6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Pakistan Army's failed Operation Gibraltar, whose objective was to infiltrate Kashmir valley with Army regulars disguised as Kashmiris, was the immediate trigger for the war.

Incidentally, Gibraltar is a rock formation located at the southernmost tip of Iberian peninsula. The word Gibraltar is a mutilated form of its Arabic name Jabal-i-Tarik, *which means "Rock of Tarik", and was the base from which the Muslim Berber tribes of Africa started their conquest of infidel lands, that would later be known as *Al-Andalus/Spain. Interesting, no ?

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Naming Missions and Missiles on the names of Muslim generals and places associated is not a new phenomenon and I think same thing is followed on other side of the border.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

^
Give examples ?

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

from your side or my side? :D

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Indian missiles are:
Agni=Fire,Prithvi=Earth, Akash=Sky, Nag=Snake, Trishul=Trident, BrahMos=Brahmaputra+Moscow [2 rivers], Dhanus=Bow, Shaurya=Valor
But that is off-topic. I only mentioned the name because it does give insight into the psychology of those who planned the ill-fated operation.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

I am well aware of the imminent personalities on whom Pakistani missiles are named. :D

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

What about Chetak? How about calling saas bahu tussles Maha-Bharat? :D

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Nice to know. Do you know who is the inspiration behind Hataf?

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

^
Prohphet Muhammad PBUH.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Chetak was well known for its speed. So I can not see what insidious motive can be behind naming a helicopter after a famous horse.

Mahabharat is an ancient Indian epic. How is it relevant :hmmm:

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

My point was people love to refer their wars with the historic / religiously important events like Mahabahrata

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Mi-24 is also called Akbar, Chetak is name of Maharana pratap horse known for speed. Admiral Gorshkov is christened Vikramditya known as Napolean of India:)

Operation Gibraltor was a covert operation to incite rebellion in kashmir but was poorly planned and on the estimation that India will not open another front like India did in 48, Failure of operation Giberaltor resulted in operation grandslam, to release pressure of kashmir, India reacted in Punjab, Offensive and counter offensive resulted in strategic stalemate, biggest strategic mistake by India was giving back Haji peer paas after Tashkent declaration.
As for us, the kashmiri pundits, we lived a little more to die another day:), India was unlucky, Indira wasn't the PM.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Explain more. Even I don't know the link

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Whats the strategic important of Haji Peer Paas for India?

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Haji peer pass is just on the pakistani side of LOC, it serves as a small gateway to Indian side of LOC, controlling the pass is another way of stopping infilteration inside Indian side of Kashmir.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Not quite, Pak army had made significant advances in the Chamb jorian sector and in panic the Indian army invaded Lahore and the war started.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

Operation Gibraltor wasn't able to incite violence in kashmir, the esclation in Chamb Jorian was part of Operation Grandslam and was on premise that India won't react in Punjab, which India did to release off pressure on Kashmir, same giberlator type operation helped in creating Bangladesh some years later though:)

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

That was my point the Indians panicked at the losses they were suffering in chamb jorian and having failed to contain the Pak army there they wanted to open other fronts in order to divided the Pak army which they outnumbered and out gunned. So it was India who crossed the International border and wanted to capture Lahore but failed. As for BD saga India took advantage of a civil war, purely of Pakistan's own making, Pakistan would have done the same if the roles were reversed so no strategic planning by India there.

pak should have done the same to India during the 1962 India/China war and walked into Kashmir at that time. Grave mistake by Pak there.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

That precisely my point is, Gibraltor failed miserably, Grandslam was the second phase, it was strategic blunder to think India won't react in punjab and will fight only in Kashmir,65 war was in reality started by Pakistanis not Indians, Indians only crossed international line, just like 71 where complete skirmishes started in last week of november but war officially started when PAF attacked on 3rd December, entire war was planned by Pakistan, not only poorly planned Pakistan even misjudged the Indian reaction. Leaving area so near to Lahore was itself one of the biggest mistake. 71 war was masterminded by R&AW, not only training but even supporting Muktibahini.
Pak had another chance in the time of Bhidranwale in 1984, but mard-e-momin was not ready to engage his forces against Indira, in counter offensive of Indian in Punjab many escaped to the Pakistan even then.
Indo-China was surprise for IAF, my grandfather was POW of that war, when Chinks captured air bases in east, leave alone preparedness of Pakistan, because even Pakistan wasn't aware what was happening then.

Re: 6th September 1965 - A neutral perspective

On the one hand you are crowing about how RAW planned the 71 war (Which is not correct), on the other hand you are saying Pakistan started the war when PAF attacked. Which one is it. 1971 was a pure blunder by Pakistan India just took advantage, nothing brilliant on part of India or RAW.

as for 1962 your assertion Pakistan wasn't aware what was happening is far off the mark as Bhutto who was than the foreign minister was pressing Ayub Kahn to attack in kashmir. Ayub should have listened to Bhutto. if only Bhutto was the PM than things would have been different.