Jaish terrorists attack CRPF convoy in Kashmir, 40 killed

[Double Edge]

A critical take of the IAF PAF dog fight by Shekhar Gupta. Why did Abhinandan not heed his calls by the flight controller to pull back ? He never received it as he was jammed. The Mig didn't have a secure comms link

What the IAF-PAF dogfight reveals | HT (op-ed) | Mar 27 2019

The February 27 aerial duel shows India’s military capability doesn’t match its ambitions. Blame the nation’s tardy defence acquisition process for this.

Shekhar Gupta


Whether the Rafale deal is a scam or the best thing for India’s defence is for more eminent people to debate. Let me, meanwhile, list four facts emerging from the February 26-27 air skirmishes to bring the story of what should be called the real Rafale scandal.

*In the Rajouri-Mendhar sector air skirmish a day after the Indian Air Forces’ (IAF) successful Balakot strikes, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) was able to create surprise and local superiority — technological and numerical — in a chosen battlefield. It struck in daylight when least expected, and perfectly timed to attack the changeover of IAF AWAC patrols. The outnumbered IAF pilots (12 aircraft of three vastly different types), scrambled from various bases, and showed the presence of mind not to walk into the ambush set for them, but they failed to deliver a deterrent punishment on PAF.

* Four Sukhoi-30s, the IAF’s most powerful air-superiority aircraft, were involved in the melee at beyond visual range (BVR). They were surprised by the PAF F-16s firing their American AMRAAM missiles from so far that their own radar/computer/missiles were not able to give them a “firing solution”. Translated: India’s best fighter, which constitutes half of the IAF’s combat force, was outranged and outgunned.

* Fortunately, two of the upgraded Mirage-2000s were on patrol. These have new French missiles (MICA, or Missile d’Interception, de combat d’autodefense), which are the exact peers of the F-16/AMRAAM. They were able to lock on to some of the PAF planes, which panicked into dropping their South African origin, stand-off weapons (SOWs) in a hurry, mostly missing the targets. Nevertheless, one fell in the middle of the Nowshera brigade headquarters compound. It was a closer call than we think.

* Surprised, and outnumbered, the IAF scrambled six MiG-21 Bisons from Srinagar and Awantipur. Since these climbed in the shadow of the Pir Panjal range, the PAF AWAC failed to detect them. Their sudden appearance at the battlefield upset the PAF plan. This was fortuitous.

It is only because of the IAF’s good training, situational awareness, and some luck that this audacious PAF mission failed. No ground target was hit. Its larger objective of luring vastly outnumbered and outranged IAF jets into a pre-set “killing zone” was the bigger failure.

Which brings us to our central question: Should we have even been having this conversation today if we had the military capability to match our economy (eight times Pakistan’s) and strategic ambition? February 27 reminded us that we don’t.

If we had a functional defence acquisition system, by now we would have built such a gap that Pakistan wouldn’t even dare to retaliate. Check out on a rarely-reported Mirage-2000 laser bomb raid to clear a Pakistani incursion across the LoC in Machil sector in 2002. Forget retaliation, the Pakistanis pretended nothing had happened. Indian air-to-air missiles then, on both Mirage-2000s and MiG-29s, had better range than the PAF, which ducked the challenge. Computers, radars and missiles decide the outcome in modern, mostly BVR, post-dogfight era air warfare.

How did India lose that edge?

This serial crime dates back to the Vajpayee government. In 2001, IAF projected the need of a new fighter to replace the MiGs. Its choice was more Mirage-2000s. Dassault was willing to shift its production line to India, the IAF knew the plane and loved it. By this time, the IAF would have had 6-8 more squadrons of the upgraded, Made-in-India Mirages with new missiles. The Rafale would probably not even be needed so desperately. PAF wouldn’t have dared to carry out the 27 February raid, and if it did, it would have been mauled. But then, George Fernandes, smarting under Coffingate and Tehelka, refused to go with a “single-vendor” deal. The full process for a new acquisition was launched.

We slept for a decade. The Pakistanis got their new F-16s and AMRAAM missiles from the US after 2010. Tactical balance in the air shifted. We, meanwhile, took until 2012 for a new fighter — Rafale — to be chosen. Except that defence minister AK Antony wouldn’t take a decision. Three of his negotiation committee of 14 dissented, so he set a committee above them. And he set up another committee of three outside “monitors” to supervise this committee. Finally, all inputs in, the choice was cleared. Sure enough, Antony ducked again.

He said three things at different times: Within the MoD, he then said, call fresh bids. To the media, he said he didn’t have headroom in the budget that year. And now, he told the media three weeks ago, that he put off the deal in the “national interest” since two eminent persons, Subramanian Swamy and Yashwant Sinha, had written letters pointing out problems in the deal and he had ordered an inquiry. He has since refused to talk about these letters even when chased by a reporter from The Print. The issue is too sensitive, he tells her. Chances are, his party knocked him on the head for nearly killing their Rafale story just to save his own neck. I will be pleasantly surprised if he talks about those letters again.

The earlier 126-aircraft MMRCA deal was dead by the time the NDA came in. The first wake-up call came early enough, with the Pathankot raid. As usual, the air forces were first off the blocks, and during aggressive patrolling, the IAF realised the PAF’s range superiority. It’s an unwritten story yet, but some MICA missiles were bought overnight, slung on Mirages which flew deliberately close enough for PAF to observe them. In the four years since, how many of our 40+ Mirages can even carry that missile? Don’t ask me for the truth because, as Jack Nicholson’s Marine Col. Nathan R. Jessep said in A Few Good Men, you can’t face the truth. Be grateful that those two on patrol on the morning of February 27 could .

As I promised, I am telling you about the real Rafale scandal without mentioning the Rafale deal. The Vajpayee government wouldn’t buy additional Mirages, scared of touching a single-vendor order. The MICA missile had first been sought by the IAF in 2001, the first only came in 2015 when Pathankot shocked the MoD to pull the file down from orbit. Existing Mirages then had to be upgraded. Two were upgraded by Dassault. HAL said it would do the rest. How many has it done yet? I warned you, you can’t face the truth.

Then it gets even more scandalous.

How did Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman cross the LoC? He was in visual pursuit of a PAF fighter for sure. But his controller was warning him to return. He didn’t. Because he couldn’t hear. As you’d expect in 2019, the battle zone had full radio-jamming. That’s why modern fighters have secure data links. Why didn’t that MiG have it? Ask the gallant bureaucrat of MoD who blocked the purchase for three years claiming that a defence PSU would make it. Don’t ask me his name, find out. You might learn another truth you don’t want to face.

That order has lately been placed. With Israel. Soon enough, all IAF fighters will have this secure data link. And you’d die of shame, when I tell you it is a purchase, worth a mere Rs 630 crore, less than half the price of one Rafale. We were lucky to lose just one MiG that day.

What comes across from this article is the capabilities of the IAF weren't sufficient to deter the PAF counter attack. Had the PAF assessed at the time any losses would be unacceptable the matter would have ended there & then.

So the PAF launched their counter attack to assuage their loss from the day before. I consider this their primary motivation. They weren't successful but can get some satisfaction for having tried. Course if we had the capabilities we'd have taken out more of their jets or could be they were very careful not to risk anything. Shekhar thinks we were lucky but against a force two to 1 the IAF still managed a decent performance.

The other thing that comes across with these strikes is first we hit the terrorists and then have to deal with the Pak Mil next. This is fine. Since one supports the other we are dealing with the root of the problem. All it takes is one bad loss for the Pak Mil to subdue them. The outcome would be they challenge us less while we go after the terrorists.

[Agnostic Muslim]

More independent satellite imagery analysis debunking Indian claims of any actual damage being inflicted (responses to some of the previous posts to follow as I get time):

New High Res Satellite Imagery Suggests Balakot Airstrike a 'Very Precise Miss'

High resolution imagery acquired by European Space Imaging the day after the strike suggests that buildings at the Jaish camp were not visibly damaged or destroyed.

Marcus Hellyer, Nathan Ruser and Aakriti Bachhawat

3 HOURS AGO
Ever since the stunning US success in the 1991 Gulf War, we have increasingly come to take precision bombing for granted. While militaries may sometimes misidentify a target, we assume that they can precisely hit what they are aiming at. ‘Precision strike’ is supposedly a proliferating, off-the-shelf commodity.

But India’s recent airstrike on a purported Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorist camp in Balakot in Pakistan on February 26 suggests that precision strike is still an art and science that requires both practice and enabling systems to achieve the intended effect. Simply buying precision munitions off the shelf is not enough.

Indian news media outlets have cited unnamed ‘senior military officers’ as saying that the Indian Air Force used the Israeli SPICE 2000 weapon to target four buildings at a terrorist camp in Balakot. The SPICE 2000 is the Israeli analogue of the US JDAM (joint direct attack munition), the weapon that has become the mainstay of coalition airstrikes in the Middle East. The SPICE 2000 is essentially a strap-on guidance kit that can transform a 2,000-pound ‘dumb’ bomb into a very precise way to deliver more than 400 kilograms of high explosives at a range of up to 60 kilometres. The weapon can be both GPS- and electro-optically guided. A 2,000-pound bomb causes substantial damage to structures.

Controversy has raged over whether India hit its intended targets. The Indian narrative has insisted that the strikes did hit their targets, ‘killing a large number of terrorists’. Indian Air Chief Marshal B.S. Dhanoa remarked, ‘If we plan to hit the target, we hit the target.’

The Indian narrative has also suggested that the strike used a SPICE 2000 variant with a reduced amount of explosive and the ability to penetrate through several floors of a building and even underground before detonating. This argument claims that such a weapon would only create a small entry hole and, while it would kill all occupants, it wouldn’t destroy the target building.

However, publicly available imagery acquired by European Space Imaging the day after the strike suggests that buildings at the camp were not visibly damaged or destroyed (see image below). This imagery, which is of a higher resolution than that available previously, shows conspicuously undamaged roofs that are not consistent with either a SPICE 2000 strike or a strike with other munitions. We believe that even a weapon with reduced explosive fill would cause damage to buildings that would be identifiable in the satellite imagery.

We suggest a possible alternative explanation.

One of us (Nathan Ruser) has previously published imagery identifying likely impact sites and comparing their locations with the locations of likely targets. The locations of the weapons’ impacts can be independently verified through three separate sources. First, photos taken by local journalists of impact craters have been geolocated by matching features visible in the images to features visible in satellite imagery.

Second, our previously published analysis of infrared satellite imagery indicates three circular areas – each roughly 30 metres in diameter – in which vegetation disappeared in the two days either side of the strike and which are consistent with explosive impact sites.

Finally, the images taken the day following the airstrikes and published by European Space Imaging allow for a higher resolution optical analysis, which indicates disturbances and craters in the areas previously identified as the likely impact locations.

There are two striking aspects to the images. The first is that all three weapons missed by similar (but not identical) distances, and certainly by much more than the three metre ‘circular error probable’ attributed to the SPICE 2000. The second is that all three weapons missed in virtually the same direction. These two factors suggest that the misses were caused by a systematic targeting error.

The strike could have relied on the SPICE 2000’s electro-optical guidance capabilities, but that would have required significant targeting support, including the development of topographically and architecturally precise modelling to program and guide the weapon. It is not a simple process and is dependent on considerable pre-strike imagery-collection and targeting infrastructure. It is likely that the Indian Air Force opted instead to rely solely on the weapon’s ‘set and forget’ GPS capabilities.

It is important to note two characteristics of GPS-guided weapons. The first is that GPS coordinates have three dimensions: elevation, latitude and longitude – something we tend to overlook in everyday life when we navigate using a mobile phone’s GPS function. Second, a glide weapon like the SPICE 2000 doesn’t fall vertically to its target; it follows an inclined trajectory. Therefore, an incorrect vertical coordinate will result in the weapon missing as surely as an error in latitude or longitude.

Such errors can occur for various reasons, including by neglecting to convert coordinates from one coordinate system, or datum, to another (a datum shift). One potential candidate in this case is the difference between GPS ellipsoidal height and orthometric height based on mean sea level (see here for an explanation). In northeastern Pakistan, the difference is around 33 metres, although in many areas the difference is not precisely mapped so it may be larger or smaller at a point such as Balakot.

One explanation for the miss is that the SPICE 2000 bombs were incorrectly programmed to fly precisely into GPS points that were, say, 33 metres above their intended targets (the buildings on top of the ridge line). They performed as programmed and then continued on their trajectories until they struck the valley beneath.

The image below correlates the identified impact sites, the buildings that were the likely targets and a discrepancy between ellipsoidal and orthometric height which we have assumed to equate to 33 metres above the target buildings. Presented in 3D, this correlation results in consistent, parallel trajectories indicating a consistent targeting error. The differences in the impact distances from the intended targets are accounted for by the steep terrain and the differences in elevation between the impact sites. While this diagram does not necessarily represent the actual trajectories of the missiles, it does suggest a systematic targeting error caused by the use of different vertical datums.

This explanation is lent further credibility by the fact that the resultant trajectories point back towards where India has claimed the weapons were launched from, just on the Indian side of the border.

This may not be the actual explanation. In a strike system that consists of French jets, Israeli weapons, US GPS and a targeting system that potentially used maps based on an older local Indian datum, there are other ways in which incorrect information could have been introduced or data shifts could have been omitted.

Also read: Four Reasons India Has Little Cause to Cheer the Balakot Airstrike and its Aftermath

Despite the proliferation of precision weapons, actually completing the strike ‘kill chain’ is still difficult. Some militaries, such as those of the US and Australia, have spent years developing the technologies and systems that enable precision strike and employing the skills required in actual operations. But proficiency should not be taken for granted. It takes more than the weapon itself to launch a successful precision strike.

Marcus Hellyer is ASPI’s senior analyst for defence economics and capability, Nathan Ruser is a researcher at ASPI’s International Cyber Policy Centre and Aakriti Bachhawat is a researcher with ASPI’s defence and strategy program.

https://thewire.in/security/balakot-...ellite-imagery

[Agnostic Muslim]

The terrorists cannot target Pakistan if Pakistan in the first place does not admit these strikes took place. I find this an acceptable policy by GOP. In effect you look the other way each time a raid or strike occurs. In doing so you are immediately defusing a potentially larger conflagration and you have plausible deniability via a vis the terrorists. Even put up some token resistance if you must.

Since the strike did not inflict any damage to begin with there's 'nothing to look away from'.

If you cannot handle these people out of fear of retribution then we will take care of them. Work with us.

No.
The groups will be neutralized on Pakistan's time frame. The US couldn't make Pakistan budge on how it approached the TTP, India (with respect to Kashmir focused militant groups) won't either.

[Agnostic Muslim]

The IAF wouldn't be able to hide the fact it lost a second bird. It would be very difficult to keep it secret if any wreckage fell in J&K. There are enough people there to bring attention to it.

The same applies on the Pakistani side.

Plane was hit at high altitude. So the parts are strewn over a wide area. It's in PO J&K like the Mig 21.

So in Pakistan's case you can concoct all sorts of excuses to explain away the lack of evidence for an alleged F-16 kill, but the same doesn't apply when it comes to claims of an SU-30 being shot down by Pakistan. That's a lot of intellectual contortions.

Hard to tell, the second article in post #352 believes ...

Without hard evidence, all we have are claims vs counter claims.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Refer here

The 2 on the right (that show burn damage) can also be linked up with images of the wreckage of the Mig-21, indicating that they burned up while attached to the Mig, and hence were never launched.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Hey AM, long time no see, how are you brother?

First of all, handling of the Balakot attacks by Indian poltis and journos has been appalling. This just shows how much of a 3rd world country our policymaking realm still is. Of course, Pakistan is in a worse state, but that is none of my concern.

I would leave you with a few facts.

1. India struck inside Pakistan's territory, crossing the IB. The PAF were not able to intercept the IAF. This has been recognized by the ISPR and across all levels of the Pakistani establishment, including the floor of the National Assembly. You are free to claim that this is trivial, but we both know otherwise. The numbers don't matter, what matters is that India is able to strike deep inside Pakistan. After that, whether they bomb trees or kill terrorits is really secondary. If you dispute that, then I guess India's aerial aggression doesn't bother you much

That is subjective and open to analysis. What you've offered is one view on it, the other is that Pakistan's quick response also made clear that Pakistan is not going to back down from a protracted, but limited conflict. So strike followed by counter strike followed by counter strike. Pakistan's goal will be to inflict proportional damage on the Indian military for any such strike. Indian's argue that the pressure will be on Pakistan, but after Pakistan retaliated the pressure was on India to back down.

The biggest pressure point for Pakistan remains international forums like the FATF. That's where most of the concrete changes will take place.

2. The independent Italian Journalist Francesa Marino has reported that at the site around 35 bodies were carries away. Remember, independent and Italian (which is nearly the same as Pakistan in the eyes of bhakts)

She reported nothing first hand, only quoted 'unidentified local sources' and her claims (as those of the Indian government, media and politicians) have found no support from various other reputable international media organizations (and Pakistani journalists and media organizations, the same ones the dug out Kasab's family) that DID actually travel to Balakot, interviewed locals, viewed the craters and have reported on independent satellite imagery analysis.

She's also been banned from Pakistan for a while because of her links with Baloch terrorists, so hardly an 'objective' source.

3. You claim that the 2nd fighter was an Indian plan that crashed on the Indian side, yet your media is claiming that it was actually an Israeli pilot who was shot down. Why this discrepancy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAGtxdqCOKM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrciYgHyRaA

Have I quoted the Pakistani media here? Unless it's a direct quote (of a high ranking government/military official) or actual first hand reporting backed with evidence I wouldn't bother.

4. This video by Maulan Ammar, who seems butthurt and is railing about conducting Jihad in resposne to enemy cross broder aggression and bombings. I trust you understand Urdu. Start listing from 1:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a06Z0CfD7pI

It's been debunked. And again, where's the evidence to back up casualties or damage from the Balakot strikes?

After all that, Indians at large remain convinced of the following:
1. They have avenged Pulwama
2. They have shot down a Pakistani plane and the pilot did not even survive
3. India's international strength and staure forced Pakistan to hand over the Indian pilot earlier than necessary

That's more of a reflection on how well the Modi government has manipulated the media to promote it's propaganda and lies.

To top it all, MBS (who apparently considers himself Pakistan's safeer), morphed into Modi's brother when he went to Delhi.

And refused to officially endorse the Indian position with regards to Pulwama.

All in all, not a win for Pakistan. I am sure inside Pakistan the feeling was jubiliant when the IAF plane was shot down, but the mood changed to "mixed feelings once he was retuned and many have caled it a "lost opportunity". I actually agree with them.

I don't agree with them. The pilot had to be returned and Pakistan stole the narrative by taking the initiative on return. Some Pakistanis who argue that the pilot should not have been returned argue (laughably) that one pilot could have been a key negotiating point with India.

On the other hand, Modi did reap the dividends and many Indians now acknowledge that finally there is a "strong" leader, in the veins of Patel and Indira Gandhi. Pakistan, to the eyes of the average Indian, seems more of a pushover than before. If Modi survives, and I expect he will, expect more "surgical strikes".

Media manipulation with dozens of doctored images and fake audio clips sprinkled with 'janab' apparently works wonders with the Indian populace.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Point defence. In fact, outside of NATO, I don't know anyone who spends as much time and money on area defence and even NATO, this is regulated to AWACS most of the time instead of CAP.

So, the point about bombing rocks and trees isn't moot. The PAF's first response is to defend their points before mounting an intercept mission. I could be wrong but I don't think the PAF flies AWACS missions 24/7 which leaves their coverage with ground based radar. Obviously, there are blind spots but those blind spots lead to trees and rocks instead of a point target.

Obviously, these are very mission specific parameters but if the Indians are right about Pakistani military establishment involvement, then this begs the question, why are not the Indian targets under Pakistani radar coverage?

OOE, I pointed this out earlier, the 'training camp' at Balakot was allegedly moved years ago (per open source reporting.

So, to answer your question, why would the PAF be concerned with a Madrassa essentially in the middle of nowhere, the answer is that it wouldn't.

[Double Edge]

The same applies on the Pakistani side.

No, the Pak military does not have the same constraints as the Indian one. It has far more leeway

So in Pakistan's case you can concoct all sorts of excuses to explain away the lack of evidence for an alleged F-16 kill, but the same doesn't apply when it comes to claims of an SU-30 being shot down by Pakistan. That's a lot of intellectual contortions.

There is evidence, as posted earlier. Three pilots ejected. We see two jets go down. Given that both jets landed on the Pak side of the fence it wouldn't be hard to show
a) evidence of the Su-30 with Indian ensignia as well as the Indian pilots

That none has been forthcoming the obvious conclusion is it was a PAF jet. You also see here debris being quickly removed instead of being displayed.

Without hard evidence, all we have are claims vs counter claims.

For me the question is the intent behind the PAF counter strike. That is what it hard to tell. Whether just symbolic to boost PAF morale for the day before or intent to strike but were dissuaded.

[Double Edge]

Since the strike did not inflict any damage to begin with there's 'nothing to look away from'.

Why the PAF strike then ? what is the purpose of the counter strike.

No.

The groups will be neutralized on Pakistan's time frame.

Take as long as you want but the primary condition is no attacks in India that have an obvious Pak connection. Otherwise there will be reprisals.

The US couldn't make Pakistan budge on how it approached the TTP, India (with respect to Kashmir focused militant groups) won't either.

US was dependent for access, India has no such constraint. Pakistan has no leverage here.

[Double Edge]

An Indian gunners view on strategic constraint vs surgical strike

Strategic Restraint Vs Surgical Strikes – A Pakistani Viewpoint By Lt Gen P R Shankar (R) | Mar 25 2019

There are strong views that the Surgical Strikes tamed Pakistan and achieved everything. Equally there are views that they have failed to deter Pakistan having achieved little.

Consider this Pakistani view “A surgical strike imposes no additional costs on the aggressor while the cost of the preparedness the victim country must maintain is quite substantial”. Hence there are penalties on Pakistan. In my opinion these include

1) negating nuclear coercion,
2) shifting terror camps into depths,
3) internal action against proscribed outfits,
4) international focus and action on the Deep State jihad factory,
5) internal churn in Pakistan, economic cost of enhanced vigilance in Pakistan,
6) psychological effect on Pakistanis,
7) dislocation of support to separatists in Kashmir and more.

this is at minimal cost to us.

When repeated in different formats over a period of time, Surgical Strikes will begin to pay. Provided there is restraint.

However chest thumping provokes exaggerated downsides.

Risk of retaliation and escalation is omnipresent, hardening of attitudes and coalescence of the Nation around the Deep State, minimal effect on Pak military, image enhancement of the Deep State as the ultimate Savior, out sized military budgets irrespective of other features of Pakistani economy and back to old ways after a time.

[Agnostic Muslim]

No, the Pak military does not have the same constraints as the Indian one. It has far more leeway


There is evidence, as posted earlier. Three pilots ejected. We see two jets go down. Given that both jets landed on the Pak side of the fence it wouldn't be hard to show
a) evidence of the Su-30 with Indian ensignia as well as the Indian pilots

That none has been forthcoming the obvious conclusion is it was a PAF jet. You also see here debris being quickly removed instead of being displayed.

The obvious conclusion, given that parts of all 4 A2A missiles from the Mig-21 Bison have been recovered (two clearly not fired and 2 with parts still attached to the Mig-21 wreckage) refute Indian claims of the Abhinandan's Mig-21 getting off any misiles and therefore could not have possibly shot down any PAF aircraft, unless of course the Indians now want to change that claim to one where Abhinandan used the auto-cannon. The Indian defence minister stated in an official press conference that the 'Indian evidence' was based on a facebook post (a post that had already been debunked by various organizations), and that the Indian government 'knew the name of the F-16 pilot' (which still has not been released by the GoI).

The fact is that you could see swarms of people with cell phones/smart phones swarming around the wreckage and the Indian pilot, so for you to argue that somehow an F-16 crash has remained hidden is just ludicrous.

For me the question is the intent behind the PAF counter strike. That is what it hard to tell. Whether just symbolic to boost PAF morale for the day before or intent to strike but were dissuaded.

The intent was as stated by the DG ISPR - an Indian violation and bombing of Pakistani territory (admittedly with no damage or casualties) was responded to in order to demonstrate Pakistani capability and intent to not let any such actions go unchallenged or without response. The DG ISPR made clear in the first press conference after the Pakistani strikes that empty spaces (by Indian military installations) were deliberately targeted to avoid any casualties (given that the Indian strikes inflicted no casualties). The point being made was that had India inflicted casualties in Pakistan, or were to inflict casualties at a future date, the Pakistani response would be to target the Indian military and inflict casualties.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Why the PAF strike then ? what is the purpose of the counter strike.


Take as long as you want but the primary condition is no attacks in India that have an obvious Pak connection. Otherwise there will be reprisals.

Reprisals will be responded to, as was done in the recent PAF strikes.

US was dependent for access, India has no such constraint. Pakistan has no leverage here.

Neither does India, leverage that is. It should be pretty clear now - India violates Pakistani airspace and attacks targets in Pakistan, Pakistan will respond and target the Indian military.

[Double Edge]

The 2 on the right (that show burn damage) can also be linked up with images of the wreckage of the Mig-21, indicating that they burned up while attached to the Mig, and hence were never launched.

Then why are the two on the left intact ? see the video i linked which shows the Mig21 wreckage.

IAF have credited the kill to Abhinandan. He's confirmed he fired the missiles.

[Double Edge]

Reprisals will be responded to, as was done in the recent PAF strikes.

Neither does India, leverage that is. It should be pretty clear now - India violates Pakistani airspace and attacks targets in Pakistan, Pakistan will respond and target the Indian military.

We will escalate in that case and dare you to go further. And then you will be confronted with an asymmetric conventional disadvantage. Simple.

You cannot attack our military in response to our attack on your terrorists.

Do you see how the balance has flipped in so many ways.

People do not think the 2016 surgical strikes had any effect. Didn't deter Pakistan from more strikes.

But it really is an inflection point in how India reacts to terrorists attacks and whatever comes with it.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Then why are the two on the left intact ? see the video i linked which shows the Mig21 wreckage.

Look at both pictures and video of the wreckage - the two intact missiles were likely part of the aircraft that broke apart and were not engulfed in flames. The two missiles that are burned - you can also see the rear (tail fins)of one missile and the forward part of the other missile attached to the wreckage. That accounts for 4 missiles, so what exactly did Abhinandan shoot?

IAF have credited the kill to Abhinandan. He's confirmed he fired the missiles.

Of course they have, sans any evidence - the Modi government has to maintain a media narrative, but both the evidence related to the missile parts recovered, and the lack of evidence with respect to an F-16 wreckage, point to a different story.

The PAF has also issued patches that show both a Mig-21 and an SU-30 as 'kills', but I'm not going to push the latter claim without further credible evidence.