Ray

Vishw29,

You claim you are from Pune. Good.

Let me tell you something in Marathi. You should be conversant with it since you are from Pune.

Tumcha bochya madhye paye ghaleen. Samajhlas?

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Jay

Ray Sahab,
If he's from Pune then I'm from Karachi

Ray

But then I am Dr Khan with my nest in Timbuctoo where I will flee if the US puts too much of heat on Mush's seat! May Allah forgive me for selling nuke secrets to all and sundry and being so greedy and crass.

Hawk_eye

Firstly before i reply to your remarks i must say that as someone who has military experience i found much of the content of this fourm very ammusing, at one point it was more a boxing match between pro-india/pakistani members then a logical discussion in regards to the topic.

Secondly, The author of this post must be working in Psy-Ops or some military intelligence unit- Mabye that's why he/she is so qualified to asses the impact of the MNNA on Pakistan's regional and global position.

Some of the remrarks in this topic were outlandish at most, one side trying to get back at the other... A very emotional discussion, showing that very few of you even understood the motives of the author, who was looking for just such a reaction.

Frankly i am suprised that you all took this "persons"post so seriously..

Now coming back to the 1965, there is no doubt that India had mounted an amazing counter-assult on the empty border and had reached the gates of lahore. Their combat tactics were better then the pakistani commander who was out gunned. However Sing's plan was thwarted in september when one lone tank regiment gave a severe mauling to two tank regiments out of a total available Indian force of an armoured division, and a brigade level counter attack in Lahore Sector. The counter attack of Brigadier Qayyum Sher in Lahore Sector was a successful divisional battle ordered by Major General Sarfaraz MC and executed by Brigadier Qayyum Sher most resolutely! It produced a crisis on the Indian side and threw the Indians off balance! Both retired in the same rank sometimes after the war!

Our reliance on heavy armor and tactics to utilise them have dramatically changed since then, and after the induction of Al-khaild MBT and the Al-Zarrar, such as the recent weapons for peace and Futurez 2003 showed.

But the Indian argun is a good machine aswell, however i am not quite sure of its armor.

__________________
http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8...taneditres.jpg

Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a [person] does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses their intelligence.
--Albert Einstein

vishv29

Our reliance on heavy armor and tactics to utilise them have dramatically changed since then, and after the induction of Al-khaild MBT and the Al-Zarrar, such as the recent weapons for peace and Futurez 2003 showed.

But the Indian argun is a good machine aswell, however i am not quite sure of its armor


@ hawk eye,
i agree that pakistan has a very powerful armor but see, now india has inducted around 200+ T-90 tanks and gained the edge in armor also. ( i dont know those tanks r fully operational yet or not ). ok lets not think abt T-90. but see, indian armor is quatitiwise huge against pakistan. it uses one the most powerful SMERCH MRLs which can target pakistani tanks even more than 80-90 km.distance. our army also uses PINAKA MRL's with a range of 40-50 km.
IAF uses one of the most dangerous anti tank MI-35 choppers. which have become more lethal after the upgradation now capable for night attacks, and it proved its metal in the recent airshow of rajasthan. also indian army had purchased 8 PN-TPQ-37 firefinder radars in april 2000 from USA. which r fully operational.(now it is reported to be using 12 such radars).besides in the war if PAF fails to provide significant aircover to its armor becoz of IAF's superiority in quality and quantity, then these costly pakistani tanks will be very easily hunted by IAF, indian armor, smerch and pinaka mrls, MI-35 anti tank helcopters, PN-TPQ-37 firefinder systems in join operation.

Hawk_eye

Dear Sir,

At no time did i ever wish to imply that india dose not have adequte means, we all know that india posses a vast array of tanks in its arsenal and not forgetting to mention the AT-Gunships and HEAT missiles as you stated above, although you have mentioned Joint Ops, Unfortunetly for both nations it is a subject that we never have truly invested in as a important tool for warfare.. But yes the Indian Asrenal is huge and the threat posed by the MI-35 AT gunship could be countered by the baktar Shikan missile system or the cobra AP gunships could be used along with the arial support possibly provided by 18 Sqd (f-7-p).

vishv29

hawk eye,

yes u r right. but belive me i was not comparing the millitary hardware of both the countries. i still agree that pakistan has qualitative edge in armor over india (becoz T-90's r most probably not yet fully operational). i was just trying to show that in case of war, how indians will try to save their littlebit inferior tank force from pakistani AL-ZARRAR,AL-KHALIDS with the help of indian airforce and other weapons i mentioned above.

Jay

Al-Zarars ? and how many Khalids does PAkistan have? 2 zillions??

Hawk_eye

Point taken!

lexxwern

__________________
If you disagree with me, you are wrong!

Aryan

Any war between Pakistan and INdia is expected to be a short swift one, like all previous wars. The outcome of short wars are more dependent on military and tactics, the economy only comes into play if the war is prolonged.

Hawk_eye

Hmm,

I dont feel you understand how war's are fought... Espically proxies.. For your information the Pakistan army spends a quater of what india spends to maintain its soldiers, altough you may have read that pakistan cannot sustain prolonged periods of combat because of supply problems and other logistical difficulties that come from war.

Well in response to that school of thought, The Pak army spends about 1/10 of what india spends to transport troops and equipment espically to schicen thanks to the karakorum highway (Thankyou China)

India clearly holds a edge over Pakistan when it comes to Airforce and navy but even indian thinktanks have said time and time again that the strength and overall capability of the Pakistan army is better then india's, this was also re-confirmed by Royal Military Academy Sandhurst Commandant Gen Wright, and i quote "That while the indian army holds the quantative edge, the fighting prowess and qualatitave edge of the Pakistan army over their indian counterparts cannot be ruled out in the field of battle.

[qoute] were miles ahead[/quote]

LoL... Thats what happens when your the fifth biggest purchaser of arms and armament in the whole world, consider this please.... Why you buy weapons, we try to make our own... In the long run, who's better off?

Officer of Engineers

Pakistan's Wars with India has not qualified your claims. And Stars does not give anyone assesement right.

Unsubstantiated crap. The Warsaw Pact and North Korea were/are weapons importers but we knew/know that they could fight damned well.

__________________
Chimo

Hawk_eye

Hmm,

Lets see,

For my first post mabye this will shed some light on the subject:
1965 War -September when one lone tank regiment gave a severe mauling to two tank regiments out of a total available Indian force of an armoured division, and a brigade level counter attack in Lahore Sector.

The counter attack of Brigadier Qayyum Sher in Lahore Sector was a successful divisional battle ordered by Major General Sarfaraz MC and executed by Brigadier Qayyum Sher most resolutely! It produced a crisis on the Indian side and threw the Indians off balance! Both retired in the same rank sometimes after the war!



1987 Crisis
The 1987 Crisis was a case of over enthusiasm at the military level with little outward enthusiasm at the highest political level. The Indian Chief Sundarji was living in visions of Glory and visualized that a military manoeuvre would escalate into a war which would lead to a successful Indian military thrust severing the Pakistani line of communication in Rahimyar Khan Sector thus leading to the emergence of a new state in Pakistani Sindh and the creation of a second Indian Field Marshal after Manekshaw i.e Sundarji!

Comically Sundarji’s visions of glory were not matched by strategic insight! Thus he was overawed into inaction and inertia like K.K Singh at Gadgor, once the Pakistani High Command relocated the Pakistani reserves northwards in a purely defensive move!

1987 was a watershed and marked the Indian Army at its lowest position in the eyes of the highest Indian political leadership

vis-a-vis the high position of 1971. Sundarji destroyed all that the Indian Army had gained in 25 years with one night of irresolution and inertia!

1999 Crisis

The 1999 Crisis in Kargil were the result of an audacious Pakistani plan to inflict a sharp but highly subtle psychological defeat on the Indians by threatening the Indian line of communication to Leh and Siachen by placing a small Pakistani force on the heights overlooking the Dras-Kargil-Leh Road. The execution at tactical level was brilliant albeit marked by poor logistic arrangements at divisional level! The Pakistani political leadership lost the resolution to press home the move to its final conclusion. Full facts are not available about what the Pakistan Army’s highest leadership wanted at this point in time.

The Indians payed a heavy price in terms of casualties for an intelligence failure. What Pakistan gained or lost is not clear although a debate continues about who was Kargils winner. Kargil stands out as merely one stage in a long series of actions in Pakistani military history.[Undecided]

(Source- Pakistan Defence Journal 2001/august.)



Secondly:
New Delhi had stepped up defence spending by 50 per cent in the past three years. India spent 4.5 billion dollars a year on high-tech imports, putting it on course to become the world's biggest purchaser of arms.-http://www.rense.com/general29/mushd.htm



Also : Please read, Intresting article by indian author:

The ghost of Kargil
Qudratullah Gandapur
The ghost of Kargil will keep on haunting the Indian Army and its leadership and strike awe and terror in their hearts for decades. To cover their failure in the battlefield they had come up with funny unbelievable explanations and all sorts of mock stories to redeem their national honour and prestige of their armed forces. But all this had been of little avail.
Whatever the Indians have been trumpeting during and after the conflict may have provided some face saving and to a great extent swayed the public opinion of far off lands to win them their public and official support but it has been of little help to convince or even partially satisfy their own people. Because there everyone knows that it was United States, which came to bail India out of that desperate situation. Or to be more exact it was our own leadership, whose nerves could not stand the pressures and made a dash to Washington, to sign an accord that still baffles diplomats and analysts the world over.
Never in the annals of war have the leaders of a country behaved in such a manner when they had such a tremendous edge in the battlefield. Still more mystifyingly disgraceful was the scandalous outburst of Mian Nawaz Sharif, when in June 2000, he claimed that he was not a privy to the operation and his dash to Washington was because the position of the Pakistan Army on those outposts had become untenable.
This misrepresentation of facts was an ugly attempt of salvaging his political position at the expense of national honour and pride. (Incidentally it was a written statement that he read out) It was certainly a detrimental and unbecoming way of helping himself politically at home or to improve his image and acceptability abroad. But all that it did was to provide the much-needed credulity to false Indian claims.
Thus, recently on a TV Talk Show on a private channel, it was most pathetic and heart eroding to watch the most influential member of Nawaz Sharif's Kitchen Cabinet, Ch. Nisar Ali Khan, justifying and rationalising Nawaz Sharif's role with an unabashed audacity, re-echoing the same unbelievable tale.
The rationalisation of this gutless decision is doubtlessly a more unpardonable felony than the act itself. But then as nation we tend to, not only overlook and forget but also forgive such national crimes.
When confronted with the facts to the contrary he flatly refused to acknowledge the meetings and briefings given to the then Prime Minister. The ex-Minister very glibly denied even the official photographs released to the press on that occasion saying that these do not prove the date and location of the meetings. But he conveniently seemed to be forgetting that all these are on records and duly reported in the press.
How can he deny Prime Minister's visits and the briefings in early 1999, one in Skardu on January 29 and the other in Kel on Feb 5 and the ISI briefing on March 12? Or for that matter the earlier presentation given to him by the ISI Chief in November 1998. If it was not for that, then why should the Prime Minister visit Northern Areas and FCNA, HQ twice and that too, in a span of seven days? Never have any head of the Government including the military rulers ever made such hurried trips or received military and intelligence briefings with such frequency.
The Ex-Minister was harping the same old tune that the Prime Minister's dash to Washington was because the Pakistan army and its Para-military troops could not hold on to those peaks. Something that even the Indians themselves find hard to believe. Because they had witnessed the plight and helplessness of their elite units, (having a combined strength of over fifty battalions) to achieve any noticeable result in the field.
Even after heavily augmenting their forces, with more troops and additional firepower, the gains were negligible and the losses were colossal. Thirteen regiments of the most modern 155 mm BOFOR guns (Whose ammunition according to Brian Cloughley, "was a problem and expensive to acquire at over 1,000 dollars per round") two ATGM units and rocket batteries were shifted for continued firing on these positions.
Even the third dimension of war, the Air Force was unleashed, which flew no less than 600 sorties MiG-21 and Mirage 2000, "using laser guided bombs" (confirmed personally by the Chief of the IAF to the press) had been of little help. All that they could clear in those ten weeks (even according to their own reports) was only up to 10-11 percent of the "posts" that they claimed had been established by Pakistan Army and Para Military Forces and those too at a very heavy cost in men and material.
Out of the more than 100 picquets, only 10-12 had been cleared by the Indian forces and according to Brian Cloughley "Withdrawal from the remaining 120 or so defended localities was on orders from the Pakistan side of Line of Control" as a result of the Nawaz Government's so called diplomatic triumph of "Washington Accord", which made NLI suffer more casualties than they had suffered during the three months of combat.
The President of Indian Janta party, Dr Subramanium Swamy, confirmed that President Clinton while addressing the Indian Parliament in March 2000, reminded them in unambiguous words by saying that "it was not India but the United States that intervened and forced Pakistan to withdraw in the Kargil conflict"
But all these facts were of no consequence to our ex-Minister or his leaders. To them a political advantage is all that they must have, whatever may be the cost.
All this said and done, one question still remains unanswered that this scribe asked these rationalists of the "Washington Dash" in the article "Lost Victory-III", published in a national daily, on 10th October1999:
"For a moment, just for an academic argument we concede to the Indian claim and their baseless propaganda or the out of context assessment of some of our own "courtiers" and self styled experts and analysts that holding on to these peaks was becoming untenable in the face of mounting Indian pressure.
Or that India was all set for an all out war along the international border. The simple question is why Washington Accord? Especially when India was not prepared for a commitment of clean break and safe withdrawal. The "infiltrators" could simply and quietly fall back, claiming that in accordance with the doctrine of guerrilla warfare they have moved away after inflicting heavy losses on the enemy.
Prolonged and pitched battles were not a part of their over-all plan. In any case Pakistan had not admitted a direct involvement of the Pakistan Army across the LOC, therefore, there could be no loss of face as such." Even the Accord said, 'Pakistan would use its influence to withdraw from these peaks'".
Nietzsche said, "No man lies so boldly as the man who is indignant". Leaders on both sides have been indignant, o course for different reasons. But it is a pity that the Indians are making stories and telling lies to redeem their national honour and armed forces morale, whereas, ours are doing so; at the cost of national honour and prestige; desperately trying to make up for their personal loss in the political arena and gain cheap popularity with the West and increase their acceptability with them. And why shouldn't they do it?
They know that this nation is in habit of forgetting rather quickly and forgiving almost everything, including national crimes and betrayal.

Source:http://fashion.za-news.com/news/Ghost.html

701 Million Pak-US Military, Economic Deal Finalized

April 30, 2004: Pakistan and the United States have finalized details of a $701 million military and economic assistance package to be offered to Islamabad in November, Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz said on Thursday.

"The US government has sent a formal request to the US Congress to approve a $701 million military and economic assistance program for Pakistan which is to be approved on November 1 along with the US budget for 2005," he said. Talking to news media here on Thursday after his return from a visit to the United States, Mr Shaukat Aziz said he had held useful talks with senior US officials besides meeting the functionaries of the US Exim Bank, USAID and the chief of the economic wing of the National Security Council.

He said the Bush administration had decided to offer $300 million each as part of the military and economic assistance program for Pakistan. "Then, additionally, they have approved $101 million development assistance for health, education, narcotics control and law enforcement," he said. The finance minister said he had met Ted Steven, chairman of the Senate Appropriation Committee, and Jim Kolbe, head of the House Appropriation Committee. He said meetings were also held with US Secretary of Treasury John Snow and Under-Secretary of State for Economic Affairs Alan Larson. "And they assured us that the US will provide all necessary military and economic assistance to Pakistan."

He said that a $480 million debt, out of a total of the $2 billion loan that Pakistan owed to the US, would be written off this year for which broad understanding had been reached between the two countries. Mr Aziz said the US Exim Bank had decided to open up credit facilities for the American investors to help them do business with Pakistan's public sector. Besides, Mr Aziz pointed out, an Exim Bank delegation would visit Pakistan next month to assess the credit needs of the private sector. "The US investors appear keen to invest in the power sector and undertake some railway projects for which the Exim Bank will extend the required guarantee," he said. [Dawn]

http://www.pakistanidefence.com/news...USPAK_Deal.htm

Also it was announced that Pakistan To Maintain Minimum Credible Deterrence: Munir Akram At UNSC

April 29, 2004: Pakistan has declared that it will continue to develop its nuclear, missiles and related strategic capability to maintain the minimum credible deterrence vis-a-vis India. Speaking at the UN Security Council following approval of the Resolution on Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction on Wednesday, Pakistan's Ambassador to the United Nations Munir Akram asserted that Pakistan would "not accept any demand for access, much less inspections, of our nuclear and strategic assets, materials and facilities." Without naming India, Mr Akram said that Pakistan had to take into account the reality that "our eastern neighbor" was embarked on major program for nuclear weapons, missiles, anti-missiles and conventional arms acquisition and development. The 15-nation Security Council passed the binding resolution criminalizing the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by such private parties as terrorists and black market traders after its main sponsor, the United States, accommodated the major concerns of Pakistan and other countries in the revised text.

Mr Akram told the council "we have proposed the creation of a Strategic Restraint Regime in South Asia encompassing nuclear-weapons and confidence building measures; a conventional balance of arms and the resolution of underlying disputes. We hope to promote such a regime under the composite dialogue recently agreed by the two states. An experts-level meeting on "nuclear CBMs" will be held next month," he added. Ambassador Akram noted that the sponsors of the resolution had given assurances that it was designed to address a 'gap' in international law to address the risk of terrorists and non-state actors acquiring or developing weapons of mass destruction, and that it did not seek any specific legislation which was left to national action by states.

Mr Akram said Pakistan shared the view expressed in the Council's open debate that the council could not legislate for the world. The council could not assume the stewardship of global non-proliferation and disarmament issues, he said. Composed of 15 states, it was not a representative body. It could not enforce the obligations assumed by five of its members which retained nuclear weapons since they also possessed the veto power. He said biological weapons were the most likely weapons of mass destruction to be acquired by terrorists and non-state actors, as well as by states, "Biological weapons technology was evolving rapidly, and a universal and equitable verification mechanism to prevent biological weapons proliferation was now more essential than ever."

"The situation in the area of nuclear non-proliferation, as well as missile proliferation, was considerably more complicated," Pakistan's chief delegate said. Pakistan had been obliged to acquire develop nuclear weapons and related delivery systems to maintain credible minimum deterrence against external aggression, especially once similar capabilities had been developed and demonstrated by its eastern neighbor. Mr Akram said that the nuclear non-proliferation regime needed to accommodate the reality of the existence of these weapons in South Asia: "A recognition of this reality would enable Pakistan to cooperate more fully in promoting the objectives of non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament."

Taking action on the US-drafted resolution, the Security Council decided that "all states shall adopt and enforce appropriate effective laws which prohibit any non-state actor to manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, transport, transfer or use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their means of delivery, in particular for terrorist purposes, as well as attempts to engage in any of the foregoing activities, participate in them as an accomplice, assist or finance them."

Governments were prohibited from aiding any private actors seeking to make or acquire such weapons. The resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which gives the 15-member council the power to enforce certain decisions through tribunals, embargoes, or military force after all peaceful means of persuading delinquent member states have been exhausted. In the public debate last week to suggest amendments to the text, Pakistan and several other speakers cautioned that the most important aspect about the resolution was not enforcement. They emphasized that the council would have to get separate approval for the means of enforcement. The Security Council would establish a committee to monitor for the next two years the implementation of the resolution and would expect all states to present reports on their efforts to execute the provisions within six months. However, the Wednesday's resolution is not retroactive, a fact noted by the Ambassador Akram who said that the provisions of the resolution would apply only to events from the date of its adoption.

The JF-17 will be equipped with BVR missiles.
JF-17 To Be Equipped With Advanced BVR Missiles: AVM Shahid Lateef

April 25, 2004: The air force on Friday announced plans to integrate the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles into the JF-17 Thunder aircraft. Half of the 16 Thunders from the first batch of the supersonic third-generation aircraft are expected to be inducted into the PAF inventory by mid 2006, while the rest would be conscripted by the Chinese air force.

Briefing journalists at the JF-17 Thunder project directorate at Chaklala, Air Vice-Marshal Shahid Lateef shared the progress being made on the project and dilated on the features of the maiden flight of prototype-3 held at Chengdu in China on April 9. It was for the first time that two foreign pilots had flown a prototype aircraft in China. "We have now selected the BVR missiles for integration into the JF-17 Thunder. We made a breakthrough recently by acquiring the technology," he said. He said the JF-17 would also carry H-2 and H-4 bombs.

About the avionics component of the JF-17, AVM Lateef said the West was reluctant to offer help in this regard. He said an avionics package for the aircraft had been examined and a contract for it would be finalized next month. In reply to a question, AVM Lateef said five radars of Italian make would be used on the prototypes. The information made available to the media said the prototype-1 of the aircraft was for verification of flight performance, prototype-2 for ground and load testing, prototype-3 for verification of light performance, prototype-4 for avionics and weapons integration and qualification and prototype-5 for fatigue testing. Prototype-2 and prototype-5 were only for ground tests, it said.

AVM Lateef said induction of the aircraft would help maintain combat potential, especially at a time when the need to replace the ageing fleet was the top priority and new aircraft were not available from anywhere. "It (JF-17) would replace every aircraft that would retire," he said. According to the schedule, flight testing of the aircraft would end this year. The small batch production would be followed by serial production. AVM Lateef said 25 PAF officers had been sent to China and the PAF would have enough expertise to duplicate the work in Pakistan when the people trained in China returned. He said a number of countries were interested in buying the aircraft. He said the Chinese air force had ordered the aircraft in big numbers.

Not forgetting:

Navy To Join US-led Coalition Plan: Admiral Shahid

April 16, 2004: The Pakistan Navy will join the US-led Coalition Maritime Campaign Plan (CMCP) next week in line with Pakistan's general policy of participating in international peacekeeping/peace enforcing efforts. This was stated by chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Shahid Karimullah while talking to newsmen on board PNS Tipu Sultan off the coast of Ormara on Friday. Admiral Karimullah, however, made it clear that Pakistan Navy would not participate in any blockade by the coalition against any country in the region. He added that interdiction operations within the country's territorial waters shall be conducted only by the Pakistan Navy.

He said that the PN was joining the CMCP under a UN resolution and stressed that there would be no change in routine operations and the PN assets would be available for the defence of national frontiers. The naval chief said that Pakistan had contributed forces in Somalia, Sierra Leone, East Timor etc., and joining the CMCP would augment Pakistan Navy's surveillance of its area of interest against threats to its maritime security. It would also lead to visible sustained presence in the own area of interest, thus providing a perception of safe environment to facilitate smooth maritime economic activity. He made it clear that the areas in which Pakistan Navy would be present, others would not be there.

He said that Pakistan Navy's inclusion in the CMCP would also enhance PN's capability of quick response, besides deterring terrorists and checking arms, drugs and human smuggling. He said that human smuggling was a serious concern. One reason for Pakistan's participation in the CMCP was to deny India any opportunity to join the arrangement in "our area of interest" and play the role it was playing in the Strait of Malacca.

Referring to Indian navy's acquisitions and future plans, that would lead to a significant force imbalance, Admiral Karimullah referred to steps being taken by Pakistan to maintain a minimum and credible conventional defence capability.
While emphasizing the need for inducting more surface ships, subs and air arm, he also referred to efforts being made to get frigates from China. In reply to a question, he said the Pakistan Navy had no objection to the Indian gas pipeline passing through shallow waters but made it clear that the PN would monitor surveys and other work to ensure that activities like spying were not carried out on the pretext of maintenance, etc.

He told a questioner that in view of the easing of sanctions the PN was hoping to get P3C Orion aircraft. He said the Atlantique aircraft obtained from France had become very old and their replacement was not available at the moment.
Earlier, Rear Admiral Iftekhar Rao, who is Deputy chief of the Naval Staff (operations), briefed the media team on the comparative strength of the Pakistan and Indian navies and the increasing imbalance between the two.

April 01, 2004:Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Shahid Karimullah on Wednesday said Pakistan would sign a deal with China for supply of four frigates in June. He told reporters at the inauguration of a private hospital in Wah Cantonment he hoped the financial approval for the purchase of the frigates would soon be accorded while further modalities would be finalized in May, during his upcoming visit to China. In June, both the countries would formally sign the agreement for the supply of four Chinese F-22P frigates, he added. One or two of these frigates would be built in China, while the rest in Pakistan, he said.

In addition, he said, Pakistan would also buy anti-submarine helicopters from China and this deal would also be finalized in due course. Answering a question, he said the Pakistan Navy had been conducting joint exercises with numerous countries’ navies and at present its fleet is participating in a two-day multilateral maritime exercise in the Gulf of Oman. In the exercise, "Arabian Shark 2004", maritime units of nine international navies have been participating, including those of the US, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Australia, Kuwait and Bahrain. Admiral Shahid said the Pakistan Navy units will also take part in an exhibition later this year in the UK, while the PNS flag would be hoisting in the US waters the next year when its another unit will attend an exercise there.


Now in conclusion, there is no doubt that pakistan's defence has a serious problem when you look at the shere numbers and quality of the IAF and INS but once again i shall say this that although bought nations has failed to inflict the final or death blow the fighting skills of the Pakistani army remain undisputed.

Officer of Engineers

None of which substantiate your claim of a superior Pak soldier. It is NOT across the board. For every one action you've listed, the Brigadier could counter with his. Even from this far away perspective, the fact that you've lost those wars really put doubts about your claim.

I do not doubt that there were some exceptional performances here and there (as they're always are when men are under fire) but the fact is that the Pak Army at best held its own. It did not chase the InA from the field. It did not own the action.

And please, there is absolutely no way can the AF or Navies of either nation is going to be the decisive force in any ground action. Neither have the weight needed.