lashkar camps or Pak army camps? What's difference anyway?

Any follow up report on Modi meeting Rashtrapati after Uri attack? Thought that was unusual.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1504
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby schinnas » 21 Sep 2016 01:15

Aditya G wrote:This piece in Firstpost beautifully summarises our options:

http://www.firstpost.com/india/uri-terr ... 11862.html

....

1. A sitting ducks strategy
2. Learn-no-lessons strategy
3. The hugs-and-kisses strategy
4. The outrage-and-bluster routine
5. The playing-by-our-rules strategy
6. The dossier strategy :mrgreen:
7. The diplomatic isolation gambit
8. The turn-the-other-cheek strategy
9. The look-at-root-causes strategy
10. The good boy strategy


:rotfl: Our baboos and netas are too smart and follow a combination of strategies / options.

Local Administrations and police / BSF / NIA:
Learn No lessons strategy
Sitting ducks strategy
Dossier strategy

Public Relations and Media Strategy:
Outrage and bluster routine

Babus and Netas and Army:
The dossier strategy
Diplomatic isolation gambit
Playing by our rules strategy

Diplomatic / IFS types:
Playing by our rules strategy
Dossier strategy
Diplomatic isolation gambit

Intelligentia:
Look at root cause strategy
Turn-the-other-cheek strategy
Hugs and kisses strategy
Learn no lessons strategy

Dossier strategy seems to be the most popular and has the widest consensus! :mrgreen:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby NRao » 21 Sep 2016 01:38

Boycott of SAARC Summit in Pak should be weighed: Afghanistan

Time has come for countries of the region to join hands in "singling out" Pakistan for spoiling regional peace and stability through terror, and possible boycott of upcoming SAARC Summit in Islamabad should be weighed, Afghan envoy Shaida Mohammad Abdali said today.

Calling for regional unity in sending out a strong message to Islamabad, he said terrorism being unleashed has become very lethal and systematic as it is state-sponsored and that there should be zero tolerance to it.

Asked whether India, Afghanistan and Bangladesh join hands to boycott the SAARC Summit in Islamabad in November, he said there must be a comprehensive effort by countries of the region and that most of them share views of India and Afghanistan.

"We have to make sure that we bring the maximum number of countries and I am sure most of the countries in South Asia are in line with what Afghanistan and India think. Therefore, the effort should be a comprehensive one and one which should include as many (countries) as possible," he told NDTV in an interview.

The Afghan envoy said time has come to "single out" the country that spoils unity and regional stability and peace. "Definitely we should single a country that spoils our unity and spoils regional stability and peace and that stops integration and connectivity."

Earlier in the day, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani called up Prime Minister Narendra Modi and condemned the "cross border attack" in Uri and expressed solidarity with India to eliminate the threat of terrorism.

"There must be zero tolerance (towards terrorism). It must end. We have seen the signs of terrorism becoming much more lethal and becoming very systematic. This is a state-sponsored terrorism. It is no more a issue of non-state actors that we have been hearing for a long time.

"Now there is ample proof of this as state-sponsored terrorism and, therefore we have to revisit our mechanisms. We have a global war on terror that must be revisited," said Abdali.

Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Lilo » 21 Sep 2016 02:26

Mending Pakistan’s behaviour...retaliate by using the Indus Waters Treaty

Brahma Chellaney

.....

If India jettisons the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), it can fashion water into its most potent tool of leverage to mend Pakistan’s behaviour. Pakistan has consistently backed away from bilateral agreements with India—from the Simla Agreement, to the commitment not to allow its territory to be used for cross-border terrorism. So why should India honour the IWT?

When Pakistan refuses to observe the terms of the 1972 peace treaty signed at Simla, it undercuts the IWT. It cannot selectively demand India’s compliance with one treaty while it flouts a peace pact serving as the essential basis for all peaceful cooperation, including the sharing of river waters.

The IWT ranks as the world’s most lopsided and inequitable water pact: It denies India the basic right to utilize the waters of the rivers of its own state of Jammu and Kashmir for industrial and agricultural production. The main J&K rivers—the Chenab, Jhelum and Indus—and their tributaries have been reserved for Pakistani use, with India’s sovereignty limited to the three rivers of the Indus basin flowing south of J&K: the Beas, Ravi and Sutlej. In effect, the IWT kept for India just 19.48% of the total waters of the six-river Indus system.

Pakistan, by repeatedly invoking the IWT’s conflict-resolution provisions to mount pressure on India, is already undermining the treaty, the world’s most generous sharing arrangement. Waging water war by such means carries the danger of a boomerang effect.

A balance between rights and obligations is at the heart of how to achieve harmonious, rules-based cooperation between co-riparian states. In the Indus basin, however, Pakistan wants rights without responsibilities: It expects eternal Indian water munificence, even as its military generals export terrorists to India and its civilian government wages a constant propaganda campaign against India’s water “hegemony” and seeks to internationalize every dispute.

The IWT has become an albatross around India’s neck. If India wishes to dissuade Pakistan from continuing with its proxy war, it must link the IWT’s future to Islamabad honouring its anti-terror commitment, or else the treaty collapses. Indeed, a Pakistani senate resolution passed earlier this year, calling for Pakistan to “revisit” the IWT, offers India an opening to renegotiate a more balanced and fair Indus treaty—and, if Pakistan refuses, to stop respecting the terms of the existing pact. In the absence of an enforcement mechanism in international law, nothing can stop India from emulating Pakistan’s example in not honouring its bilateral commitments.

Time to test the international backing for Pakis on IWT. SSwamy should be roped in to move a private member bill in the parliament.
Let us identify the voices that still insist on a one sided IWT with Pakis internally & externally.

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

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby prahaar » 21 Sep 2016 02:41

Liloji, which international body is going to support a treaty which endangers water access to 200 million? India should not allow converting a terror crisis into an India-generated humanitarian crisis fake narrative.

Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Lilo » 21 Sep 2016 03:20

Prahaar ji,
How is renegotiating a lopsided treaty endangering water access - what of the rights of 200 million in the Indus basin of the upperriparian?
Nothing will happen overnight, pakis will get enough notice period when India announces its plan to withdraw from IWT by so-so year.
In the meantime create any storage & water transport infra on our side to store any additional water we may benefit from - it will anyway take lot of time.
If pakis want india to be generous with respect to Indus water then let them acknowledge the fact that Indians have been generous, instead why are they claiming 80% of Indus water as if its their birth right ? - reflecting this acknowledgement on their part the new treaty must include conditionalities like cooperation on terror,access to Afghanistan,Central Asia, etc.
Pakis may may even continue to enjoy the equivalent to IWT water access only if they meet above conditions, else they have to make do with lessened water access as per the needs of the upperriparian whose requirements have multiplied exponentially since 1960.
Nothing iam broaching is uncivilized or liable to put India into a dock - unless we ourselves wish to abjure our right to Indus sytem and keep getting pushed into a dock in a world goaded by Pakis & their fourfathers.

Pakis are being smug about the IWT while exporting terrorism under a nuclear umbrella, smug under the impression that India wont touch it ever (as we havent touched it even during wars of 1965 or 71) its time to get them rid of that smugness.
Last edited by Lilo on 21 Sep 2016 15:23, edited 1 time in total.

Leonard
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 15 Nov 2000 12:31

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Leonard » 21 Sep 2016 03:45

Lots of images of "MBTs" being moved by Rail ..

Could they be positioned and deliver strikes -- ie Kill "2 Birds" with ONE stone ???

What is their range ?

Han Lizard has stationed "han drones" to build stuff in POK -- along with 5K Jihadi's (minimum) acting as Bodyguard's ...

How about a few SALVOs fired by 100 MBTs to vaporize some these "drones" in POK ...

Since the Lizard denies any knowledge of presence of drones -- It is a perfect opportunity to deliver a message ..

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Kailash » 21 Sep 2016 09:44

From @writetake (Ananthakrishnan) on twitter
In the last 48 Hrs, 25 infiltrators have been neutralised in URI. Heavy Artillery has bee moved to th sector. Radio intercepts confirm that the Pakistan Army has cancelled leave for all personnel. Their families have been asked to leave for safer area inland. Unconfirmed reports state that 25 killed are PA Regulars. Time for an early Diwali!

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

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby RoyG » 21 Sep 2016 09:58

Kill count is 29 (25 PA regulars + 4 jihadi irregulars) for 18 IA soldiers.

Ratio should be much much higher but at least we have regained our respect and some breathing room.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11643
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Sep 2016 10:34

Rakesh wrote:
ramana wrote:Could very well be.

Honestly, I have no patience till November. Maybe deejay feels the same way. I will leave it him to answer.

But what I think and feel, matters not to the powers that be. But I have faith that this PM is going to do something.

sivab wrote:https://twitter.com/asifsuhaf/status/778198127572426752


I strongly believe we are going to respond with an artillery strike at militant camps in PoK and at military establishments in Pakistan.


If we waste artillery on Mud huts and not on Pakistani Soldiers, equipment bases, we are the biggest fools.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9742
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Yagnasri » 21 Sep 2016 10:54

http://newsable.asianetnews.tv/india/pa ... edium=ndtv

and the last para of it is:
The choices apart from competing with an increasingly rich $2 trillion India are getting stark. It would be a mistake to underestimate the ability of Pakistan’s army to hold the country together. However, for its 182 million people, being a North Korea minus the sanctions is about the best they can hope for, going forward.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Philip » 21 Sep 2016 11:53

Just stop the Indus waters until terrorism is stopped! Maroof also recommended a naval blockade when the sh*t hits the fan. Not a dog or cat internationally will support Pak.In the subcontinent we already have full support for the boycott of Pak from SAARC from BDesh and Afghanistan and the Lankans have also come aboard.

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

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby prahaar » 21 Sep 2016 12:04

Naval blockade is another name for declaring war. But so is attacking Armed Forces. If the former is designed to provoke PA, then it might be a good alternative. With US troops positioned in Pakistan and NATO in Afghanistan, would that be a no go?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20496
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Philip » 21 Sep 2016 12:16

A naval blockade when there is all out conflict. Until then shelling Paki military positions,taking out key mil bases,etc.,smiting Muzzafarabad with incendiaries (like the British bombed Dresden)-as it is an HQ of terror activity,in POK,organising covert op[s,suspending/breaking off diplomatic relations,forming a Baluchi "govt-in-exile" in India,are just some options.
There are many ways of skinning the Paki Pig!

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11203
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Gagan » 21 Sep 2016 14:01

How do we stop Indus waters? There is NO dam on the indus

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13428
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby pankajs » 21 Sep 2016 14:13

Lets assume for a moment that there exists some *spare* storage capacity in all of the "run-of-the-river" projects.

Once that *small* extra capacity is filled then what? The water will take its natural course i.e flow continuously to Bakistan. What will we have achieved hanji apart from hawabazi. And if we *care* for international opinion stoppage of water will allow Bakis to plead Indian *genocidal* tendencies after all it is their only river basin.

Till we have capacity to lift the water out of the Indus basin this is just pure hawabazi that will seriously open us to very negative propaganda. If *victory* could be achieved by such sloganeering then Tamilnadu could very soon start receiving Indus water by hawai technology. In one stroke we could nullify all this bad blood between Karnataka and Tamilnadu. There I have as of this moment solved the issue and from now let peace prevail between the two states.

Aaryan
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 00:01

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Aaryan » 21 Sep 2016 14:29

Why are we thinking about retaliating on our won.. I'm not saying we cant, we can. But afgan's are already very angry with Porkis and so are Baloch's. Lets use their anger. Send SG boys to train ANA and Baloch rebels. In meantime using the context of stone pelting in JK send all the required no of troops in JK which will be needed to mount an offensive and put of rock solid defence. Open up at pre-decided date and time. Let the Pokis have their own 2.5 war.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13428
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby pankajs » 21 Sep 2016 15:00

BTW, if you want to scare them using the IWT there is another way.

IIRC, posted in some thread was a report that spoke about the desire of the Baki elected representative to re-negotiate the *unfair* treaty. You could accept their characterization of the treaty as unfair but to India. You could then politely suggest that a fair division of water would be closer to 50:50. And you would then accept the *Baki proposal/idea* of re-negotiating the treaty and indicate your willingness to start at the earliest.

Bakis would immediately cry murder or genocide but in this case it wouldn't cut much ice internationally firstly because the idea was Bakis to start with. Secondly because the split, to a casual observer, would *seem* fair/reasonable at 50:50. The Bakis will throw a fit but they and rest of the world will get the message without you *threatening* anyone.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8179
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Pratyush » 21 Sep 2016 15:11

Why not issue a quarantine of Pakistani water's. It is not a blockade. We can allow, humanitarian relief to reach tsp. But everything else is blocked. Barring items destined for Afghanistan.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2237
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby manjgu » 21 Sep 2016 15:19

pankajs...its not abt storage capacity etc..its about timing of water release.. if u hold back water during irrigation time then the objective has been achieved.. u cant hold water indefinetly..but its about the timing. not hawabazi...

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11643
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Sep 2016 15:35

Or dump chemical effluvents into the rivers when flowing into Pakistan.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13428
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby pankajs » 21 Sep 2016 15:40

Folks wanting to *stop* Indus water from flowing to the Bakis is hawabazi without the infra to lift the water out of the basin. For timing release do we need to scrap the IWT?

Timing the *release* of water it self is suggestive of *some* storage capacity else how do you stop a river from flowing? Q is how many days/weeks can you block/store before the inflow *forces* you to open the gates?

Even then it would not work if the Baki were smart. They would discharge water form their main storage during the cuttoff period knowing fully well that storage will be back to capacity once India is *forced* by nature to release water in matter of days/weeks. They could just synchronize their flows with your flows in reverse.

Only a canal of *adequate* capacity to lift water out of the Indus basin will allow you to *control* the water flow to have any impact. Here we are talking of walking out of IWT and of disrupting flows without *adequate* control over the water flow.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4357
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Manish_Sharma » 21 Sep 2016 17:11

RoyG wrote:Kill count is 29 (25 PA regulars + 4 jihadi irregulars) for 18 IA soldiers.

Ratio should be much much higher but at least we have regained our respect and some breathing room.


Army has done its work, now its up to Doval ji to get some pakistani make this statement, then watch the fun !

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3932
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby deejay » 21 Sep 2016 17:34

Manish_Sharma wrote:
RoyG wrote:Kill count is 29 (25 PA regulars + 4 jihadi irregulars) for 18 IA soldiers.

Ratio should be much much higher but at least we have regained our respect and some breathing room.


Army has done its work, now its up to Doval ji to get some pakistani make this statement, then watch the fun !


Satisfied already?

Abhi khatam nahin hua hai.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4357
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Manish_Sharma » 21 Sep 2016 17:40

:D

_/\_

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11203
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Gagan » 21 Sep 2016 17:44

Ye Dil Maange More!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Gyan » 21 Sep 2016 17:56

Manish_Sharma wrote:
RoyG wrote:Kill count is 29 (25 PA regulars + 4 jihadi irregulars) for 18 IA soldiers.

Ratio should be much much higher but at least we have regained our respect and some breathing room.


Army has done its work, now its up to Doval ji to get some pakistani make this statement, then watch the fun !


A tweet says that somewhere, some place 29 Pakis died, so everything is now fine. :roll: I want camera footage of Su-30MKI diving on Pak HQ headquarters and turning it into mud.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16926
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Rahul M » 21 Sep 2016 17:57

deejay wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Army has done its work, now its up to Doval ji to get some pakistani make this statement, then watch the fun !


Satisfied already?

Abhi khatam nahin hua hai.

abhi shuru bhi nahin hua hai.

rkirankr
BRFite
Posts: 773
Joined: 17 Apr 2009 11:05

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby rkirankr » 21 Sep 2016 18:01

deejay wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Army has done its work, now its up to Doval ji to get some pakistani make this statement, then watch the fun !


Satisfied already?

Abhi khatam nahin hua hai.

where is this info from

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Cosmo_R » 21 Sep 2016 18:07

Aditya_V wrote:Or dump chemical effluvents into the rivers when flowing into Pakistan.


And get hauled up for eco-terrorism? Set precedent for Cheen to do same to us? Not a good idea

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India's Retaliation Options to significant terrorist strikes

Postby Cosmo_R » 21 Sep 2016 18:10

Gagan wrote:How do we stop Indus waters? There is NO dam on the indus


It's a mystery. Actually we can't even stop any of the other rivers without flooding our own land. Better to spend monies on interlinking of rivers in India.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anishns, brar_w, rajsunder and 39 guests