Indian Army Discussion

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 26 Mar 2009 21:29

RayC wrote:China attacking India in a conventional mode is an interesting proposition.
...
Therefore, what would be the window for the campaign? And what would be the aim?
...

Ray, the Chinese wouldn't be attacking to gain much territory. They would probably just want to give a "bloody nose" to India to show who is the boss in this region!! So a sharp quick attack cannot be ruled out. And there have been reports that China has a large number of missiles aimed at India, and also has squadrons of SU-27s based in Tibet. Attack a few posts along the LAC using artillery and missiles without using too many ground troops, while having a strong AD network to thwart Indian counter-attack cannot be ruled out. However, how likely is this to happen on the ground? What would India's response be in that scenario?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 26 Mar 2009 22:10

manjgu wrote:RayC... intersting insights.. just 2 quick points

a) you had issues with terrorists and rebels being equated.. and you want to treat a thief and terrorist as same...collateral damage etc.. did not quite get the logic.

b) i was wondering what would have been the collateral damage in the kupwara encounter...which to us lay men appeared to be in the deep forests?

for your comments please...

I was not equating a thief to a terrorist. I was only trying to explain to those who are aware of what is a thief but have no personal knowledge of terrorists and their activities.

Most of us have not seen a terrorist face to face and least of all in action. I have. But it cannot be explained. Had I been a civilian it would be a different experience to what a military person would feel. For a military person, it would be a part of a daily job. Dangerous, but still nothing too alarming or heroic. Some will die and some will survive. It is a part of our life. The way the Indian public has become immune and de-sensitised to terror attack since it has become commonplace, to us, while we were de-sensitised long back.

To me, whether it is SF or RR or BSF, loss of life hurts - very badly. But we move on!

In civil life, a thief in your house is alarming and likewise a terrorist to the Army is not the routine way of life, though it is becoming or has become.

Now if a thief enters a house, should the police raze that house?

Collateral damage is not just buildings. It is also humans. If you had read my posts, I have explained it already. The forest on the slopes are where the Gujjars graze their livestock and have their temporary shelters. Can one guarantee that they would be safe in an air strike? Now if, such people die, would their kith and kin accept it? And would not the Hurriyat, the international media, human rights and Indian pinkos and Communists not make capital of it?

Who loses in the bargain? The Nation, the Government and the Army!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 26 Mar 2009 22:18

RaviBg wrote:
RayC wrote:China attacking India in a conventional mode is an interesting proposition.
...
Therefore, what would be the window for the campaign? And what would be the aim?
...
Ray, the Chinese wouldn't be attacking to gain much territory. They would probably just want to give a "bloody nose" to India to show who is the boss in this region!! So a sharp quick attack cannot be ruled out. And there have been reports that China has a large number of missiles aimed at India, and also has squadrons of SU-27s based in Tibet. Attack a few posts along the LAC using artillery and missiles without using too many ground troops, while having a strong AD network to thwart Indian counter-attack cannot be ruled out. However, how likely is this to happen on the ground? What would India's response be in that scenario?

with all due regards, bloody nose would require clarification in military terms.

Would one deploy Corps just to give a bloody nose? That is the question.

What if they get a bloody nose in the bargain? Or if they totally fail to do so? So much of money diverted for the campaign and failing?

The Chinese are a very cautious people. Unless they are sure, they will not embark. Their main aim is the US and to surpass them and by 2017, they will still be far behind. They are a pragmatic race and a nation!

In military terms, firing a few missiles and use of artillery would not be termed as an assault or an attack. It would fall under the category of ''Harassing Fire'' which is commonplace!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 26 Mar 2009 22:32

sum wrote:Just to add to above points:
We allow them to walk deep into our areas to prevent the terrorists from scooting back if challenged very near to the border and also to get the pigs as far as possible from the protective fire of the Paki border guards to ensure unhindered operations...

Let's be very frank.

We lure no one, at least as far as I know.

While it is natural that one should feel that we should lure as many as we can and eliminate them.

But have we forgotten our biology classes? Cells divide to form identical daughter cells.

The terrorist cannot be just killed and we feel it is the end. They are like protoplasm or like the lizards tail. They keep growing.

Why should we lure to waste time and lives?

It is better to change the local mindset and we have indeed been successful to a great degree!

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 26 Mar 2009 23:55

We must prepare for another Chinese attack which would come to "teach India another lesson" and put it back in its place for another 4 decades.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 27 Mar 2009 00:01

Katare,

Of course we must.

The issue is, is it feasible for China to attack?

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 27 Mar 2009 01:01

I am just wondering whether this group of terrorists also originated from the batches which Kasab trained with. Various unconfirmed reports were suggesting that there were few 10s or 100s more who trained with the terrorists who eventually participated in Mumbai on 26/11.

RayC wrote:It is the people who turn terrorists and not the govt. Therefore, the people have to understand that what the Army is doing is not against them, but against the terrorists and that the Army is there to improve their lot!

This in a nutshell seems to describe the very essence of CI ops and how the IA practices it. The western militaries would do well to follow such a doctrine however that is unlikely to happen when they fight in lands and cultures foreign to their own (and in their eyes inferior to their own).

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 27 Mar 2009 06:50

RayC wrote:Katare,

Of course we must.

The issue is, is it feasible for China to attack?

History tells us yes they can. They certainly would if we give them enough reason to beleive that they can repeat 1962 all over again. The only way they won't dare is if they are sure that all they would get this time is a bloody nose and loss of face nothing else.

kobe · Post by **kobe** » 27 Mar 2009 06:56

you guys mindset needs to be calibrated,
by 2017 china can attack india
and everybody is discussing what will happen IF IF IF

think outside of the box
by 2017 india MAY attack china too!
wtf this all defensive arguments,

if they f**k with india, india should and must attack them
across arunachal pradesh, across akshy-chin across taiwn straits
wherever and whenever.. just gimme a reason, i will press the button.

stop being such pussys, and if you want to run the imagination
imagine something bold too, is everyone wearing kangans on BRF too???

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 27 Mar 2009 09:14

kobe wrote:you guys mindset needs to be calibrated,
by 2017 china can attack india
and everybody is discussing what will happen IF IF IF

think outside of the box
by 2017 india MAY attack china too!
wtf this all defensive arguments,

if they f**k with india, india should and must attack them
across arunachal pradesh, across akshy-chin across taiwn straits
wherever and whenever.. just gimme a reason, i will press the button.

stop being such pussys, and if you want to run the imagination
imagine something bold too, is everyone wearing kangans on BRF too???

Not sure about the kangan but everyone seems to be a peacenik in India. It doesn't matter if we have been slapped hundred times we still keep on showing our cheeks to our enemies. No wonder a beggar Pakistan one third the size of India is able to get away with all the murders while we provide only evidence and not proof.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 27 Mar 2009 09:26

kobe wrote:you guys mindset needs to be calibrated,
by 2017 china can attack india
and everybody is discussing what will happen IF IF IF

think outside of the box
by 2017 india MAY attack china too!
wtf this all defensive arguments,

if they f**k with india, india should and must attack them
across arunachal pradesh, across akshy-chin across taiwn straits
wherever and whenever.. just gimme a reason, i will press the button.

stop being such pussys, and if you want to run the imagination
imagine something bold too, is everyone wearing kangans on BRF too???

That is interesting.

Though this is not the thread to discuss it, yet it would be interesting to know how exactly it is visualised to be done.

Intent has to be based on ground reality or else like Parvez's Op Badr (Kargil), it will fail!

Therefore, though it is correct that one should have an offensive mindset, one wonders offence without the environment maybe a trifle difficult a proposition.

I presume all this cosying up with the US is increasing the options wherein multidimensional (can't think of a better word in a hurry) can be addressed i.e. not confined to the Tibet front alone.

kobe · Post by **kobe** » 27 Mar 2009 10:34

RayC wrote:
.....Intent has to be based on ground reality or else like Parvez's Op Badr (Kargil), it will fail!.....

yes they failed, but did we succeed? we lost 300+ jawans and officers.
if there was ever a moment to burn karachi, it was during kargil.

there is too much pride in having chanakya mindset on BRF, but
no clear intent or discussion or strategy on total destruction of the enemy

india needs to have a clear, ever threatening nuclear offensive posture over the chinese. that is the only way they will be controlled.

i know chinese, i have lived in china. they are good at exploiting weakness and also know when to respect strength. that is why they are pushing india around and bend over backward against the americans and russians.

and regarding pakistan. only option is to cut them in three pieces. indian army should promote this doctrine and rehearse it repeatedly until it is clear to pakistan, china, and the rest of the world. forget about eunuchs called indian politicians. indian army will have to proactively promote an offensive doctrine so it will percolate up to the highest level

Ajay K · Post by **Ajay K** » 27 Mar 2009 11:31

Think focus should be on border monitoring rather than ground based sensors how about using remote sensing satellites with 1 mtr resolution. Pukis have installed the Satellite based border monitoring system (?) along the Afghan border. Similar systems are operational in Poland- Ukrainian, Columbia-Brazilian border, Chinese also have started to use them.

Uncle is already using them for controling the drug cartels across the Mexico border.

Do we have such systems in place?

Improved mobility for troopers should be provided by heli-borne, UAV patrols.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 27 Mar 2009 11:59

kobe wrote:
yes they failed, but did we succeed? we lost 300+ jawans and officers. if there was ever a moment to burn karachi, it was during kargil.

Pakistan failed because they were seized with the same mindset as some of what has been said here - offensive action, but without ground realities taken into consideration.

Tell me which war has been won with loss of lives and casualties.

We are losing men in the CI ops in Kashmir. Are we succeeding or are we losing? If we are losing, does it mean we stop fighting the terrorists?

Victory is measured in the fulfilment of the national aim. The national aim in Kargil was to recapture the territory taken by Pakistan by subterfuge. Therefore, it would not be wrong to say that we won. We translated the aim on ground!

If newspaper reports are to be taken as an guide, there was a report that during the Kargil War, there was a deficiency in certain war materiel. I will not get into the blame game, but one does not embark on war without being fully equipped to take on the threat scenario.

Therefore, Karachi burning is a moot point!

there is too much pride in having chanakya mindset on BRF, but
no clear intent or discussion or strategy on total destruction of the enemy

Total destruction of Pakistan is not feasible. It is not because one is wearing 'kangan' (as someone put it), but it is what the ground realities dictate. Please do understand that to capture POK one has to go over many mountain ridges and valleys and it is underdeveloped i.e. tracks and roads are few and far between. Without an axis of maintenance, it will be Kargil repeat, this time to India's disadvantage. Canal crossing with DCB is not a matter of semantics.

india needs to have a clear, ever threatening nuclear offensive posture over the chinese. that is the only way they will be controlled.

Am I to believe that India has no clear idea of how and when its nuclear arsenal will be used? And must the Govt spell it out in no uncertain terms and indulge in scare mongering? Hardly a diplomatic way to address sensitive international issues! I wonder if China has stated publicly that they will nuke India!

i know chinese, i have lived in china. they are good at exploiting weakness and also know when to respect strength. that is why they are pushing india around and bend over backward against the americans and russians.

It is good to know that you have lived in China. If you share your views in detail with facts, it will be a great eyeopener. Yes, I presume there are many who know that China feeds on other's weakness. And it is true that India requires to show greater resolve over the issues that keep happening on the border from time to time.

and regarding pakistan. only option is to cut them in three pieces. indian army should promote this doctrine and rehearse it repeatedly until it is clear to pakistan, china, and the rest of the world. forget about eunuchs called indian politicians. indian army will have to proactively promote an offensive doctrine so it will percolate up to the highest level

Since you know China and the Chinese well, remember the advice of Sun Tsu - The skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field. With his forces intact he disputes the mastery of the empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph is complete - therefore, let Pakistan break up with its own internal contradictions with some assistance from India, preferably covert. What is currently happening in Pakistan is possible the beginning of the end of Pakistan and Pakistan claims it is the handiwork of R&AW! Another Chinese virtue that one should adopt is - patience and perseverance!

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 13:04

RayC wrote: Since you know China and the Chinese well, remember the advice of Sun Tsu - The skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field. With his forces intact he disputes the mastery of the empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph is complete - therefore, let Pakistan break up with its own internal contradictions with some assistance from India, preferably covert. What is currently happening in Pakistan is possible the beginning of the end of Pakistan and Pakistan claims it is the handiwork of R&AW! Another Chinese virtue that one should adopt is - patience and perseverance!

Pardon my pun sir, but did Sun Tsu also say to do nothing when incidents like Mumbai happen every six months and when soldiers are killed in Kashmir?

Because frankly that is what we are doing, and if we rationalize, what we are doing (i.e. nothing) using some gibberish by Sun Tsu or Chanakya or who ever, I do not know who is the bigger f*ol, the rationalizer or the do-nothinger. What we are seeing from GOI is not a master plan of Sun Tsu or Chanakyan class, but the actions of clue less.

When we actively support(instead of mouthing platitudes) US giving alms to Pakistan and say Pakistan is an equal victim of terrorism, should we think that India is having a plan? In short, do you think that India HAS a plan? First let us know that India has a plan or not, then later we can think whether it is of Sun Tsu/Chanakyan class or whether it is pedestrian.

The only time India acted to change game situation around it was in early 1970s. After that, is there even a small game changer from us vis-a-vis Pakistan. China changed the situation by giving nukes to Pakistan. Pakistan changed the situation first in punjab and then continually in Kashmir and now with success in extending it to the whole of India.
If the game is against us, as you say, what are we doing to change it?

P.S: 1998 was a game changer with respect to US- this is the only action which was a small worthwhile game changer from us in the recent decades.

Edit: In short sir, we have India's reaction to Mumbai, i.e. NOTHING. What will be the reaction when another Mumbai occurs, then another and then another. Do we have an answer to that? After how many Mumbais will we be able to get out of this do nothing syndrome?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 13:08

ravi_ku wrote: The only time India acted to change game situation around it was in early 1970s. After that, is there even a small game changer from us vis-a-vis Pakistan..

Parakram

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 13:09

Sanku wrote:
ravi_ku wrote: The only time India acted to change game situation around it was in early 1970s. After that, is there even a small game changer from us vis-a-vis Pakistan..
Parakram

Was it a game changer? What did it change and note Parakram was only a response from us to Parliament attack.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 13:33

ravi_ku wrote:
Parakram
Was it a game changer? What did it change and note Parakram was only a response from us to Parliament attack.

Yes and no; Parakram definitely worked to stem the increasing tide of proxy war many years till UPA came back and undid it. (I am only stating facts here, borne out by statistics on the ground, it is not a pol statement) It was however not a permanent game changer, just a short term one (71 also has this issue) -- the only permanent game change it has caused is emergence of cold start.

Was it a response to attack on Parliament; in part yes -- but it was also an interesting Mil-Diplomacy initiative. In general whether you are truly taking a initiative or merely responding or external stimuli is a bit of philosophical debate in the end. What counts is that an action which changed the course on the ground was taken successfully.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 13:43

Sanku wrote: Yes and no; Parakram definitely worked to stem the increasing tide of proxy war many years till UPA came back and undid it. (I am only stating facts here, borne out by statistics on the ground, it is not a pol statement) It was however not a permanent game changer, just a short term one (71 also has this issue) -- the only permanent game change it has caused is emergence of cold start.

Was it a response to attack on Parliament; in part yes -- but it was also an interesting Mil-Diplomacy initiative. In general whether you are truly taking a initiative or merely responding or external stimuli is a bit of philosophical debate in the end. What counts is that an action which changed the course on the ground was taken successfully.

Sanku,
a game changer essentially means that the ground realities have been changed. Was the ground reality for India-Pakistan the same after 1971? Was it the same after 1974? Was it the same after China helped Pakistan in getting nukes? Did the Kashmir terrorism and later its spread to rest of India, change things?

Op Parakram was an attempt/(you can say warning) of game changer. It was NOT a game changer.

I am asking if India HAS a plan for Pakistan. When you do not involve in game changing moves, there can be three things:
i) we are not interested in game changing and thus we do not need a plan. Only a fool will say that India is happy with the status quo with a nuclear Pak and its terrorism with Mumbai attacks all over India.
ii) We do not have the capability. When even Pak can involve in them, I see no reason why we cant.
iii) We have no plan and are blundering idi*ts.

I picked (iii) because of no proof to the contrary.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 27 Mar 2009 14:37

Ravi

Pardon my pun sir, but did Sun Tsu also say to do nothing when incidents like Mumbai happen every six months and when soldiers are killed in Kashmir?

I feel that you would prefer that India went to war. Waging war is not a difficult proposition. It can be done as and when desired. But then the outcome of that war on the Nation is of concern. The economy will take a tailspin and whatever we are achieving would get slowdown and the gap between our principle adversary will grow wider and then one will complain that this is not acceptable. Catch 22 to be precise.

Now take this scenario. If by not waging war and using means that encourage the inherent incongruity and divisions in Pakistan that result in Pakistan self destructing, is that not a cheaper action? Of course, the result is not immediate to be seen as in a war. What is happening in Pakistan? There are multipolar centres of authority and they are like bullocks pulling in different directions. There is power struggle between Zardari and Sharif, between the civilian govt and the Army and ISI and even between Zardari and his own hand picked PM Gilani!! Then there is the Radio Mullah who has made the Swat Valley practically a separate country where Pakistan's writ does not work. The Balochi and the Shias of Northern Areas are in an uneasy peace with the Govt and can explode any time (maybe some foreign nation can help). All are against the Punjabis. I am sure these issues are being addressed by concerned countries. The Shia Sunni are at each other's throat and there is the spate of bombings! Pakistan's economy has failed and are being bailed out by IMF and WB and are getting into greater debts. Therefore, the witchs' cauldron is boiling and will soon brim over! They are tottering and will keel over in the near future.

I, concede that it will not satisfy those with bloodlust in mind.

Because frankly that is what we are doing, and if we rationalize, what we are doing (i.e. nothing) using some gibberish by Sun Tsu or Chanakya or who ever, I do not know who is the bigger f*ol, the rationalizer or the do-nothinger. What we are seeing from GOI is not a master plan of Sun Tsu or Chanakyan class, but the actions of clue less.

Of course, that too is a point of view.

When we actively support(instead of mouthing platitudes) US giving alms to Pakistan and say Pakistan is an equal victim of terrorism, should we think that India is having a plan? In short, do you think that India HAS a plan? First let us know that India has a plan or not, then later we can think whether it is of Sun Tsu/Chanakyan class or whether it is pedestrian.

Do you have a plan? If so, what?

The only time India acted to change game situation around it was in early 1970s. After that, is there even a small game changer from us vis-a-vis Pakistan. China changed the situation by giving nukes to Pakistan. Pakistan changed the situation first in punjab and then continually in Kashmir and now with success in extending it to the whole of India. If the game is against us, as you say, what are we doing to change it?

[/quote]

I have not understood as to where I have mentioned that the 'game' (whatever that means) is against us.

They can extended it to whole of India since we are the type who feel that so long as it has not harmed us directly, let us not put our nose into it, but sure we will shout from the rooftops at the outrages! How many landlords report to the local PS of new tenants? I believe it has been notified that these should be reported. Likewise, how many desist from employing Bangladeshi as maid servants, especially when they come cheap? How many contractors desist from employing Bangladeshi labourers? It is not so difficult to spot them. Their syntax and accent is different!

So, let us first also look within and then think of plans that cleanse the country of the problems that you mention.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 14:52

ravi_ku wrote: a game changer essentially means that the ground realities have been changed. .

Well thats one way to define it yes -- but what sort of ground reality change do you want to see -- for one post Parakram, Kashmir has stabilized in a massive way including two elections etc (check the statistics) is that not change in ground?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 27 Mar 2009 15:00

RayC wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote:Re RayC

You missed some of the biggest achievements of Indian army (Indian strategy) In J&K:-

Compare J&K with Afghanistan for level of tourism, level of civil infrastructure, Normal civil activites, political activities, commerce and trade, roads, railways, bridges, bus & truck network, Hindu religious festivities, absense of massive opium farms, hydro electric plants etc.
Thanks.

You are welcome. In addition we should be careful about US casulality figures in Iraq & Afghanistan as we tend to forget the Poor Iraqi and Afghanistan security forces who are loosing people in droves. The losses of allies and local security is also to be added in, as they are under US command.

On different footing, would it be proper to guess that the first contact with terrorists was not fully effective allowing them to break off and counter ambush (??)

Further, non use of artillery and attack helos is ok if we don't want to have colateral damage but it should not be automatic mantra as if it can never be used.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 15:55

RayC wrote:Ravi
I feel that you would prefer that India went to war. Waging war is not a difficult proposition. It can be done as and when desired. But then the outcome of that war on the Nation is of concern. The economy will take a tailspin and whatever we are achieving would get slowdown and the gap between our principle adversary will grow wider and then one will complain that this is not acceptable. Catch 22 to be precise.

This is where I believe you have got me wrong. Was giving nukes to Pakistan by china, waging war? Was Kashmir terrorism waging war? Was TAM(terrorist attacks on mumbai) waging war? Pakistan economically is in a worst sh*thole than we can be even after waging war. But does it stop Pakistan? I am not talking about waging wars, I am talking about changing the ground rules (in my words game changers). There is a lot of difference between, we game changing and trying to see others do not game change(which is what the army is doing in Kashmir). One is proactive by nature whereas the other one is status quoist and reactive by nature.

I do not see any advantage in being the reactive one and we are reactive only to the extent of trying to neutralize the game changing action, and not even trying to use that actions faults to our benefit.

Now take this scenario. If by not waging war and using means that encourage the inherent incongruity and divisions in Pakistan that result in Pakistan self destructing, is that not a cheaper action? Of course, the result is not immediate to be seen as in a war.

Sir, my simple question is yes, we are not waging war (I have no qualms or regrets or anything, that we are not waging war.) but are we encouraging Pakistan to self destruct? Two completely different things. If our only action for Pakis self destruction is not waging war, I do not see the point in it.

{If we have a policy that Pakistan should self destruct - here on IPSSD}
And again, I need to ask you, do you think India has a aim that Pak should self destruct? I am questioning this particular assumption of yours, sir. You are saying India is not waging war because we have a policy that Pakistan should self destruct. I am asking solely about the second part. For me the first part is only a means, the second question is more important: what is our aim for Pakistan.

What is happening in Pakistan? There are multipolar centres of authority and they are like bullocks pulling in different directions. There is power struggle between Zardari and Sharif, between the civilian govt and the Army and ISI and even between Zardari and his own hand picked PM Gilani!!

and our official spokes person said that we are not able to the central authority in Pak and thus not properly able to do business with it. IPSSD, instead of having only Pakistan policy, shouldnt we have Zardari policy, Sharif policy, Army policy, ISI policy and so on.

What happened to the multipolar centres? All it took was a rap from US, to set them straight.

Then there is the Radio Mullah who has made the Swat Valley practically a separate country where Pakistan's writ does not work. The Balochi and the Shias of Northern Areas are in an uneasy peace with the Govt and can explode any time (maybe some foreign nation can help). All are against the Punjabis. I am sure these issues are being addressed by concerned countries. The Shia Sunni are at each other's throat and there is the spate of bombings! Pakistan's economy has failed and are being bailed out by IMF and WB and are getting into greater debts. Therefore, the witchs' cauldron is boiling and will soon brim over! They are tottering and will keel over in the near future.

Pakistan is a country always on the brink of self imploding. However it will not implode without India's push. If it almost goes to the brink, it will always be bailed out.

We are self congratulating ourselves for something not happening on the ground. There was a member of Pakistan thread, who said during the latest crisis in Pakistan, that it was clearly going to implode in 3 months. I said no, it is not. You are saying it will in say 5 years, it will not unless India acts in some fashion. The creation of bangladesh required active Indian support, the next pakistan will require the same (whether it is going to be war or protection of their leaders, I do not know)

Sir, if we see the number of bombings in Kashmir and India and compare it with Pakistan, we might be worse off. Infact, wasnt there a study which said India was the second most affected (in terms of death) by terrorism after Iraq. Does this mean for an outsider is India imploding? Those bombings are just that. The Radio mullah and many others are simply playgrounds for ISI. Wasnt there a report which said what the Pak army famously did in Bajour, where their arrival was pre-informed and they destroyed some empty buildings, hailed their victory and came back.

I, concede that it will not satisfy those with bloodlust in mind.

Sir, All I can say is, frankly I do not care if Pakistan exists or does not exist as long as India has no bad effects from it. If it has bad effects, I again do not care if Pakistan does not exist.

If you think this is bloodlust.........

Of course, that too is a point of view.

Do you have a plan? If so, what?

So what? The existence of a plan(assuming that it is working) automatically implies that we have an aim spelled out loud and clear.

The only time India acted to change game situation around it was in early 1970s. After that, is there even a small game changer from us vis-a-vis Pakistan. China changed the situation by giving nukes to Pakistan. Pakistan changed the situation first in punjab and then continually in Kashmir and now with success in extending it to the whole of India. If the game is against us, as you say, what are we doing to change it?
I have not understood as to where I have mentioned that the 'game' (whatever that means) is against us.

They can extended it to whole of India since we are the type who feel that so long as it has not harmed us directly, let us not put our nose into it, but sure we will shout from the rooftops at the outrages! How many landlords report to the local PS of new tenants? I believe it has been notified that these should be reported. Likewise, how many desist from employing Bangladeshi as maid servants, especially when they come cheap? How many contractors desist from employing Bangladeshi labourers? It is not so difficult to spot them. Their syntax and accent is different!

So, let us first also look within and then think of plans that cleanse the country of the problems that you mention.

Game situation simply means ground realities and the relationships of the countries with each other. (call it the effect of the great game thread and some guru(Shiv mostly) postings.

Again what I am calling for the first time, Maryada Purushottam Ram Syndrome (MPRS). In short it means, that unless we are the perfect epitome of righteousness and never did any wrong things in life, I should not point fingers at others even if the other guy has done much bigger faults. That I do not report my rentee to my local PS, doesnt mean it gives the right to Pakistan to send a terrorist to kill me. I am not MPRam, but I do not need to be MPRam to look after my interests and say somebody is hurting me.

P.S: Please please notice, no where in ALL my posts, have I said, to avenge TAM we need to wage war or anything like that. I have always tried to be ambiguous about it and to a fault. And at the other end I do not say, we should not wage war or like that. For me, war is continuation of nation's interests, thats about it. In short, I am open to wage war but do not want it.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 16:01

Sanku wrote:
ravi_ku wrote: a game changer essentially means that the ground realities have been changed. .
Well thats one way to define it yes -- but what sort of ground reality change do you want to see -- for one post Parakram, Kashmir has stabilized in a massive way including two elections etc (check the statistics) is that not change in ground?

Sanku,
Are we still in the same situation as in 1980s or 70s? Is elections the only criteria to check, didnt we have elections prior to that? What about the number of army personnel posted there? What about just the other day, when 5 army personnel were killed? Did it change prior or after parakram.

Look Sanku, parakram was an attempt. I respect an attempt than not trying at all. But I recognise, it was an attempt, thats about it.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 16:07

RayC Sir,

Forget about all the above. A very basic question sir, what do you think India has to do to avoid any more mumbais?

P.S: Mods I think we are getting out of thread topic. Where do you propose, I can take this. Thanks in advance.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 16:25

ravi_ku wrote: Sanku,
Are we still in the same situation as in 1980s or 70s? Is elections the only criteria to check, didnt we have elections prior to that? What about the number of army personnel posted there? What about just the other day, when 5 army personnel were killed? Did it change prior or after parakram.

Look Sanku, parakram was an attempt. I respect an attempt than not trying at all. But I recognise, it was an attempt, thats about it.

Look boss you are going all over the place, 70s were different so were 80s and so were 90s and so are 2000s -- the success or failure of Parakram can not be measured by whether it has managed to take us back to the Guptakalin life.

Thats why I asked, to measure success or failure you have to first DEFINE your goals from an attempt (as has RayC) -- Parakaram had limited goals to pursue -- to shut down proxy attack from Pakistan and consequently stabilize Kashmir to the extent that polls could happen. Which it succeeded in till UPA undid it.

So Parakaram can only be measured by before and after that incident in narrow period.

So yes it was a game changer in the sense it undid about 10 years of militancy -- and to remind you of your original question "did the Indian state do anything at all to change game" answer -- yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------

However if you want freedom from death before 100, world peace and universal brotherhood -- yes Parakaram failed -- and guess what -- there have never been game changers.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Anyway I think the question "hat do you think India has to do to avoid any more mumbais" itself is deeply flawed, because it looks at only one minor event (yes extremely minor) a mere symptom and considers it to be the problem, if you avoid a Mumbai they will pull the next stunt.

The problem is Pakistan's jehadi mentality -- ask how do you want to curb it -- and the answer has already been given by RayC here.

A solid defence followed by constant covert attacks on Pakistan in all spectrum -- and yes consistent attack against the Jehadi infra (read ISI) the top brass of Pakistan must be made to pay with their lives and that of their near and dear ones, with property, and their most precious asset -- there deluded self esteem.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 16:36

Sanku wrote:
ravi_ku wrote: Sanku,
Are we still in the same situation as in 1980s or 70s? Is elections the only criteria to check, didnt we have elections prior to that? What about the number of army personnel posted there? What about just the other day, when 5 army personnel were killed? Did it change prior or after parakram.

Look Sanku, parakram was an attempt. I respect an attempt than not trying at all. But I recognise, it was an attempt, thats about it.
Look boss you are going all over the place, 70s were different so were 80s and so were 90s and so are 2000s -- the success or failure of Parakram can not be measured by whether it has managed to take us back to the Guptakalin life.

Thats why I asked, to measure success or failure you have to first DEFINE your goals from an attempt (as has RayC) -- Parakaram had limited goals to pursue -- to shut down proxy attack from Pakistan and consequently stabilize Kashmir to the extent that polls could happen. Which it succeeded in till UPA undid it.

So Parakaram can only be measured by before and after that incident in narrow period.

So yes it was a game changer in the sense it undid about 10 years of militancy -- and to remind you of your original question "did the Indian state do anything at all to change game" answer -- yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------

However if you want freedom from death before 100, world peace and universal brotherhood -- yes Parakaram failed -- and guess what -- there have never been game changers.

-----------------------------------------------------------

That is what it was, Parakram had a limited effect, that during that time of Parakram, there were no terrorist attacks. Apart from that, there was none. If we look back 6months after parakram or 6 months before parakram, was there a noticeable change? If we remove the 2 years of Parakram and see terrorism in India, would you have noticed a complete difference in trajectory?
If not, how can we say that it has changed the ground realities?

Anyway I think the question "hat do you think India has to do to avoid any more mumbais" itself is deeply flawed, because it looks at only one minor event (yes extremely minor) a mere symptom and considers it to be the problem, if you avoid a Mumbai they will pull the next stunt.

The problem is Pakistan's jehadi mentality -- ask how do you want to curb it -- and the answer has already been given by RayC here.

A solid defence followed by constant covert attacks on Pakistan in all spectrum -- and yes consistent attack against the Jehadi infra (read ISI) the top brass of Pakistan must be made to pay with their lives and that of their near and dear ones, with property, and their most precious asset -- there deluded self esteem.

Do you think I did not realise all that when I asked that question?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 16:44

ravi_ku wrote: If we remove the 2 years of Parakram and see terrorism in India, would you have noticed a complete difference in trajectory?
If not, how can we say that it has changed the ground realities?

If no then why has Kashmir gone progressively quite(r) after Parakram which has lasted till this date?

However by the standards of success you are imposing even 71 has not changed any trajectories what so ever.

Please realize that what we want and what we can get have to be balanced. Our desires are not limited by reality but what we can achieve are. Please please spend some time and see what are we stacked up against when we consider solving the Pakistan problem.

Do you think I did not realise all that when I asked that question?

If you did then why ask? We are not here to play childish games -- at least I am not, I really fail to see what your POV if any and how does it add or differ from the ground already much trodden.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 27 Mar 2009 17:09

Sanku wrote:
ravi_ku wrote: If we remove the 2 years of Parakram and see terrorism in India, would you have noticed a complete difference in trajectory?
If not, how can we say that it has changed the ground realities?
If no then why has Kashmir gone progressively quite(r) after Parakram which has lasted till this date?

However by the standards of success you are imposing even 71 has not changed any trajectories what so ever.

Please realize that what we want and what we can get have to be balanced. Our desires are not limited by reality but what we can achieve are. Please please spend some time and see what are we stacked up against when we consider solving the Pakistan problem.

Oh really! In what respect has kashmir progressed with respect to integration of India? Has the entire hurriyat cadre and the PDP, the soft face of terror been discredited? has the Kashmir assembly moved towards abolishing the special laws and moving in line with rest of Indian states?

If we have not and you want me to think that 2% or 5% of decrease in violence because they have been successfull in exporting the rest of terrorism to rest of India and then start praising that percentages, I apologize for not being able to do that. I apologize for not being able to think that Mumbai terrorists roaming around for full 3 days are representation of the progressive-ness of Kashmir. I apologize for not being able to think that eating chat at a favorite joint in hyderabad can kill me and that is not a measure of standard of success which I am "imposing".

If we have everything "stacked up against", what are we doing to change it? In case you didnt realize, that IS the definition of game changer. and in the last three decades, all you (I mean India) could come up was Parakram

Yes I definitely want to know, what we are doing for "solving the Pakistan problem." instead of giving excuses of Mai(China), Baap(US). Within those constraints, there are lots that can be done, are we doing even 1% of what we CAN do? For eg: How much effort does it take for a party to organise a rally? Couldnt the govt even create a mini rally against XYZ for selling YXZ to Pakistan? What stops it? There are many things that India can do, that it is not doing.

Do you think I did not realise all that when I asked that question?
If you did then why ask? We are not here to play childish games -- at least I am not, I really fail to see what your POV if any and how does it add or differ from the ground already much trodden.

Really and as yet, are we sure that GOI has a aim to destroy Pakistan? Only yes and no please.

Quit trying to judge me and stop giving excuses for inaction of GOI.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 27 Mar 2009 17:23

More pigs dispatched to Jannat..posting in full.

link

Even as the forces are fighting off another infiltration attempt in the Gurez sector, four militants, including a district commander of the Jaish-e-Muhammad, were killed as fresh fighting erupted in the Hachimarg area of Kupwara close to the Line of Control, and in Lolab and Bandipur today.
One unidentified militant was killed as troops replied to heavy fire from a residential house during search operation in the Hachimarg area of Kupwara today.
After intelligence inputs that a militant had infiltrated into the village and taken shelter in a residential house, the forces had launched a search operation in the area and begun conducting house-to-house searches for the militant, during which they came under attack.
Hachimarg is close to the Hafrada forests of Kupwara where troops were engaged in a bloody five-day battle with infiltrating militants recently that left 25 persons, including 8 soldiers, dead.
Police sources apprehend that some of the militants in the forests might have slipped through the forces dragnet and taken shelter in adjoining areas.
As a result, the forces have sealed off a number of villages including Shelura, and begun a massive hunt for fleeing militants.
The search operations were on when reports last came in, but there was no information of any casualties or any militants having been arrested.
A district commander of the Jaish-e-Muhammad was killed in an encounter with the troops and the police in the Dardpora forests of Bandipur today.
The encounter broke out after the 14 RR and the SOG of the police sealed the area off following a tip off about militant presence.
The slain militant, identified as Wasim Bilal, was found with an AK 47 rifle, a magazine, three hand grenades, and five SIM cards besides other ammunition, the police said.
A Lashkar-e-Tayyaba militant was killed in the Doorsa forests of Lolab in a several hours long gun battle with troops that broke out after the 28 RR and the 9 Paras sealed off the area after specific reports of militant movement.
The police said that the slain militant was a top Lashkar commander hailing from the Pakistan-administered part of Kashmir.
Exchanges of fire were still on in the area when reports last came in.
Gun battles have broken out in the Gurez sector close to the Line of Control after a group of militants was reported to be trying to sneak over the dividing line.
Personnel of the 8 Bihar Regiment have swung into action and started an operation against the infiltrators, one of whom is said to have been killed in exchanges of fire that were still on.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Mar 2009 17:25

ravi_ku wrote: Really and as yet, are we sure that GOI has a aim to destroy Pakistan? Only yes and no please. .

No very obviously not!!

This has been such a waste of time.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 27 Mar 2009 19:36

Line of Duty on TimesNow
Mechanised warfare in Rajasthan. India's biggest tank formation in the deserts of Rajasthan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB6b5bxbxmY

sum · Post by **sum** » 27 Mar 2009 21:04

Sir, if we see the number of bombings in Kashmir and India and compare it with Pakistan, we might be worse off. Infact, wasnt there a study which said India was the second most affected (in terms of death) by terrorism after Iraq. Does this mean for an outsider is India imploding? Those bombings are just that. The Radio mullah and many others are simply playgrounds for ISI. Wasnt there a report which said what the Pak army famously did in Bajour, where their arrival was pre-informed and they destroyed some empty buildings, hailed their victory and came back.

Ravi,
Pretty good points, IMHO...

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 27 Mar 2009 22:22

sunilUpa wrote:More pigs dispatched to Jannat..posting in full.

link

Does that bring the total to 21/25?

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 28 Mar 2009 17:50

Second group of pigs encircled, one piglet sent to jannat.

Bad weather hampers Gurez operation

Srinagar The Army has encircled a big group of infiltrators in the forests of Gurez Valley, but bad weather and snow is hampering the operations which started early on Thursday morning. So far one infiltrator has been killed in this in the Hajibal forest near the Line of Control. This is the second major infiltration bid on the LoC in the past week.

Sources said the group, comprising 15 to 20 militants, was intercepted by troops in the forests of Gurez after they sneaked as the Army was busy flushing out infiltrators in Kupwara and Handwara. This militant group too is believed to be highly trained and equipped with the latest weapons and maps. Sources said the group had reached close to the Bandipore forests and established contact with their local handlers, before they were intercepted.

Brar said the area where the militants were holed up has been sealed off. “It is difficult for militants to escape as our troops have cordon off the forests,” he said. Sources, however, said the tough terrain and weather was likely to benefit the militants.

Like in Kupwara, the Army had prior knowledge about the infiltration in Gurez sector.

sum · Post by **sum** » 28 Mar 2009 18:02

Hope we play it safer and don't loose as many men as last time(max usage of all tech apparatus like UAVs, air strikes etc should help in doing that)...

Also very noticeable seems to be our beefed up intel apparatus in these piggy orgs. Notice that Col. Brar, in his press conference last time,specifically mentioned HUMINT (and not the usual TECHINT) as source of knowing the infiltration in advance...

26/11 seems to have got the wheels into motion.

Btw, what happened to the remaining 7 of the 25 who were trapped in the prev operation? IIRC, only 18 were hunted down.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 28 Mar 2009 18:20

sum wrote: Btw, what happened to the remaining 7 of the 25 who were trapped in the prev operation? IIRC, only 18 were hunted down.

According to media reports, they escaped.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 28 Mar 2009 22:12

General Deepak Kapoor to visit France from March 31

During his visit, the Army chief will interact with senior military and civilian defence hierarchy and discuss various contemporary defence related issues.

He will also visit important training institutions and operational headquarters.

France and India share common values and have convergence of views on many issues that affect the emerging world order.

These encompass varied activities like visits, training exchanges, equipment collaboration and participation in seminars and conferences.

satya · Post by **satya** » 28 Mar 2009 23:45

IIRC during 90s terrorists use to infiltrate in small number less than 10 per group & now its usually 15+ ,more 20+ per group .Interesting for it shows tht LoC infiltration is becoming harder so it makes sense to send ever larger group hoping some of them make through the IA's net at LoC ( recent op in Kupwara where only 8 or 7 made it through out of a total group of 25 ) . Its hugely demoralizing for terrorists to say the least no matter what spin their masters try to put .

Gaurav_S · Post by **Gaurav_S** » 29 Mar 2009 05:23

Too few life-saving kits for soldiers in J&K

Soldiers involved in counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir are bleeding to death for want of life-saving kits to treat battlefield injuries.

The Army has failed to equip tens of thousands of troops with an adequate number of frontline haemorrhage control kits to stop excessive bleeding from combat injuries.

Official documents show that the Udhampur-based Northern Command, the nerve centre of the Army’s counter-insurgency operations, has ordered just 850 pouches of a granular haemostatic substance called QuikClot with proven clotting ability, in the last three years.

The Army had no budgetary provision even for the small number of kits bought. These were procured out of the Army Commander’s special financial powers. The price of QuikClot works out to Rs 3,640 per unit. It is a standard issue item for the US Marine Corps. American soldiers serving in Afghanistan and Iraq carry it as their preferred haemostatic agent.

“The army has failed to meet the urgent requirement of life-saving kits demanded by Rashtriya Rifles (RR) units. Haemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable death in combat,” said an officer from an RR unit, not authorised to speak to the media.

The Rashtriya Rifles forms the backbone of the army’s anti-insurgency operations.

At any given time, close to one lakh soldiers are directly engaged in counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir, Army sources said. The kits procured by the Army are hardly enough for them.

A senior officer in the Army headquarters said that these kits had been provided to regimental medical officers and nursing assistants who accompanied soldiers. But officers in Kashmir said this was only a makeshift arrangement. “The medics can’t be with you all the time. Soldiers have to be self sufficient,” said an officer.

Commanding officers realise they need to source haemostatic kits on their own to give soldiers the cutting edge of military medicine. Many Rashtriya Rifles units have begun diverting regimental funds, collected from profits made from canteen sales, to enable soldiers to rapidly treat multiple wound sites and various wound types with a single packet of material. The kit gives precious evacuation time to wounded soldiers before they can be treated at a hospital. The army has admitted that there is no substitute for QuikClot because of its exceptional haemorrhage-control features.

“We regularly send jawans to New Delhi to buy the kits from the only distributor in India. However, due to paucity of funds, we barely order two or three kits at a time. Ideally, a battalion should hold a stock of at least 100 kits at any given time,” said another Rashtriya Rifles officer.

Over the last two years, Rashtriya Rifles units have purchased around 1,500 kits on their own.

Army fatalities have averaged around 100 a year for the past several years.

“It is an effective non-surgical method to stop bleeding that cannot be controlled by ordinary gauze or the Rakshak bandages used by us. Every team that goes into an operation must carry it. We have saved many lives and many more could be saved if supplies improve,” said an army doctor posted in Kashmir.

HT