Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
Here is the only response to above post - want to step outside, Phoenix?
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
Here is the only response to above post - want to step outside, Phoenix?
wait southie... let me check if the terrain is mountainous and if i am at higher altitude....
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
Nice timing! Pakistan wins battle of wits!!
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
india is holding it at siachin....right?
anyway lets not make it another indo-pak bashing match...lets look at facts....first 4 weeks are toughest when you intrude especially in a mountainous terrain. If you can survive that time period and all air strikes and make permanent posts with a well established supply-chain, you can prevail.....it is extremely hard to dislodge permanent posts on a steep mountainous terrain especially if your forces posses higher altitude.... ....and yes you need your air force to shelter you fully in first 4 weeks....Pakistanis had no such plans as they were claiming these are mujahadins not pak army..so their plan was meant to be a failure from day one....had they done what indians did at siachin (use full air force with a full division with an intact and protected supply chain), yes pak forces may very well be still there.....nothing against indian army, it is the nature of mountainous war..first mover advantage is almost unassailable...
Though I agree with your perspective that things would have been a lot more difficult if Pakistan used air-force in the first few weeks, I do not think Pakistan could have held onto its gains in the longer run. India is a democracy and no government would have survived if somehow the Pakistani army held onto its positions. Things would have escalated easily into a bigger conflict and the world opinion would have forced Pakistan to retreat.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
india is holding it at siachin....right?
anyway lets not make it another indo-pak bashing match...lets look at facts....first 4 weeks are toughest when you intrude especially in a mountainous terrain. If you can survive that time period and all air strikes and make permanent posts with a well established supply-chain, you can prevail.....it is extremely hard to dislodge permanent posts on a steep mountainous terrain especially if your forces posses higher altitude.... ....and yes you need your air force to shelter you fully in first 4 weeks....Pakistanis had no such plans as they were claiming these are mujahadins not pak army..so their plan was meant to be a failure from day one....had they done what indians did at siachin (use full air force with a full division with an intact and protected supply chain), yes pak forces may very well be still there.....nothing against indian army, it is the nature of mountainous war..first mover advantage is almost unassailable...
i don't quite agree with this but regardless let's not discuss war theory as applied to a hypothetical version of the kargil war. let's discuss the actual kargil war of 1999. i am asking a simple question: do you actually subscribe to this fantasy of nawaz sharif calling bill clinton being the reason for pakistan's defeat? and therefore believe that in the absence of such intervention pakistan would have prevailed militarily and would currently possess territory in kargil sector? to believe this is to be insane.
i don't understand the need to resort to such delusional fantasies as a pride retention mechanism. it is completely acceptable to lose this type of war against an enemy with a much larger army operating with full air support, the ability to freely absorb casualties, and total political compulsion to evict the intruder at all costs. there was no other possible outcome.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
i don't quite agree with this but regardless let's not discuss war theory as applied to a hypothetical version of the kargil war. let's discuss the actual kargil war of 1999. i am asking a simple question: do you actually subscribe to this fantasy of nawaz sharif calling bill clinton being the reason for pakistan's defeat? and therefore believe that in the absence of such intervention pakistan would have prevailed militarily and would currently possess territory in kargil sector? to believe this is to be insane.
i don't understand the need to resort to such delusional fantasies as a pride retention mechanism. it is completely acceptable to lose this type of war against an enemy with a much larger army operating with full air support, the ability to freely absorb casualties, and total political compulsion to evict the intruder at all costs. there was no other possible outcome.
to answer your question more precisely, No i absolutely don't live in any fantasy bubble whatsoever and i do not debate on this forum under the notion of patriotic fatalism...
nawaz went to Clinton because we were in deep ****..our supply chain was completely destroyed and we could not use our air force or send a full division to strengthen our posts amid our initial stand that there is no pak army up there plus we were worried that a full war may start. It is simple as that and everyone in pak knows that.
now what you are calling delusional fantasies are mere staretgic points....not facts but strategic points. I am not trying to ignite my pride or anything. It is the nature of mountainous war where first mover advantage is almost unassailable... and I gave you saichin example where indian amry surprised us, used full force, occupied higher altitude and strengthened its posts and launched a full political campaign across all major capitals that why Indian action is right. we could have followed the exact same protocol but we did not and paid the price....
now i am not saying with 100 % certainty that had we done that, the eventual outcome of kargil would be similar to siachin becaue in all possible likelihood indians would have attacked lahore or sialkot. all i sam saying that if we really wanted to do kargil (first we shd not have done that), the right way to do was the indian siachin way..not the way we did it coz that was meant to fail from day one.
and there is a reason why indians had so many causalities in first 2 weeks at kargil with no tracked-the land-back success because pakistanis were at higher altitude with strategic posts....indians then launched a full fledged air operation and found zero resistance from our air force...they smoked our supply line (if we had one) and destroyed our posts....from thereon of-course there was only probable outcome..we knew that and went to uncle sam...peace
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
to answer your question more precisely, No i absolutely don't live in any fantasy bubble whatsoever and i do not debate on this forum under the notion of patriotic fatalism...
nawaz went to Clinton because we were in deep ****..our supply chain was completely destroyed and we could not use our air force or send a full division to strengthen our posts amid our initial stand that there is no pak army up there plus we were worried that a full war may start. It is simple as that and everyone in pak knows that.
now what you are calling delusional fantasies are mere staretgic points....not facts but strategic points. I am not trying to ignite my pride or anything. It is the nature of mountainous war where first mover advantage is almost unassailable... and I gave you saichin example where indian amry surprised us, used full force, occupied higher altitude and strengthened its posts and launched a full political campaign across all major capitals that why Indian action is right. we could have followed the exact same protocol but we did not and paid the price....
now i am not saying with 100 % certainty that had we done that, the eventual outcome of kargil would be similar to siachin becaue in all possible likelihood indians would have attacked lahore or sialkot. all i sam saying that if we really wanted to do kargil (first we shd not have done that), the right way to do was the indian siachin way..not the way we did it coz that was meant to fail from day one.
and there is a reason why indians had so many causalities in first 2 weeks at kargil with no tracked-the land-back success because pakistanis were at higher altitude with strategic posts....indians then launched a full fledged air operation and found zero resistance from our air force...they smoked our supply line (if we had one) and destroyed our posts....from thereon of-course there was only probable outcome..we knew that and went to uncle sam...peace
again i understand that theoretically pakistan could have waged the war in a way that could have theoretically led to sustainable possession of some territory. but that is also a fantasy. there are many reasons why this was not an option available to pakistan's army and why musharraf had to hide behind the jihadi facade. launching a proper war against india would have meant having to fight a proper war against india and facing a proper retaliation that need not be limited to kashmir or the LOC...and to do so in a context where india would have had full license from the international community to deal with pakistani aggression.
my limited point is that i do not understand the delusions of nationalists like rommel and the bizarre fantasies they feed themselves to retain pride. i just don't see how a sane person can arrive at any conclusion except that it was a colossally stupid idea that had no chance of succeeding either militarily or politically.
Re: China’s Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf’s Kargil adventure
NEW DELHI: A third flag meeting between Indian and Chinese troops failed to break the deadlock between the two sides, with the Chinese insisting that India take down security structures in Fukche and Chumar in Ladakh without offering reciprocal commitments.
“The meeting was unsatisfactory,” foreign minister Salman Khurshid told TOI, indicating that the standoff might not blow over just yet.
With May Day celebrations beginning on Wednesday, Khurshid said there was no prospect of a response from the Chinese side to India’s demand that the intruding troops be withdrawn. “We made our demands. But they made their demands too,” Khurshid said.
The Chinese demanded dismantling of the border structures that have recently come up, particularly in Fukche and Chumar. In addition, they asked the Indians to take down their tents facing the Chinese troops. Only after the Indians complied would the Chinese contemplate their next step, refusing to give any commitment on a withdrawal.
According to ITBP sources, the border structures China wants India to pull down are not even permanent posts but only metal sheet shelters set up for troops who conduct frequent patrols in the desolate region prone to icy winds. Seeking their removal is a broad hint that India roll back its increased patrolling and presence in the area.
“Dismantling of these structures is ruled out without any clear commitment from the Chinese indicating the time of retreat of its troops from Raki Nala. There has to be complete restoration of pre-April 15 position,” an ITBP official said.
Indian officials were told by Chinese commanders that they would have to wait for orders from Beijing. This seems to fly in the face of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s assessment that the incident was “localized” and that the government had a plan to resolve it.
It seems clear now that rather than local adventurism, a well-thought out Chinese strategy is at work that caught India off guard at a time when the government is grappling with domestic political turmoil and on the eve of a visit by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang.
The impasse is pushing India to take more muscular steps which would invite retaliation, a situation India is keen to avoid. But this is looking increasingly likely, sources said.
Incidentally, Indian local military and ITBP commanders will be crossing over from the Indian border post at Chushul to the adjoining Spanggur post in China to participate in the ceremonial function on Wednesday to mark May Day, providing an opportunity for discussions.
“Informal deliberations are expected there as well, though it is now clear that this border row may not be resolved at the local commanders level,” said a senior official of the security establishment.
Will Khurshid still travel to Beijing on May 9? “Yes,” he said, ruling out a cancellation at this stage. However, with India unable and unwilling to physically remove the Chinese tents, officials said a diplomatic approach was inevitable – which means that both the Khurshid visit and the Chinese premier’s visit to India on May 20 could be in danger.
Third flag meeting fails; China wants India to dismantle security structures in Ladakh - The Times of India
recent update on the issue
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
how delusional must one be to think that the pakistani army had any chance of winning a war like kargil? i am amazed at how often pakistanis cite this fantasy of "political pressure" from bill clinton as being the reason why pakistan lost the war. why does one need any explanation other than the fact that it was a harebrained plan executed by one army against a much larger and more powerful army. the outcome is common sense. why would bill clinton be required to explain defeat?
do people like rommel actually believe that today the pakistani army would be currently occupying various peaks in kargil sector if not for bill clinton? in what universe is that a sane belief? truly mind-boggling stuff.
listen
your army is bunch of cowards they rape women in kashmir and they got slapped up in kargil when they face real army that fights.
don't even think of trying to fight China you will look even bigger bunch of fools. Stick to looking tough in your bollywood movies this only chance you have of victory.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
^^
Thanks for your valuable advice. Meanwhile please do not stop smoking whatever you are, it helps us to get a good laugh at times.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
No one bothered to consider what China did in Ladakh and what are its future implications on SinoIndian relations.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
future implications? china has been doing similar things every few years all over the tibetan border with india and bhutan. previously with sikkim too before it decided it was safer to merge with india than go the tibetan way. bhutan uses the indian army to patrol its tibetan border. chinese army can't really maintain a presence to patrol however far they manage to poke in for their "surveys", as this means maintaining supply lines over the himalayan continental divide. it is dumb, they can't win against geography.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
It about time China has outward looking policy if it has ambitions of becoming a international power and dealing with India will be easy for them as time will tell.
Re: China’s Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf’s Kargil adventure
mm yeah rommel pai.. china has more productive things to do than engage in conflict with india. velcum to india, premier Li. 
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
So how far did China retract from their positions? How far did Indian forces retract from their positions after reaching an understanding?
Chinese forces originally set up camps up to ~20KM inside Indian territory.
Re: China’s Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf’s Kargil adventure
Never mind. Found the answer.
The funny thing is, or well rather tragic in terms of projecting regional prowess.
Chinese troops move back a little from their positions in Indian territory. Indian forces also move back from their positions in Indian territory to mark this a resolved matter.
Hooray?! 
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
these are not actively patrolled areas with no permanent positions. chinese troops came, did a survey to show they can come any time. but as always they had to return back across the continental divide of the himalayas. they still claim that part of ladakh, like they claim a lot of territories all along the himalayas wherever the peaks plateau out.
Re: China's Ladakh incursion vindicates Musharraf's Kargil adventure
Yup.