dave lukins

Archer Sir, it is not the aggressive winner who wins ,but the non-aggressive winner who stops the agggression in the first instant who wins

Archer

Dave, I am no sir, you call me sir once more, and I'll have to buy you a beer.

About a non aggressive guy who stops the battle in the first place, well that works- but only if one is Chuck Norris (tm), Steven Seagal (tm) or 6 ft4 with bulging biceps and a scowl on your face.

Otherwise you have to fight, or run!

__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task

dave lukins

Did I tell you that my brother was the World Shotokan Karate World Champion and he beat C.Norris in an title fight in less than 20secs..He was the youngest Sensei at 8th Dan

Archer

Thats only because Chuck let him.

Unless you are serious.

digvijay

When?

You missed the point. Local/Internationl highlighting of such a case helps in preventing torture of such magnitude. Secondly it allows the govt to file a case at international tribunal. The only reason why Nachiketa came back and Saurav did not is because Nachiketa's case hit the headlines and Pakistan could not offord to mutilate and torture him.

Not true. Chit Chatter on the waves about Saurav was going on and if a resolute operation to recover Saurav was launched we would have succeeded in either:
a) recovering him and rest of his paltan
b) Ushering a faster execution for him which would have saved him and his men the torture at the hand of Pakistanis.

No. Not crossing of LOC was just buckling of Indian PM Vajpayee under Intl. pressure. All millitary commanders hated it. Infact Malik in one of the press briefings, during Kargil war, does say we will cross LOC. But he did not stand up to the politicians and tell them point blank that this is war and I will do as I seem fit for the army. This is where he failed.

This is why it is so damn important to instill in the hearts of these pakistanis, a mortal fear, that if you touch a captured Indian soldier we will create a living hell for you within a couple of hours of his capture. This is where you need leaders both in the politics and army who command respect and fear from the enemy.

It is more systematic in Indian army where "good officers" who do not play to the galleries are being filtered out because they will not be helping there boss build a house or accost his wife on a shopping spree.

Sure. Despite the top polits and the top brass being clueless the middle level of the army did very well.


(Will respond to the rest of the post later).

-Digvijay

Archer

I think you had raised this when you joined this board..or was it another, dont remember..but anyways, do remember this coming up sometime


I sincerely doubt whether Pak cares two hoots about international coverage of PoWs. They were busy spinning it as fidayeen ops and would have blamed it on them as well, and brought up India in J&K. Simply put, ask LT about how some PoWs have been treated by Pak in past wars and you'll get an idea about how this thing goes. Nachiketa was released because the Pak side sought to make a PR Bonanza out of him, and event tried to brainwash him some. In the case of Kalia & his troop, the Army had two options- assume that he would be treated fairly according to the Geneva convention, or create a fuss, or make a rescue attempt. The way things were going, and Anoop has pointed this out well, the situation on the ground was chaotic and I doubt whether any operational commander would have sent more men into a combat situation without knowing what was going on.

You have to have some sense of perspective here- we are talking of the Pak Army vs the InA, which is basically war, albeit undeclared at that point of time. In the events which caused Op Khukhri, a bunch of guerillas captured an entire unit of Gurkhas...and despite knowing where they were, it took a complex, heavily planned rescue attempt to get them out. This was much more than that.




First- you need to find out where Kalia and his men were. We had no means of doing so. Motivated chit chatter on the radiowave could be used for an ambush as well, if you have been to Kashmir you know how the terrain is. I have.

Second, the assumption any group would move on, when your men are in enemy hands is that they would be treated well or used as PoWs. There is- always the risk of torture- as I said, its a given when you are up against the SSG and the past record of the PA has not been too great either in several cases, but as the commander on the ground, you have to do consider all possible options. It took brigades of men to seize objectives deep inside indian territory and a full mini-war. Why would any sensible commander risk his limited assets doomed to failure by mounting a half assed rescue attempt? It may be the "right thing to do" emotionally, but practically, you are sending more men to their death or capture.

Talk is cheap, even for Malik, with all due respect. As RayC says- cross the LOC and it is war. And war means war with a nuclear backdrop. These are non trivial considerations. In 1999, the Indian Army could have crossed the LoC, but at what cost? What is the objective? To seize Kashmir? To regain our territory? To teach Pakistan a lesson? Face it- our objectives were limited to regaining our territory, and we did so. Thats where it eneds- even today, the Army & political leadership must think twice before conflict escalation, with a nuclear backdrop. The ABM and Cold Start could reduce this threat, but even so, a full scale war is the last alternative and should be. India has far more to risk and lose than Pak, why put it to the grindstone? There are multiple other options available, which only our politicians lack the gonads to use.


Definitely- but full war is not the only way to do that. A war with unclear objectives is even worse, it can be used for propoganda of having "survived the onslaught". See Hezb. vs Israel, who does the man on the Arab street think won?

Hit at the ISIs appointed leaders, hit at the jihadis, do what the Israelis did and create targeted assasinations squads against each tanzeem, against each PA General who breathes jihad. Repay them in their own coin, make them hurt.


This is there in all armies. Go over to Arrse or Tank-net, and you'll see how they ****** and moan about the UK and US peacetime armies as well and how the occasional malcontent messes things up. It is a fact of life that peacetime armies acquire moss and REMFs- combat ops shake them up, and bring the leaders to prominence.


War gets the competent folks noticed!

digvijay

Not here. I did raise this point at Bharat Rakshak and basically got a spineless response.

This is an excuse. Men go into the war and war is chaotic. It is not a bed of roses. You do not always know things in black and white. There is a grey zone, *always*.

Initial orders by the top brass were to "run up the hill and capture it". These were suicide missions.

A rescue has to be mounted even if it costs lives of more men. Each soldier has to know that his life is paramount and every effort will be made to save him no matter what the cost.

This is how the enemy starts fearing you. Otherwise the enemy will keep torturing Indian soldiers and we will keep arguing the pros and cons. There is only one way and that is attack such filth.

I will give you an example from the history. Once an Afghan Marauder had captured women during the hindu festival of Teej. The rajput ruler of that area, though in his late sixties, was enraged and immediately mounted a rescue. His sons were not in the area and with whomever he could gather he went after Afghans. Pitched battle was fought, the girls were rescued, but the rajput ruler lost his life.


So ad infinitum you want Indian soldiers to be tortured? This is a defeatist attitude and I know it is not your attitude. You are just taking the role of devils' advocate.

In 1999 Pakistani nuclear arsenal was unoperational. The aim should have been to kick out the NLI + fidayadeen and capture land beyond LOC. After all that is our land. But you need balls to do this. ANd neither our brass nor our PM had any plan.

Both to regain more territory and teach them a lesson should have been the objective.

Unfortunately no. There is no other option but millitary with Pakistan and these guys are also afraid of it. It is just that we do not put pedal to the metal when it is required. Problems with Pakistan will not end until there is an all out war and we
a) regain our land beyond LOC.
b) completely demillitarise 2 KMs of Pakistani border beyond the 1947 border.


When you go in you do not come out till the job is complete.

This is useless and we are already seing this in the Israel/Arab conflict.

Do not trivialize it or generalize it. This is the biggest problem with INA right now. Talk to serving men. Spineless people are climbing the ladder by sucking up to there seniors. Army generals *CANNOT* be like this.



Sure.
-Digvijay

saambaarblast

Ketchup, booze, medals, fragging etc.? Looks bad at all levels. Then again, leadership(or lack of it) may be the cause.

digvijay

You really know your history! Though it is just slightly inconvenient that these men of credibility and there followers have not been able to solve the kashmir problem. No wonder congress can find enough idiots in India to vote for them.

These same rajahs are the reason you and your parents and there parents are Hindus. If they were not there you would be reading a kalma today. Though it is obvious that communists historians have done there job well.

No. I am trying to say one Iyengar, one Menon and one Nehru screwed up Kashmir and 62.

One civil war is a lot better then dealing with **** everyday. Ofcourse it will be hard for you to comprehend it. I will even wager money that people like you would not hesitate to give Kashmir to Pakistan arguing why waste Indian tax payer's money on something so worthless!

Try doing a bit of research. And on top of that the shiv sainiks had a go at these tamils who migrated to Maratha land.

If you do not even know this then what do you know? Hint: Heard of Raja Raj Chola?

And of course these were the only two temples that were brought down by Islamic armies. So do your tamil history books quote that only two templese were razed to ground or is the number higher? What is the number?

ANswer the question asked and do not give me crap about your books ccontaining correct history till you can answer the simple question .


You have already proven that you know nothing about history. I am just toying with you now.

America has the worst social inequality on the planet. But you being you can neither see it or have the courage to speak against it.

This does not parse.

-Digvijay

Archer

Have to disagree here, it just seemed that you were unable to grasp what they were trying to say & vice versa, and after it became a flamewar, I stopped following the issue.


What you are saying is idealism. In reality, the commander has to take the most prudent course of action, which often deals the short end of the stick to individual soldiers.

Yes, so was this correct? Political pressure cost lives, but was this ideal? If you can see that this was fool hardiness, why not extend it to the other case?

This is idealism, but the reality is far more brutal. In a war with Pakistan and India, two of the most highly militarized states in the world, a lot of people are going to (unfortunately), end up where they shouldnt. India doesnt have the kind of information superiority over the TBA, to fix its targets and then mount some kind of rescue attempt within minutes. Check BHD for what happens when things go south, and that is the US vs rabble!

There are otherways to make the SSG pay than mount a ham handed rescue attempt, lose more people, and then give them a propoganda victory.

Digvijay, its good to have analogies, but for crying out loud, this aint Kansas anymore! War has moved on- in the old days, a man with a sword could take on a couple more, perhaps three more and what happened when gunpowder was invented? What happened to Rana Sanga when his famed cavalry went up against Babur without adequately thinking things through? Babur won the battle and ruled India!
War is no longer fought on emotion alone, and with good reason. It is fought on discipline. All modern armies swear by it. That discipline means you commit forces when you must, not rush headlong into battle because the enemy will learn fear. Yes he will learn- that we are impetuous, and next time, it will be another trick to provoke and create a favourable battle on his terms.


No, what I am saying is that the option you have underlined, is not the only way to "strike fear". What you are proposing works when a) You have overwhelming superiority b) Accurate information. When you dont have a) or b) then you commit to battle only when you must (say a breakthrough is happening and you rush to defend). My point is that find another way to hit back and strike fear. Find those SSG operators, have them brought to justice- in this life or the next, and have the message passed- that India does not forgive or forget. But rushing headlong into a battle, when it may well be an ambush, and when you dont have the resources to win, can cause a disaster. This is exactly why modern armies run on strict protocol and discipline, as mind numbing as it can be.


How do we know it was unoperational? Can the GOI take our words for it? Why didnt we escalate to full war just 2 years later? It was in the late 80's when Pak declared that it was now nuke capable- I can assure you that GOI takes them seriously, it must. I am no friend of the GOIs spineless and headless Pak policy, but after nukes came into the picture, things have changed.

Again, it escalates to full scale war. Teaching a lesson can be expensive and a pyrrhic victory- the PRC will bulk them up and manpower isnt exactly in short supply in Pak. If we have to commit to a fight, it should be on our terms. In 1999, we would have won, sure, but at what cost?

Again, all out war means nuclear backdrop. It is a serious decision.


Yes, but- is the job worth a nuke on Mumbai, Bangalore or Delhi? What you are not looking at is that pak is backed up by other states, a tight slap by India, is short term in nature. Itwill be propped up asap.

Actually, I would say it is the one thing that has worked- the Israelis pinpoint strikes and covert ops have been far more successful than their occupations- Lebanon etc. All they have caused is a bloody sore.

There is no point in debating this if your mind is made up- every Army has this issue, and there is nothing trivial or general about it, I have talked to serving officers, and depending upon whom one asks, things are peachy or never too well.

Jay

And a Kshatriya at helm woudlve solved Kashmir problem? What exactly is your problem defintion? Is it about Kshatriya not ruling the country or Congress?
Oh really? I'm not going to thank the Rajahs for keeping my forefathers as hindus. Rajahs did whats best for them, its always a selfish reason. Many rajahs were made heros coz they fought against British. But would the Rajahs devolve their lands to people and have democracy? Hell no.
Thats a known thing. The problem is when you say one Kshatriya couldve changed the entire history of modern India.
Again, you dont have a clue. One civil war has uprooted entire generation in nearby Srilanka, another one ended up in creating a seperate nation.So you can give all your reasons that a civil war was better than partition, but then the people which includes your and my forefather did not agree to it or didnt have enough clout to change the course.
I guess you've reached the limit of idiocy and I suggest you not to make this personal.
Baseless BS. You still havent proved that millions of tamils moved in to Maharastra. The tamils who migrated to Mumbai were economic migrants, they were not persecuted by anyone.
You dont have a clue do you? You claimed Cholas alon with jats and rajputs and other groups and claimed them as martial race (kshatriyas) and I asked you to prove it.
Our syllabus was not to read Sub continental encyclopedia.
Now if your history books revered Mughal rulers, then its your problem, not mine.
And this is from a guy who said millions of tamils were persecuted in TN and they migrated to Maharashtra. Sure, you know all about it.