Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
India Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: India vs Great Pakistan
TheOne    10/16/2005 11:18:41 AM
Pakistan--------------------India $2.7 Billion (Yearly Military Expense) $14,018.8 Million 3.9% (% of GNP) 2.4% 17 (Min. Enlist Age) 17 39,793,586 (Available Manpower) 293,677,117 550,000 (Active Military) 1,100,000 400,000 (Frontline Personnel) 800,000 1,012 ( Aircraft) 3,382 3,445 (Armor) 5,112 3,952 (Artillery) 7,169 2,100 (Missile Defense) 7,400 3,025 (Infantry Support) 7,100 And still Pakistan defeated them in 1948, 1965 and Kargil war. I know Indian will start to defend the defeat in above mentioned wars therefore I explain the victory of Pakistan below. 1948 War…Pakistan freed one- third (1/3) Kashmir in 1948 war known as AZAD |KASHMIR which clearly shows that Pakistan won against India. 1965 War…I personally believe that Pakistan won the 1965 war as India invaded war against Pakistan and Pakistan army successfully defend their country. For instant if I accept the Indian claim that 1965 war was a level war, no one win no one lose than I am afraid Pakistan won the war as they fight with 10 time bigger country/army. Kargil War… I can’t stop my laugh when Indians say that they won the Kargil War. Whole world knows that how Pakistan army slaughtered Indian army. Just consider some of the following facts;- Pakistan army was much less in numbers in Kargil war we can explain it in ratio as 1:30 (one man of Pakistan army and 30 men of Indian army) Pakistan didn’t put enough army because they tried to show them as kashmiri mujahidin . Pakistan army only used guns against India (they were not able to use air force, tanks and missile etc as they showed their army as kashmiri mujahidin) and as we all know in response Indian army used air force, tanks, chemical weapon etc and still they can’t beat Pakistan army. Pakistan shot down two of their fighter aircraft and destroyed two weapon stores, number of tanks and countless army members. Might be Indian remember when government decided to celebrate Kargil war anniversary and opposition criticized them by saying ‘you want to celebrate your defeate?’ Indian should be thankful to their DAD Bil Clinton who saved them otherwise???? You know better… One more thing whenever Pakistan fight against India Pakistan fight on his own but Indian fight with the help of their DAD America and granddad Israel. Indian can only win in propaganda war by the help of their DAD and granddad. please don’t call American and Israel link as natural link because DAD always do favor to son
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT
maxin     India vs Pakistan   11/23/2009 12:55:09 PM
u pakistanis just think abt war n jihad. we already send satellite to moon.n we r ready man mission to moon n space. Indian space mission claims to have found water on  moon raising hopes that a manned base could be established there within the next two decades.we r the nxt global power
can u? can u?  pakistanis?
 
Quote    Reply

HARISHINDIAN    HA...Ha....WAR   12/4/2009 1:47:14 AM
You......... Pakistani's just thought of War because pakistan is a terriorist country and all pakistani's are terriorists as the whole world knows......everyone can understand this fact with the above mentioned article written by you and everyone can also know this that pakistan occupied 1/3rd of Kashmir by the help of terriorists killing innocent peoples......as mentioned by you, u must know that in 1948 after occupying the part of Kashmir when Indian Forces came to Kashmir, when the Lion came and the dog runs you Pakistanis run like the dog who want to go back to the dog shed(Pakistan) which is also the home of all criminals and terriorists.

And about 1965 war you pakistanis think that after the war of 1962  with China, India is so weak to capture but again you loose it and i want to tell you one think that YOUR DAD at that time "AMERICA" denies to give us food and weapons so we indians take one day fast so that we can fed our soldiers and save as much food. That kind of commitment requires to win a war for our country but you pakistanis can't notice that because u didn't fight for your country but for your EGO and the desire to capture the world in your hands or spread the terriorism in the world.
 
And i also want to tell you that your one of the Military Personnel said that "We can not win direct war from India, so we have to fight indirect war."
 
Quote    Reply

slipknot       1/1/2010 10:35:27 PM
Ha Ha..what a joke..so the pakis think the they won the wars..its a pity but they got their butt kicked 4 times (ITS A RECORD OF SHAME) they tried to occupy kashmir,got their butt kicked,next they tried to occupy bangladesh,got thrashed and again during tie kargil...these pakis live in a imaginative world...lets hope these fools wakeup someday..
 
Quote    Reply

johnboy       1/11/2010 12:11:13 PM
Given the title ("Great Pakistan?"), I think any energy spent analyzing this issue on this thread is energy wasted.
 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    what would be more interesting is..   4/3/2010 1:51:35 PM

 

India against a westernised force of any decent size say 80000+, that would be a very interesting thing, the modern well equipped and equally well trained/organised soldiers of a western nation against the larger well equipped* (with poor weapons on the whole) Indian army. i think the term bloodbath and walkover are appropriate here, and for one very good reason, India?s forces are the worst logistical nightmare imaginable, Hannibal had it easy navigating the alps compared to the Indian armies logistic trail, they have far too much variation of weapons and in too greater quantity, even the Swiss guard of the Vatican could bring the Indian army to its knees just by attacking its supplies (it probably couldn?t really, but I?m trying to highlight my point, work with me here). if it came to a war between India and Luxembourg i would bet on Luxembourg winning purely because of logistics, the nightmare it must be just trying to supply those troops for any decent amount of time must be hell, not even the US could manage it (thats saying something, as in all fairness they are great with logistics, credit where credit is due). if you were to pit India against France, Germany or Britain, dare i even say it even Italy (white flags at the ready, just a joke http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emwink.gif" alt="" />) the battle that would ensue would fall somewhere along the lines of advanced target practice and a tea party, with intermittent rounds of complete slaughter, it would be like the entirety of world war one happening in the space one hour of hell, except this time the country whom is against India have cruise missiles and advanced tanks, while the Indians are using horse and cart a bolt action weapons, i would safely bet that casualties sustained by the western force (if any) would be minimal while the Indian forces would need 20 million extra men to cart the casualties back home

Just a rough not particularly factual insight, no offence intended, i just seem to think that many people (Indians especially over estimate the capabilities of their forces, against a third world nation, I?m sure they would be dominant, but against a western power, or any other modernised nation I?m sure India would suffer badly

* Indian soldiers are very well equipped with poor weapons in many cases, they have lots of the stuff but little of it is up to a western standard
if i have overseen some reason why india is an all powerful military force for one reason or another someone please point it out to me.

 

 
Quote    Reply

action-pact       4/3/2010 6:09:16 PM
Hello JTR, i understand where you're coming from and i quite agree that you cant fight a war with horses and bullockcarts specially when the other nations (examples you quote france, germany, italy and others) and well equipped and logistically sound.
 However, in my defence for India, i will explain the logical thought behind India or other such nations being compared to go to war against mightier countries. War is not eminent and cetrainly not a choice for any developing nation (India and perhaps China). If you talk of the possibility of going to war it will not happen in the near future as the World is racing for economic supremacy rather than just a military one. After all, if you dont have the goodies in your nations treasury, how do you feed the soldiers and how do you gas the tanks/aircrafts/warships? if war were to be eminient in 15-20 years from now, the following would probably happen:
1) India's would be far more Industrialised and its GDP perhaps 4X6 times of today (US$ 1.4 trillion X 4 or X6).
2) India's capability to modernise its armed forces would greatly increase purely because tax collections and goverment spending would easily be 20%-22% of GDP. Along with Infrastructure, Military spending would be massive.
3) The Billion + people would now be at work becasue simply the government and economy are running at 8-10% growth. The Defence industry (equipment) itself will employ several millions. Mercedes started manufacturing vehicles in India for the domestic market in 1996. I can assure you companies like Boeing, Bombardier etc will all be manufacturing aircrafts sitting in India. Lack of numbers from Europe would force them to be in emerging markets. These are listed companies and in business for profits - they will go wherever the demand may be.
4) Germany, Italy, France and the other boys will grow at an incredibly slower pace and may stagnate for several years. Growth rates in these countries are 1%-2%. Remember, Germany was in recession for over 3 years just recently. Social spendings in these countries will be phenominally high with a fast ageing population. The economic crisis of 2008 has proven that these economies will crop up huge deficits and provide large stimulus to just about maintain 0-0.5% growth per annum.
5) Now tell me, in Europe you are stuggling to show growth and you have several billions of socio-econimic expenses, how will you maintain and grow you defence/militaryy forces? actually JTR, you will begin to reduce them.
 
The fear of India and China being superpowers in 2050 is not just an economic fear it is indeed a military fear.
 
Greece/Spain/Italy and Portugal are begging for support from the EU. They may recieve these loans and in large numbers. However, this will only compound other socio-economic problems. When (actually "IF") Greece recieves lets say a 20 year bail out package from the EU, do you actually think they will be using that money for defence? no, they will be spending it on old age homes and pensions (and working on Sundays - hahaha!). 
 
The next 20 years will indeed decide the fate of many nations. Many in the emerging world will be wealthier and will eventually become superior in economic might.
 
NEVER FORGET - If you dont have money, you cant feed your soldiers, gas your aircrafts/tanks/warships (leave alone buying equipment). Eventually the balance of power will shift.  
 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    well quite   4/6/2010 7:22:52 AM

Hello JTR, i understand where you're coming from and i quite agree that you cant fight a war with horses and bullockcarts specially when the other nations (examples you quote france, germany, italy and others) and well equipped and logistically sound.

 However, in my defence for India, i will explain the logical thought behind India or other such nations being compared to go to war against mightier countries. War is not eminent and cetrainly not a choice for any developing nation (India and perhaps China). If you talk of the possibility of going to war it will not happen in the near future as the World is racing for economic supremacy rather than just a military one. After all, if you dont have the goodies in your nations treasury, how do you feed the soldiers and how do you gas the tanks/aircrafts/warships? if war were to be eminient in 15-20 years from now, the following would probably happen:

1) India's would be far more Industrialised and its GDP perhaps 4X6 times of today (US$ 1.4 trillion X 4 or X6).

2) India's capability to modernise its armed forces would greatly increase purely because tax collections and goverment spending would easily be 20%-22% of GDP. Along with Infrastructure, Military spending would be massive.

3) The Billion + people would now be at work becasue simply the government and economy are running at 8-10% growth. The Defence industry (equipment) itself will employ several millions. Mercedes started manufacturing vehicles in India for the domestic market in 1996. I can assure you companies like Boeing, Bombardier etc will all be manufacturing aircrafts sitting in India. Lack of numbers from Europe would force them to be in emerging markets. These are listed companies and in business for profits - they will go wherever the demand may be.

4) Germany, Italy, France and the other boys will grow at an incredibly slower pace and may stagnate for several years. Growth rates in these countries are 1%-2%. Remember, Germany was in recession for over 3 years just recently. Social spendings in these countries will be phenominally high with a fast ageing population. The economic crisis of 2008 has proven that these economies will crop up huge deficits and provide large stimulus to just about maintain 0-0.5% growth per annum.

5) Now tell me, in Europe you are stuggling to show growth and you have several billions of socio-econimic expenses, how will you maintain and grow you defence/militaryy forces? actually JTR, you will begin to reduce them.

 

The fear of India and China being superpowers in 2050 is not just an economic fear it is indeed a military fear.

 

Greece/Spain/Italy and Portugal are begging for support from the EU. They may recieve these loans and in large numbers. However, this will only compound other socio-economic problems. When (actually "IF") Greece recieves lets say a 20 year bail out package from the EU, do you actually think they will be using that money for defence? no, they will be spending it on old age homes and pensions (and working on Sundays - hahaha!). 

 

The next 20 years will indeed decide the fate of many nations. Many in the emerging world will be wealthier and will eventually become superior in economic might.

 

NEVER FORGET - If you dont have money, you cant feed your soldiers, gas your aircrafts/tanks/warships (leave alone buying equipment). Eventually the balance of power will shift.  


true money is needed to fight a war and maintain an army etc, i like the way you have mentioned the economical states of some of the countries, yes it is true the Europe and the West has received a beating by the last recession, but growth is returning, don?t quote me on this but i recall hearing something that some financial experts once said that when a country emerges from a recession (especially one with a strong economy prior to the recession) that the afore mentioned economy will be at least two or three times stronger than what it was before hence massive growth, the government over here in Britain for example has said that our economy could expect to see something like 4% growth over the next few years with greater increases to follow (but then again all of our politicians are liars anyway, so we will just have to see on that one, i wouldn?t trust most of t

 
Quote    Reply

action-pact       4/16/2010 8:45:14 PM
Hi JTR, once again, please keep in mind that the west is militarily much stronger than the east. And this is for the time being only. At 4% the UK will get nowhere in 15-20 years. The UK will be nothing but a social state for the next 20 years and you and your buddies can live of the goverment for free. Dont forget my previous comment, in an economic scenario, all the arms producers will be sitting in India and China lock-stock and barrel to sell their weapons. The British Government, US Goverment or the French Govt dont actually produce/manufacture the arms, companies do. they will kick britain in the ass and relocate to china in a matter of minutes. i dont know who you are but if you do live another 15-20 years, you will understand where i am coming from. take care
 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    maybe not   4/17/2010 7:23:21 AM

Hi JTR, once again, please keep in mind that the west is militarily much stronger than the east. And this is for the time being only. At 4% the UK will get nowhere in 15-20 years. The UK will be nothing but a social state for the next 20 years and you and your buddies can live of the goverment for free. Dont forget my previous comment, in an economic scenario, all the arms producers will be sitting in India and China lock-stock and barrel to sell their weapons. The British Government, US Goverment or the French Govt dont actually produce/manufacture the arms, companies do. they will kick britain in the ass and relocate to china in a matter of minutes. i dont know who you are but if you do live another 15-20 years, you will understand where i am coming from. take care

I don?t think many of the well established arms companies would just up sticks and relocate. for example BAE systems, the second largest defence contractor in the world, its the main supplier to dozens of armed forces around the world, and the key supplier to not only the British armed forces but the United States armed forces as well (BAE supplies more to America now than to the UK). It is a royal arms company and therefore i would imagine it is committed to the manufacture of arms for this nation, i would think that if DESO is re-established this would prevent any major upheaval in the way arms are provided to our armed forces, and with such a big thing as the defence industry, governments will not simply allow all of their defence contractors to leave and set up shop elsewhere, besides the more established companies have branches everywhere so would have very little need to move anywhere as they already dominate the market to a great degree, and in doing so are able to branch out while fulfil their requirements to western buyers etc.

you say 4% growth will not amount to much, maybe, maybe not, but look at it from this point of view, to a major world economy 4% is massive, i would hazard a guess at saying this 4% is in a different league to others countries growth levels, e.g. UKs 4% may equal 10% in India (by the way there is not facts to back that up at all, I?m not a financial expert i was just guessing to make my point)

 

 
Quote    Reply

Prabal Tomar    Great, Wow.....   6/23/2010 5:24:01 AM
Dear writer,
 The information shared by you shows the mantel level and your nation's self cocooned state. When you claim that Pakistan won 2 wars, we all laugh. This is what you army and rulers claim after every defeat and you fools celebrate that.
After independence ( you a day before us), we saw huge growth in terms of technology, infrastructure, education etc. Today we are the most promising economy. We are in top list of powerful country. There are lot other things which you better learn. COMPARE YOUR PAKISTAN
 
What you people doing in India, if we started the same, your so called PAKISTAN will be divided in many small parts and then there will be no PAKISTAN on in few months. You people even don't have the basic infrastructure to live, no real democracy and you claim that you beat India in 2 wars.
 
When you call US our dady, remember that you are surviving on their grands and mercy only. You have nothing of yours.They give and you survive.You either beg/borrow or steal your technology form other countries like China and Korea. If its real war then we know that you can not fight more than a 7 days, either you will be wiped off from the globe or you will be out of money.
 
Remember 1971 war when your 100000 soldiers dropped the weapons. So always remember that you never can defeat us in any format of war.
JAAAGOOOOOOO warna hamesa ke liye so jaoge. 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics