Pulwama Attack

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Feb 2019 06:43

komal Thanks exactly what I was looking for.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 21 Feb 2019 06:59

Who is Komal

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 21 Feb 2019 07:06

Ramana ji was referring to an earlier post by another member Komal. Regarding the Indo-Iran Treaty in 2004.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 21 Feb 2019 07:07

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 08:14

Gwadar is a double edged sword for China. When it's operational, India can kiss goodbye to "attack Pakistan" as there would be complete control of Hans not only of Gwadar, but also entire line of CPEC, as Hans would be stationed all along the route and also very good intelligence network of CPEC. Just like, now it's almost impossible for India to cross over into Tibet and occupy Lhasa, while it was possible before doklam episode.

Why I say it's double edged sword is that if Gwadar for any reason falls, the entire China is going to collapse to the Han mainland.

So now the Chinese strategy is to somehow lure India into inaction and eventual 'face saving' formula deviced and begged by India to Pakistan (a' la Doklam standoff), till CPEC is more matured and Han can put their security architecture around the entire CPEC, so that India would not even contemplate as an option to touch CPEC. China wants India to lose CPEC the way India lost Doklam. (Well India didn't loose Doklam but just begged China to take the face saver, rest is history)

They already have Masood Azhar as their card, may accept to put him in the UN as designated terrorist a' la Hafeez Saeed, and Modi can declare moral victory in the diplomacy.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 21 Feb 2019 08:37

khan wrote:Long term this strategy will escalate the cost for the Pakistanis. They will have to put a lot more people on the border to defend against more land-grabs or muzzle their terror groups to keep the pressure off their Army - which means deal with the terror blowback internally. All bad choices for the Pakistanis.

Great point! Land-grab as a response to attacks gives us tangible/irreversible gains. It changes the way the game is played. PA/ISI will be in a dilemma - should we continue terror (losing land) or should we stop terror (losing raisin dieter)

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 21 Feb 2019 08:39

nam wrote:
Y I Patel wrote:The biggest reason I would favor the Kishenganga Valley as a target for salami slicing is that it is a relatively lower risk option.
However we would have to capture dominating heights around it, else we will be the same position as Paks now. Will be receiving Pak 155MM rounds for years in the valley.

We cannot capture only the valley.

I am against capturing populated areas, which will just add to our insurgency problems and will have more people who don't like us, on our side.

....

These are valid concerns.

(1) Need to capture dominating heights - absolutely. The big difference in this case is that the west bank of KG Valley backs up against the western extension of the Great Himalayan Range, and the only reliable access is along the river valley. In other words, unlike say Kargil or Siachen, the dominating heights on western side depend on lifelines that are exposed to Indian observation and shelling. This is why even now India can shut down parts of the valley at will. This also makes the option of crossing over and capturing dominating heights a less bloody proposition than in other areas where their lines of communication are hidden behind ranges.

(2) Need to assimilate hostile population. This is absolutely a huge concern, especially in the parts of PoK referred to as AJK. KG valley technically lies in AJK, but on the border with Ladakh/Baltistan. The risk of having to assimilate a hostile population is mitigated for two reasons: the whole valley is not very densely populated and can be isolated easily from rest of PoK, and the upper KG valley is called Dardistan after the ethnic group that calls it home. The Dards have their own language, Dardistan got bifurcated in two by LoC and on the Indian side the Dard population continues to live without any problems. Actually, farther north of AJK, the Baltis are majority Shia and suffering from their own oppression from Pakis so they would be inclined to assimilate more readily with India - just as Shias in Kargil have not had any problems.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Feb 2019 08:40

TKiran,
Someone looking for moral victory won't authorize Surgical strike and have dinner with the team.
Don't kuch bi.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 21 Feb 2019 08:49

Gagan,

what would the condition of valleys in Ladakh and Baltistan be like, this time of year? would they be snow bound?

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 09:00

Ramana sir, I didn't mock at Modi, but simply told that Modi is tactically brilliant in Doklam, Surgical Strikes and also publically proclaiming that we will avenge the Pulwama Attack. I really appreciate that as in all these, it was not calculated by China and there was an element of surprise in all these episodes.

But tactics alone do not make a strategy. There has to be action towards a strategic goal. When Subramanian Swamy brought a bill to declare Pakistan as "state sponsor of terrorism", the bill was defeated by the Modi government. It's not a right step towards a strategic goal. Only when there is some adverse event that is taking away the control, Modi gets his tactical brilliance and becomes "kabab me haddi" in all these three cases. Internally also such as "demonetisation", GST etc., No doubt they are all great steps, but there should be continuity, then only we will be so strong or perceived to be so strong that the enemy will have "doubts" put into their brains. You may also call it "deterrence".

CPEC once operational would be a strategic disaster for India. Also CPEC failure is strategic disaster for China. Now tell me who is following the strategic goal in CPEC? China or India?

PS: what I mean to say is that Pulwama Attack is actually a tactic by China in its larger strategic aim of pushing away Indian Army from Kashmir. But ye lo .. Modi kebab me haddi phir aa gaya...

PPS: in fact, if you analyze the big data on the Pakistani Terrorism, by 2012 Pakistan realized that terrorism as state policy is actually hurting them more than India or Afghanistan. They started winding down their terrorism factories. (There were no terrorist strikes in India since Hyderabad blast) In 2013 they really wanted to modernize themselves which was not possible with the doles given by US, but with FDI inflows etc., That is when CPEC was offered by China. They completely misread the Chinese strategy, and were trapped by China. Pakistan became Chinese colony. China prepared a different strategy for Pakistan, ie to use the Terrorism factories for its own use. The goal is to evacuate Indian army from Kashmir. So the pattern of attacks is to directly challenge the Army in Kashmir, recruit locals, propaganda to make Army as the villain etc., They got free ride and some insignificant incident as Burhan Wani death blown out of proportion through propaganda etc, till Pathankot when "kebab me haddi" Mr Modi did SS and broken the will of terrorists. As the morale was sagging, China asked Masood Azhar to do something, he tried, but failed when his nephews were killed. So this Pulwama Attack.... But it's just a small tactical step only for China.

They didn't expect Modi to react like this.

But they read Modi very well in Wuhan. They know that Modi is just a tactically brilliant but strategically clueless. So they will throw Masood Azhar under the bus, but not exactly under the bus, there's a precedence for this. Hafiz Saeed. They will make him Hafeez Saeed. But as long as we don't understand the strategic Nature of Gwadar and the game being played by China, they will device some other tactic and shoot from the shoulder of Pakistan. Believe me CPEC is too strategic for China that its failure may lead to China saying goodbye to Xinjiang and Tibet. But they are not worried, they know how to tackle Modi.

What Imran Khan has said in his message is totally honest, what are they going to get out of a small terrorist incident in India when they are seriously trying to get Saudis to invest money in Pakistan? Also some people were wondering why their crown jewels were not uttered during the IKs adress, it's because they really don't want to rattle the pitch. They realized too late that China has them by their balls and only to come out is through the help of their umma. Their suspicion of India's intention of peace has evaporated by 2012 itself when their own terrorists were killing their own population.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 21 Feb 2019 09:03

There is a slight risk in delaying counter-strike, even though I agree that it keeps Pakis on the edge and helps us plan better.

The risk is that ISI-Congress-Media combine will trigger a homegrown Muslim/Jati riot (preferably far from the Paki border) just like in Godhra. This will force Modi to deal with it first & fend off criticism. The window of opportunity to attack Pakistan will be lost.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Feb 2019 09:25

^^^ a lot of twitter activity has been activated, like the SIMs that jihadis keep rotating.

oppression and riots against cashmereis is the new narrative, hoping to strike gold somewhere.

mysterious people could target cashmereis in other part of india and vanish. same as the mystery church & mosque vandals who appear on cue before any election.

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 09:26

Brahma Chellaney
@Chellaney
What stops Modi from taking basic steps, such as halting cross-border trade in J&K (which NIA says helps finance extremism), downsizing diplomatic ties with Pakistan, and suspending the Permanent Indus Commission? Why the reluctance to take non-military steps that are meaningful?

https://mobile.twitter.com/Chellaney/st ... 1234520065

ritesh · Post by **ritesh** » 21 Feb 2019 09:40

To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 21 Feb 2019 10:15

ritesh wrote:To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?

What is the end goal of tactical strikes?

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 21 Feb 2019 10:17

ritesh wrote:To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?

At this point, such a step may be good for optics but not much else. That may have its merits from an anger management point of view but nothing tangible is to be gained from it.

The prospects of a land grab or revoking the IWT are things which can have a long term impact and can actually make TSP think hundred times before putting its sinister thoughts into action

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 10:47

How accurate analysis &
predictions of Dr
@Swamy39
is
he said this in #RajyaSabha
2 yrs back that India We will again
be forced to intervene & reduce
Pakistan into four!

Only Dr Swamy supported
@rajeev_mp
Bill to #DeclarePakATerrorState
#PulwamaTerrorAttack

https://mobile.twitter.com/vishalnautam ... 3744207872

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 10:51

Nihat wrote: At this point, such a step may be good for optics but not much else. That may have its merits from an anger management point of view but nothing ptangible is to be gained from it.

The prospects of a land grab or revoking the IWT are things which can have a long term impact and can actually make TSP think hundred times before putting its sinister thoughts into action

It's not TSP that is thinking, it's China which is directing the terrorists. It's a different ball game. It's cricket, it's not tennis, you can use tennis ball to play cricket though...

la.khan · Post by **la.khan** » 21 Feb 2019 10:54

TKiran wrote:China wants India to lose CPEC the way India lost Doklam. (Well India didn't loose Doklam but just begged China to take the face saver, rest is history)

TKiran wrote:But they read Modi very well in Wuhan. They know that Modi is just a tactically brilliant but strategically clueless. So they will throw Masood Azhar under the bus, but not exactly under the bus, there's a precedence for this. Hafiz Saeed.

TKiran garu,
You may be right about China, CPEC, Gwadar, pakis, Masood Azhar ityadi. Hope you don't mind me asking this: from where do you get these highlighted gems? Just curious.

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 21 Feb 2019 10:57

^^from Big data analysis and artificial intelligence, back propagation algorithm, and fuzzy logic....

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Feb 2019 11:06

IOW from thin air.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Feb 2019 11:06

TKiran in short, you are trolling and spreading FUD. So no blasts in India are due to TSP generosity and not due to Indian competence. Post more rubbish in this thread and a warning is headed your way, thanks.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 11:13

ks_sachin wrote:
ritesh wrote:To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?
What is the end goal of tactical strikes?

Tactical air strikes would cost TSP in terms of men and material by hitting command/control/communications. It would be a heavy price to pay. By destroying terrorist infrastructure would also set them back by a few years. The danger is of course escalation. In 1999, we were discussing responses to Kandahar and the release of Masood Azhar who was escorted by Jaswant Singh. The danger even then was escalation, but at that time TSP had a couple of atim bums, but there was hesitation. Today there is hesitation and in a few years from now, TSP is going to push the envelope further where no response can be taken whatsoever.

Everything being discussed in this thread are half measures because the choices are all bad due to nuclear escalation. The only solution is what had been discussed back in 1997 when BRF was formed - and that is the death and dismemberment of Pakistan once and for all. A nuclear first strike must be taken by India and it must kill at least 60 million of the Pakistani population in the first strike. Several enhanced radiation weapons at low altitude near the Indian border and at higher altitudes for Karachi, Pakistan Hyderabad and western Pakistan would be needed. The goal would be to reduce fall out if possible.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 11:17

ramana wrote:IOW from thin air.

No .. no .. no .... He has *deep* ~~connection to China~~ understanding of china! He is very much at *home* with China and all their super duper plans.

He revealed it once in some thread .. I can't remember where .. perhaps a slip of the tongue.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Feb 2019 11:18

Let me reply once I am.at my laptop

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 11:25

ritesh wrote:To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?

Across the the length and breadth of bakiland? It is opposite to *limited*, *targetted* or *localized" or *calibrated*, etc. That is an all out war.

Is that what you want?

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 11:28

pankajs wrote:
ritesh wrote:To add to what Brahma is saying, What stops this govt to do tactical air strikes across lenght and breath of bakiland? Concentrating majorly in pok?
Across the the length and breadth of bakiland? That is an all out war. It is opposite to *targetted* or *localized" or *calibrated*, etc.

Is that what you want?

YES.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 11:29

I guess Modi is going to disappoint you then!

I may be wrong but Modi/Force will only go for *limited* strikes and my *guess* is also limit it to the Kashmir theater. Even Gwadar is FAR out of that zone.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 21 Feb 2019 11:31

Mort Walker wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: What is the end goal of tactical strikes?
Tactical air strikes would cost TSP in terms of men and material by hitting command/control/communications. It would be a heavy price to pay. By destroying terrorist infrastructure would also set them back by a few years. The danger is of course escalation. In 1999, we were discussing responses to Kandahar and the release of Masood Azhar who was escorted by Jaswant Singh. The danger even then was escalation, but at that time TSP had a couple of atim bums, but there was hesitation. Today there is hesitation and in a few years from now, TSP is going to push the envelope further where no response can be taken whatsoever.

Everything being discussed in this thread are half measures because the choices are all bad due to nuclear escalation. The only solution is what had been discussed back in 1997 when BRF was formed - and that is the death and dismemberment of Pakistan once and for all. A nuclear first strike must be taken by India and it must kill at least 60 million of the Pakistani population in the first strike. Several enhanced radiation weapons at low altitude near the Indian border and at higher altitudes for Karachi, Pakistan Hyderabad and western Pakistan would be needed. The goal would be to reduce fall out if possible.

The question was not borne out of ignorance but out of curiosity as to whether the poster had thought out his postulation..

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 11:32

pankajs wrote:I guess Modi is going to disappoint you then!

Modi/Force will only go for *limited* strikes.

What makes you think that Pakistan will not respond disproportionately to limited strikes? The assumption has been made they are rational in decision making.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 11:34

It is Vajpayee's *Aar Paar ki ladia* ... One battle to finish all battles in English.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 11:36

Mort Walker wrote:
pankajs wrote:I guess Modi is going to disappoint you then!

Modi/Force will only go for *limited* strikes.
What makes you think that Pakistan will not respond disproportionately to limited strikes? The assumption has been made they are rational in decision making.

Sure! That is part of my calculation in a *limited* strike scenario and my *guess* would be in GOI's too.

Some one has posted that GOI was ready for a relatiotary strike back from Bakistan last time too. They still went for a *limited* operations did they not? Why one wonders?

And it is the same Modi/GOI/Forces. No different this time.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Feb 2019 11:39

Mort Walker wrote:
pankajs wrote:I guess Modi is going to disappoint you then!

Modi/Force will only go for *limited* strikes.
What makes you think that Pakistan will not respond disproportionately to limited strikes? The assumption has been made they are rational in decision making.

Sir they can try but that would be huge public loss of face for their miltary in case they do. Why do think they dont admit causualties on LOC or Surgical strikes, that would demolish the whole invincibility of Paki forces among the Paki public, time to time reinforced by PAF bombing Miranshah to 7th century etc, their public believes JF-17 is a wonder weapon, they believed PAF was invincible even in 1999, open conflict brings out a lot of weakness in Paki forces public opinion which might cause a lot rebellions in NWFP, Sindh Baluchistan and POK . Pakis using teror attacks and Indian not responding is a way their military uses to keep the myth that they are too strong for India to attack them. Thats why they even created such myths after 26/11 of India callign thier president of war but then scared from attacking them due to Paki military powers.
Let me tell you if Pakistan thought it had a half a chance to win miltarily they would not use asymmetric warfare. Off course we must be prepared when we launch our attack, but its is precisely this which has held us back for 35 years.

I dont think they hold the miltary advantages they had 30-35 years ago fresh with CIA backed arms for Afghanistan, they have slipped a lot in spite of getting some vital acquisitions.

If Pakistani forces come on the wrong side of an escalation with lots of casualties and losses they Paki fauj will have hell to pay especially from Non Punjabi public and Non Sunni Punjabis.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 11:42

pankajs wrote:It is Vajpayee's *Aar Paar ki ladia* ... One battle to finish all battles in English.

The Bush administration put great pressure on ABVP government and sabotaged them. It happened again to MMS in 2008 after Mumbai attack. It will happen again this time after Pak complains they can't negotiate unkil's withdrawal due to Indian threat in Kashmir. Right now unkil is internally distracted and haven't thought this out, but I can assure you the surveillance assets have all been put in place in the last few days. They will warn Modi government and if no positive response, they will inform Pakis that they will be hit in certain locations.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 21 Feb 2019 11:47

the action has to be visible and overt... lest u hear 'no air strikes happened..it was just pindi chana exploding' !!

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 11:59

pankajs wrote: Sure! That is part of my calculation in a *limited* strike scenario and my *guess* would be in GOI's too.

Some one has posted that GOI was ready for a relatiotary strike back from Bakistan last time too. They still went for a *limited* operations did they not? Why one wonders?

And it is the same Modi/GOI/Forces. No different this time.

Limited operations have a tactical impact. Although important, but larger scale operations at a strategic level have political implications meaning that terrorism will reduce significantly - and that is what is needed. TSP didn't respond because the damage done wasn't significant to them. They care less for their soldiers. Hit their assets and it will be a different story.

The Indian public is mad as hell and the government has limited choices. This attack was designed to make the Modi government look weak prior to national elections. The primary opposition has not criticized the government yet, but I suspect it is only a matter of time when public outcry dies down.

habal · Post by **habal** » 21 Feb 2019 11:59

I have a few data points that I would like to put up with ramana's permission.

* As Mort mentioned about nuclear escalation by pakistan impeding any strike by India. This nuclear escalation by Pakistan is a suicide for its establishment on various counts, if it carries out its threat, and is thus a non-starter. Pakistan's nuclear weapons are just to keep its own hordes in order and may be used within its own territory like Nasr. It will not fly out of pakistan.

why will no pakistani nuclear weapon come out of pakistan.

because if pakistan does indeed strike any part of afghanistan or India with nuclear warheads, then NATO/US will strike from west, chief reason being it is in US and western interest to occupy NW pakistan and cut off pakistan access to china and afghanistan as well as chinese access to Pakistan. Afghanistan can then be easily pacified and *mission accomplished* by taking NATO closer to China's western borders and xinjiang. Apart from this India will strike from east and finish off Pakistan military establishments twin power centres of Islamabad/Pindi. Russians can on Indian invitation attack from North since they may also want to restrict Pakistan's access to taliban.

Pakistan will not make it out of this in one piece. This was understood by pakistani planners a decade ago and thus they formulated the tactical battlefield nuke capable missile to be used in its own territory. Who can complain if pakistan army uses missiles on its own territory hain. This was the thinking.

second is the nature of Indian strike

until now we have been exposed to the cold start doctrine which was basically a passive-active mode of escalation formulated during relatively lesser volatile times during musharraf era.

Now in more volatile relations a new geo-political military doctrine of active-passive escalation could be the wave strike in which India strikes against Pakistan in 3 waves. After first wave of air strikes, missile strikes and naval blockades, pakistan will want to retaliate conventionally, if they are prepared and that is when we will launch the second wave. This will be when pakistan either loses nerve and uses a nuclear weapon resulting in 3 pronged strike as mentioned above or goes howling to UN or lastly tries out a conventional reaponse again. This is where India launches the 3rd wave of strikes.

Advantage of a wave strike passive-active response is that Indian forces are anyway prepared for a second strike within a fixed duration and if pakistan retaliates prematurely inbetween two waves, we can always prepone the wave.

Now if Pakistan wants to respond to wave strikes by launching its own waves, then India is alert to this idea and can always give a disproportionate response in a manner that pakistan ends up losing more after each wave and its capabilities shrink significantly after a wave. A second wave from pakistan is either going to be ineffectual because of decimated capaabilities or a non-starter.

In short there is no way pakistan can outrun or outwit India in a active-passive conflict initiated by India.

alternate scenario of no-conflict

until now we have seen that pakistan has slid more economically and socially after every escalation and India has risen exponentially without any response. So in short the natural scheme of things is such that pakistan slides anyway and India grows irrespective of any unilateral escalation by pakistan.

Now in case if an escalation by India, Pakistan will slide more severely than when it was given no response. So an Indian response to any pakistani provocation just hastens its pakistan's demise.

When US issued a travel advisory on Feb 12, it was based on pakistani military movements in preparation for a conventional retaliation in pulwama. But satellite tracked plenty of movements on PoK side only so US issued advisory for PoK alone.

This is proof that pakistani military establishment had indeed planned this provocation.

If as Imran says pakistan seeks friendship from India, then a country seeking friendship will have no qualms in extraditing any number of people convicted of terrorism in a friendly country as was the case when musharraf dispatched planeloads of pakistanis to guantanamo and well as randon folk like mir aimal kalsi and aafia siddiqui. If indeed pakistan establishment is desirous of peace and good relations it can/will send out as many suspiscious peoole as India needs. That it hasn't done so betrays its true intent.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 21 Feb 2019 12:08

Habal,

I would suggest to look at actual U235 and Pu239 stock that TSP has. They may have limited delivery systems, but there is more stock today than there was in 2008 or 1999 or 1993. This must be reconciled by planners.

habal · Post by **habal** » 21 Feb 2019 12:19

You have to understand nature of pakistan. A small elite clique called the military establishment manages the show with a slightly larger number of enforcers/razakars/sarkari pashtoon,balochi,sindhi coolies.

Once this elite clique is dismantled after a nuclear event outside India, pakistan will be overrun by blackwater and other merceneries who will be the new enforcers. There will be no central command tying pakistan together. It is the fault of establishment that they successfully subdued all political and social glue binding the country together and alienating balochis muhajirs, pashtoons and pro-bhutto sindhi waderas and thus the new group of multi-national enforcers will also round up all stocks of weapin-grade material lying around as well.

It's not as big a hurdle as you imagine.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 21 Feb 2019 12:30

Mort Walker wrote:
pankajs wrote: Sure! That is part of my calculation in a *limited* strike scenario and my *guess* would be in GOI's too.

Some one has posted that GOI was ready for a relatiotary strike back from Bakistan last time too. They still went for a *limited* operations did they not? Why one wonders?

And it is the same Modi/GOI/Forces. No different this time.
Limited operations have a tactical impact. Although important, but larger scale operations at a strategic level have political implications meaning that terrorism will reduce significantly - and that is what is needed. TSP didn't respond because the damage done wasn't significant to them. They care less for their soldiers. Hit their assets and it will be a different story.

The Indian public is mad as hell and the government has limited choices. This attack was designed to make the Modi government look weak prior to national elections. The primary opposition has not criticized the government yet, but I suspect it is only a matter of time when public outcry dies down.

GOI/Modi will regain its moral ascendancy with a *limited* surgical strike like last time if the scores/claims are between 50-60.

BUT of course, surgical strike mimicking last time is dangerous because the bakis would have factored that in and be ready but not impossible. A *limited* strike of other kind with a little more *visible* action than the last time is just as good a substitute. A air strike whose after effects could be documented via Drones/Sat images with Before/After picture should be good enough.

If TSPA does not respond "because the damage done wasn't significant to them" GOI/Modi will claim victory but if they do the next phase will be put into operations.