Pahalgam Islamic Terror Attack

[Jason Roy]

Esteemed membraans are not convinced of kinetic response, but napakis sure are

US steps in to ease tension amid India's unabated sabre-rattling | The Express Tribune

Secretary Rubio phones PM Shehbaz; Urges both countries to cooperate with each other

tribune.com.pk

Meanwhile

Pak's ISI chief gets key role amid tensions with India over Pahalgam attack

Amid escalating tensions between India and Pakistan over the Pahalgam terror attack, ISI chief Lt Gen Mohammad Asim Malik was appointed Pakistan's National Security Advisor.

www.indiatoday.in

I would love to say that but seeing the 2 decades starting from 2001 parliament attacks....we have a decision paralysis issue.
It takes us weeks to mobilise while the other side does it in 3-5 days.
While with time, external pressure mounts upon us to do anything significant.
Do we really have cold start doctrine? We were supposed to mobilize in 72 hours for a response??
Does everyone sleeps before CCS meetings?

 

[Kapil]

India desperately needs a strategic vision/policy which has concrete steps of responses or proactive measures, which are outcome based( read - capture land and never return).

Against Pak:
1. Strategic Objective #1 : Low risk : Kinetic Action to capture 50 sq kms of chicken neck area
2. Strategic Objective #2 : Low risk :
...
...
...
9. Strategic Objective # 9 : High risk : Cold Start via Jaisalmer to divide Pak into 2. Sindhu and Balochistan to be carved out
10. Strategic Objective #10 : Disproportionate response (Send padosi to stone age)

Against China:
1. Strategic Objective #1 : Low Risk : Disrupt and destroy Karakoram Hwy
2. Strategic Objective #2 : Medium Risk : Capture Yadong Country
2. Strategic Objective #3 : Medium Risk : X sq km in Ngari
3. Strategic Objective #4 : High Risk : Kailasa becomes ours
...
...
...

 

[spikey360]

India has so many internal issues that they overshadow everything.
Before fighting wars internal issues are needed to be sorted out.
Nothing will happen between India & Pakistan. It's better to focus on the economy & inner stability.
Kicking out Bangladeshis, fencing the border, wiping off Naxals, making anti nationals irrelevant these things should be our first priority.
25% Pakistan's GDP depends on agriculture. Restricting water is the biggest strike India has pursued. Now invest heavily on proxies & cripple them. India doesn't need to do more than that.

Lord forbid, if any of our friends or families were killed like the Pahalgam victims, would you have had the temerity to say "India doesn't need to do more than that"?

 

[asl001]

View: https://youtu.be/swqTnzGsMRo?si=ERy3v-CCzYe09oyd
.

 

[asl001]

Stopped until may23

 

[Wayfarer]

I respect the sentiment of Gen. GD Bakshi, but respectfully vishwaguru is no IG. I am not a fan of IG's policies and absolutely detest the Congress party. But IG for all her faults truly had balls of steel to stand up to the West and carve out BD. Mind you this was India of 1971 and not today. Our economy/military and general standing in the world was nowhere near where we are now. Also, not sure if today's generals are of Maneckshaw's caliber who put the PM and the political establishment in its place. Maybe we'll find out if we are lucky.

Funny how so called RWers idolize IG nowadays. She was the one who opened the floodgates for crores of Bangladeshi Muslims to enter India, who became Congress votebank in Assam. Are y'all really RWers or Congress IT cell employees out to confuse people?

 

[Ajatshatru]

Its not about how strong israel or india is, its about how strong their enemy is and how well protected they are from their enemy.
Israel has layered air defence on every single port they have - we dont.
Israel fights a side with no air force - we fight a side with nuclear weapons.
Big difference.

Pakistan’s ability to launch a nuclear missile is influenced by India’s conventional military capability to neutralize such threats before launch. While Pakistan’s nuclear installations are protected by air defense systems and its air force, the critical question is whether these defenses are sufficient to withstand a preemptive strike by the Indian military. India’s objective would be to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear assets before they can be deployed, with air defenses being a secondary layer of protection.
A nuclear strike is not as simple as pressing a button, as many people tend to believe. Even attempting to prepare for a nuclear missile launch without getting detected is impossible for Pakistan and its military is fully aware of this reality.

 

[Cheepek]

Diplomacy can only do so much, after a certain threshold only hard power matters at this time.

 

[Jason Roy]

Forumers, do you really think,US call for de-escalation means any full scale large intensity naval/air strike is now no longer an option?

 

[MasterChief]

Sure, that's one way to look at it.
but the way I look at it is that instead of 1 islamic country, we got 2 of them now.
Both are openly hostile.

If we indeed win the 1971 war, what exactly are our winnings? Did anyone ask that?
if anything IG snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
She could have done 100 things differently post 1971 win but she did not.

What is the point of saying we won 1971 war when we have no winnings to show for it?
Did we win back our land in J&K? No
Did we get back our pow's? No
Did we ensure hindus safety in Bangladesh? No

So, what exactly did we win in 1971? I know we won but just exactly what did we win in terms of tangibles?

The fact is, we saved Bangladesh muslims's asss in 1971 and now they are biting us in the asss. That's it, that's all we did in 1971.
We could have changed the border towards our east in 1971 to something more manageable as part of our winnings but we did not.

Like I said, we won the war but I really don't know what that means when we have nothing to show for it, we gave back every single POW of theirs.
You know who had our POW's and our land even after they lost the war? Pak

The tangible is that Bangladesh is not nuclear armed.. It has an incompetent military. The Pakistan Army eastern command was any day a bigger headache than today's Kanglu Army, and we had good relations with Bangladesh until last year..and we may have again in the near future.. If Bangladesh was part of Pakistan, it would have been permanently hostile..

Yes, we could have had some land around chicken's neck etc.. Everything is fine in hindsight . But, you forget that India's foremost task was have the world recognise Bangladesh as a sovereign country. You take that as a given today..

But, even Pakistan recognised Bangladesh as a sovereign country as part of Simla aggreement...
Also, IG didn't know how much USSR would back India against hostile US/UK/China moves.. But, she still took her chances and went ahead.. So, credit to her.

I know it's hard for right wingers to credit Congress with anything..

 

[Ajatshatru]

The entire concept of nuclear deterrence, in the context of India and Pakistan, is a psychological bluff propagated by Indian, Pakistani, and Western media to discourage open conflict. nuclear deterrence between major powers like the U.S. and Russia is effective due to mutual capabilities and strategic balance, the same does not apply universally. Iran cannot deter U.S. and NATO with nuclear weapons .Similarly, Pakistan cannot deter India, and if Hamas were to acquire nuclear weapons, it wouldn’t mean they could deter Israel.

 

[MasterChief]

If PM Modi wants to strike Pakistan in winter it's fine..
1. The China threat is minimised.
2. India has more time to build it's case and gather evidence (whether it matters or not )

I would love a thorough b**ging than pre mature ejaculation with a symbolic strike..
But, India would have to until then conduct large scale air, army and naval excercises to keep Pakistan on tenterhooks and armed forces prepared ..

But, the one problem is justifying a large strike on Pakistan in December, when most Indians would have moved on..

 

[Numero]

Lord forbid, if any of our friends or families were killed like the Pahalgam victims, would you have had the temerity to say "India doesn't need to do more than that"?

Classic textbook response.
War will kill more civilians, cripple your economy, reserve considering both are nuclear powers the implications will be extraordinarily high & seen in a long term.
Totally not worth it.
There are other ways to cripple them without even firing a bullet.
I know that no war is gonna happen from the start.

 

[srev2004]

Very high probability

The Goldilocks period for a retaliatory strike is within 72 hours. If you miss that window, international pressure will increase and it gives the opponent more opportunities to increase diplomatic pressure and flip the narrative.

 

[Suga]

If nothing else , bring legalisation to declare Pakistan jihad and enemy state. And every neighbour country as well “Indian citizen” (Aman ki Tamasha) who have relations with them will also be treated same as well declare Hindu genocide is happening and punish who Deny it. Bring “patriotic” kind of laws.

 

[spikey360]

Classic textbook response.
War will kill more civilians, cripple your economy, reserve considering both are nuclear powers the implications will be extraordinarily high & seen in a long term.
Totally not worth it.
There are other ways to cripple them without even firing a bullet.
I know that no war is gonna happen from the start.

Classic Baniya response.

Lol.

 

[MasterChief]

Forumers, do you really think,US call for de-escalation means any full scale large intensity naval/air strike is now no longer an option?

Even without US intervention no large Indian strike would have happened..
There would be a strike but not one that would cripple Pakistan's military capabilities

 

[TringTringMonster]

I would love to say that but seeing the 2 decades starting from 2001 parliament attacks....we have a decision paralysis issue.
It takes us weeks to mobilise while the other side does it in 3-5 days.
While with time, external pressure mounts upon us to do anything significant.
Do we really have cold start doctrine? We were supposed to mobilize in 72 hours for a response??
Does everyone sleeps before CCS meetings?

Yk the seeds of cold start were laid down in Operation Brassstacks. Indian Army mobilized to conduct large scales exercises which spooked the Pakis and brought the two countries on brink of nuke war. It revealed nuke redlines much earlier than pak would have liked and exposed a lot on our side too. We were too slow to mobilize which took several weeks and gave enough time for pakis to counter mobilize. Even though pakis interpreted it as blitzkrieg like war simulation, we didn't exactly surprise them.

And the lessons of Brassstacks was not learnt by the Indian military as shown in OP Parakram. We took way too long to even mobilize. That's where cold start doctrine came but who knows if the lesson has been learnt or not. Or if it's been tested or not. I don't know any large scale combined arms exercises has been conducted testing our readiness to quickly mobilize and strike hard and fast.

Moreover, this govt hasn't been stress tested in event of a actual war. Does the leadership council get paralyzed due to a blitzkrieg or a shock and awe campaign by our enemies? Does the decisions come too slow? Can the generals actually say their mind and aren't risk averse? Can they actually get the job done?

If you look at the US Civil war, the union forces would have crushed the confederates if Gen McClellan hadn't endlessly wasted time preparing the Union Army giving Robert Lee a chance to rally confederate forces. The initial delay of mobilizing and training and waiting for the perfect time cost the Union forces dearly. They were beaten back by Lee and the Confederacy. What would have been a few months campaign turned into a 4 year brutal war.

 

[karn]

After reading all arguments here and on SM I think the broad category of opinions is as such listing by severity of desired action.
1. The attack immediately gang.
2. The prepare stocks and attack gang.
3. Prepare for a winter campaign a la 1971.
4. China hawk gang .. China will take action so build up to counter said action and only then attack.
5. Dhandho gang.. We have a once in lifetime to truely become an industrialized nation if we play our cards right with unkil .. we can do to china what china did to the ussr. So lets not fuck it up by any war.

I think you'll will find yourselves on this spectrum . Incase I missed another POV do state it.

 

[randombully]

Classic textbook response.
War will kill more civilians, cripple your economy, reserve considering both are nuclear powers the implications will be extraordinarily high & seen in a long term.
Totally not worth it.
There are other ways to cripple them without even firing a bullet.
I know that no war is gonna happen from the start.

Bc, Kam se Kam unknown bombmen se ISI ke headquarter pe blast to karwana chahiye aab.