A Decision to Regret

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Romair:

Indian Army battalions in the post-1947 era have fought as well as PakArmy ones. As a general rule, my feeling is that each Army`s battalion`s fighting quality is a direct function of the quality of its officers. Some Pakistani battalions essentially broke and ran (both in `65 and `71) while others fought on till the bitter end. I think the same holds true for Indian ones as well. The reason for this is that we (neither us nor the Indians) have institutionalized our army`s training and professional ethos to overcome the intensely personalistic leadership style of our cultures and consequent way the jawans react to their officers.

My feeling, garnered from listening to various relatives, long talks with junior officers in the early 1990s and from just talking to the jawans, is that they expect the officers to behave in an afsarana manner: personal bravery and looking after their men coupled with an unwillingness to needlessly sacrifice lives. The jawans really don`t care if the officer is a panch waqt ka namazi or if he drinks (although drinking or not fasting in Ramzan is a big no-no; I think the jawans don`t mind drinking after iftar ;-) ) but from what I`ve seen, excessively pious officers who lack the necessary afsarana qualitites are generally despised as mealy mouthed hypocrites.

So upto about the battalion/brigade level its relatively easy to judge how good or bad are our armies since there has been a fair bit of fighting at this level, certainly in Kargil for example.

However, neither we nor the Indians have excelled at handling divisons or corps the way that the Israelis or Americans or even I suppose Egyptians have since WWII. The Indian track record, especially in E. Pakistan, is better than ours but their relative lack of success on the Western Front shows that they certainly could do with some improvement there.

Regards.

Romair:

If you are talking about the fighting capability of soldiers and officers, then Kargil specifically and Siachen would be good bench marks.

Also, specific cases where the US Army has indicated interest in HAWS (High Altitude Warfare School) and the COINS/Jungle Warfare school in Imphal.

Also, I don`t agree with your assertion that to see the quality of an army, you have to compare equal actions only. In that sense, You have never seen the Pak Army in action either. It`s better to analyze specific battles, keeping numeric advantage in mind, yes, but also a host of other factors such as environment, troop performance, ability to beat natural and man-made obstacles etc.

Fuzair #458: ``However, I do have a soft spot for ALL those who served in that glorious institution, the British Indian Army, so I`ll be happy to include Sikhs, Gurkhas, Rajputs, Madrassis, Dogras, etc, in the ``ideal`` army.``

Being a Rajput myself, I would like to include them in the ideal Army also. Historically, from whatever I have read, they were one of the only group who stood up to the various invaders into India.

However, my ideal Army is based on the current (not historic) state of militaries, and amongst those, the militaries I know about. While I am familiar with Indian military`s armament and tactics, to some extent, I am unaware, of its soldier`s capabilities. So I cannot comment one way or the other. The capabilities maybe great or may be terrible. I don`t know. Just like I have no knowledge of the capabilities of most of the 160 or so militaries that exist in the world. It is quite possible the best soldiers are from the Fiji military, or the Cuban military.

The second point is that it is impossible to judge the capabiliy of a military, until it takes on another military its own size, or greater in size. Perhaps a war between China and India would be a good benchmark to judge the Indian military against:)

I am very familiar with the capabilities of the Pakistani and US soldiers, however. I have pointed out earlier the Pakistani military officers` fighting capabilities decrease the higher up one goes in rank (specially in the Army), in comparison with other international militaries. In case of the US military, it is the other way around. I don`t know what the case is within the Indian military.

Fuzair #458: There is a simple rule about fighting massive civilian uprisings that have the following three characteristics:

- A large group of civilian willing to die for their cause.

- Military support from a third-party country

- A shared border of the area with the uprisings, with the third-party country that is providing the support.

The rule is, ``Don`t`` i.e. don`t attempt to fight such fights. Solve the problem politically, regardless of how much you have to give up. In the long run, you will be better off. This has been proven again and again, yet military strategists never learn. Some examples are as follow:

The US dropped more bombs on Vietnam, then they did in all of WWII. Vietnam fit into the above three rules, i.e. the population was willing to die, Soviet military support, and shared borders through which the support could come in.

The Soviets killed over 1 million Afghanis in Afghanistan. They lost due to local population willing to die, US/Saudi support through a shared Pakistani border.

Pakistanis did the same thing in Bangladesh. They lost due to locals willing to die, military support from India through a shared border (Pakistan itself did not have a shared border, which furthur complicated things).

And India is now doing the same in Kashmir. It will sooner or later withdraw due to locals willing to die for their cause, military support through volunteer civilian insurgents from Pakistan coming through a shared border.

People just don`t learn.

If China were to start supporting the Taliban in this struggle (which it may if it wants the US to get bogged down), there is no way the US will be able to win in Afghanistan. The only reason I think it will win now is because factors 2 and 3 do not apply (provided the US is willing to send in ground troops).

P.S. News from the war front from a friend of a friend who is an Army Chopper pilot:

Americans are starting to get bogged down. They launched two special ops raids. And suffered quite a few casualities in the second one.

Don`t know how accurate this info is, but it looks like this is going to be a long fight.

Fuzair #458 Granted then that the Pak army has many good captains, not good generals. What makes an individual a good captian vs. a good general: A general needs: conceptualizing ability. Not getting lost in the forest because of the trees. Ability to see the big picture. A good captian needs: Loyalty, physical courage, selflessness, ability to inspire troops. So: one can infer that individuals with the ability to think big do not enter the military, or at least do not progress beyond captain or major. And the army has for all practical purposes been a major influence at a minimum since Ayub`s days. So why are we falling behind, quarelling with neighbors, even though the average Pakistani is as good as anyone else in the world? I think the answer is written on the wall: determination of, or influence, on national policy by individuals (Zia, Yahya, the religious generals) who would not be considered fit for any serious strategizing or decision making in a commercial organization.

dostmitar

(If Scout is your jeejaji, then shouldn`t you be her saali?)

ehehe- galtee hogayee. i`m still learning in-law terminology. Aaj sae scout salee ;0)

countdowns almost up- saath din aur. You will pray for me? Please do. I need all the dua`s and good wishes I can grab :0)

Romair: Further to my post below where I was comparing Sikh generals vs. German generals, I may add that the German generals got whipped in two world wars. Sikh generals havent lost a war - ever. OK, I am just being non-serious again, so please be merely amused and dont get upset.

Romair: Sorry, I just find it hard to be serious when someone seriously tries to come up with a Perfect Army by combining all sorts of apples and oranges. You are basically comparing apples and oranges when you take groups of people from different times and different situations and label them best generals vs. best lieutenants vs. best whatever. One could for example argue that Sikh generals are the best (they did win in Bangladesh and in Afghanistan in the 19th century) or Vietnamese (beat the French, fought US to a stalemate or victory) or British (they did subdue half the world at one point), but that would be all bs. Just like any attempt at generalizing people is pointless.

So, I would suggest you lighten up a bit on this - or else have a more substantive discussion if you want to discuss military matters more seriously (I am sure you are capable of a much more substantive discussion than matching Paki Lieutenants with German generals and soldiers from England or someplace).

Saminashah

I dont accept anyone harrasing female interacts. All I say is that Zahra had been harrasing for months some men who do not fight with anyone. Some men trouble women, some women trouble men. Equally guilty. At least others dont make big tamasha like her. As I said, she cant stay away because she will miss her tamasha.

Sorry for being rude but talking about a rude person I can only be rude. Dont worry with calling her. She will be running back.

#417 hobbyty

So all this hindu-zionist conspiracy is your personal nightmare eh? No surprise there.

(Remember tho, you`re paranoid doesn`t mean they are not out to get you.)

Hope you have read the hindu nationalists Khaled Ahmed and Ejaz Haider in that zionist rag TFT.

Fuzair #458

As usual, a fine post. But then from you, anything less is unacceptable ;)

Regards

Fuzair,

{{I am not defending Niazi, who has to rank among the worst generals ever to take the field. }}

Did you read Niazi`s book (Betrayal in E.Pakistan) or something like that?! Jeeze, according to him , his troops beat the heck out of the Indian army & the Mukti Bahini & could have easily taken Calcutta if his superiors on the West had given him permission. He felt his troops, under his command, were like the noble Afrika Corps (he, ofcourse, was Pakistan`s Rommel). The reason he surrendered was because his superiors ordered him to surrender!

He also claims that in West Pakistan, their army was trounced by the Indians & the Pakistan Navy simply bolted out of sight like cowards. He makes his claim with such zeal, one would think he actually believes his own crap.

Its possible that plenty of Pakistanis (esp the ones who believe that the WTC was destroyed by Jews) have readily believed Niazi`s heroics in the East (while dissmissing his views about Pakistan`s performance in the West).

No offense, but the one characteristic of Pakistani military types is brilliant spin doctoring. Not to say Indians arent spinners but you guys beat us hands down in that category:)

US ready for shoot-out if Musharraf is ousted







ASHINGTON: The United States will be prepared for a shoot-out between its Marines and Pakistani troops if President Pervez Musharraf is removed from power and the country`s nuclear weapons are in danger of falling into the hands of fundamentalists or Osama bin Laden.

``In case of an uprising in Pakistan or if Musharraf is overthrown by forces friendly to Taliban or bin Laden, the 2,200 troops of the 15th Marine Expeditonary unit cooped up on the assault ship USS Peleliu, presumably itching for action, could be sent to safeguard Pakistan`s nuclear weapons and materials to keep them away from Laden or other terrorists, a media report said here on Monday quoting sources.

Dear Zahra (``Reply #: 425)

``Anil:

Sorry, I have no desire to be at a place where ....``

``...It`s not us vs them at all. I think you are a solid person so don`t lose your mental vision. But I do PITY the unfortunate poor women[without any options] who are in any way or shape attached to ``the trash`` as wives, mothers, sisters and daughters. Trash is trash! These women will procreate and produce the same kind. Garbage in, Garbage Out!``

Beti, I do see your passion to address this problem as coming from the bottom of your heart. My point of us-v-them was symmetrical in treament and was in no way meant to be India-v-Pakistan etc. etc. I am sorry if it delivered wrong message.

I think I do see your vision. Don`t you think empowering girls with basic education and craft as early as possible is a step toward solution. My mother in 1968 started a school for children (especially girls) of the poor in New Delhi. Now there are about 1,000 students. My sisters are running this school. Some of the wonderful stories they tell me about the success and transformation of the entire family in phenomenal. Another story, a lady cardiologist (hindu lady) while a student at Bhopal Medical College started basic education in the muslim neighborhood of Bhopal on the suggestion of a muslim lab. assistant and against the threats of Mullahs of the local mosque. She got hold of the oldest lady of the community and asked her simple question would it be better to let the girls read and write or not. The old lady took up the cause and got the local mullah under control, because she asked the lady cardiologist and the assistant to come during the day when the men have gone to work and the mullah would be alone.

Remarkable simple idea, and beautifully executed. According to her, now each Bhopal Medical College student to graduate must to community service. This lady is now settled in Silicon Valley.

Never give up Zahra, the time for you and your ideas has come.

ANIL

Reply Stuka