Failed Operation Parakram taught india nothing

[Shoonya]

How does one lose 2000 soldiers without a fight?

Things happen ... Sometimes without logic
Like losing 50K Pakistani .... first to create, then to sustain and now to fight terrorism. Funny isn't it ???

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Why? Did the casualties decrease and they came back to life?

Naa.. I was wondering ..." May be you guys wanted to boost your morale today.. so you dug out some historical bit"

I bet you never read this:
On an average, defence experts say, one Pakistani soldier is killed every third day on the Siachen Glacier, showing approximately 100 casualties every year on an average. Similarly, one Indian soldier is killed every other day on the Siachen Glacier, at an annual average of 180 casualties. According to unofficial figures, over 3,000 Pakistani soldiers have lost their lives on the bloody Siachen Glacier between April 1984 and April 2012 as against over 5,000 Indian casualties. At present, there are approximately 7,000 Indian Army troops and about 4,000 Pakistani troops stationed at the Siachen Glacier.

Over 8,000 Indo-Pak soldiers killed in Siachen - thenews.com.pk

On an average... there is an equal percentage of Pakistani and Indian soldiers dying at Siachin...

Pakistan Army: 100 Deaths per year out of 4000 = 2.5%
Indian Army: 180 deaths pr year out of 7000 = 2.5%

The Pakistanis are no better off since they lose fewer men to the hostile elements and more to the Indian firing. The Pakistani authorities had admitted in 1994 that their non-combat casualties since 1984 accounted for over 80 percent of total attrition. The Pakistani positions are, for the most part, at a lower altitude in the glacier area, ranging between 9,000 to 15,000 feet (some are at a much higher altitude such as Conway Saddle, at 17,200 feet, which controls doorway to the glacier). Over the last two decades, Pakistan has tried many times to displace the Indian forces, but had to retreat each time. The Indian troops have to do nothing but sit tight and periodically repel a Pakistani assault.

Now go cry me a river.

 

[Arsalan]

Naa.. I was wondering ..." May be you guys wanted to boost your morale today.. so you dug out some historical bit"

I bet you never read this:
On an average, defence experts say, one Pakistani soldier is killed every third day on the Siachen Glacier, showing approximately 100 casualties every year on an average. Similarly, one Indian soldier is killed every other day on the Siachen Glacier, at an annual average of 180 casualties. According to unofficial figures, over 3,000 Pakistani soldiers have lost their lives on the bloody Siachen Glacier between April 1984 and April 2012 as against over 5,000 Indian casualties. At present, there are approximately 7,000 Indian Army troops and about 4,000 Pakistani troops stationed at the Siachen Glacier.

Over 8,000 Indo-Pak soldiers killed in Siachen - thenews.com.pk

On an average... there is an equal percentage of Pakistani and Indian soldiers dying at Siachin...

Pakistan Army: 100 Deaths per year out of 4000 = 2.5%
Indian Army: 180 deaths pr year out of 7000 = 2.5%

The Pakistanis are no better off since they lose fewer men to the hostile elements and more to the Indian firing. The Pakistani authorities had admitted in 1994 that their non-combat casualties since 1984 accounted for over 80 percent of total attrition. The Pakistani positions are, for the most part, at a lower altitude in the glacier area, ranging between 9,000 to 15,000 feet (some are at a much higher altitude such as Conway Saddle, at 17,200 feet, which controls doorway to the glacier). Over the last two decades, Pakistan has tried many times to displace the Indian forces, but had to retreat each time. The Indian troops have to do nothing but sit tight and periodically repel a Pakistani assault.

Now go cry me a river.

Having to commit nearly twice the number of your enemy forces in such hostile land is no win either.

 

[SipahSalar]

Naa.. I was wondering ..." May be you guys wanted to boost your morale today.. so you dug out some historical bit"

I bet you never read this:
On an average, defence experts say, one Pakistani soldier is killed every third day on the Siachen Glacier, showing approximately 100 casualties every year on an average. Similarly, one Indian soldier is killed every other day on the Siachen Glacier, at an annual average of 180 casualties. According to unofficial figures, over 3,000 Pakistani soldiers have lost their lives on the bloody Siachen Glacier between April 1984 and April 2012 as against over 5,000 Indian casualties. At present, there are approximately 7,000 Indian Army troops and about 4,000 Pakistani troops stationed at the Siachen Glacier.

Over 8,000 Indo-Pak soldiers killed in Siachen - thenews.com.pk

On an average... there is an equal percentage of Pakistani and Indian soldiers dying at Siachin...

Pakistan Army: 100 Deaths per year out of 4000 = 2.5%
Indian Army: 180 deaths pr year out of 7000 = 2.5%

The Pakistanis are no better off since they lose fewer men to the hostile elements and more to the Indian firing. The Pakistani authorities had admitted in 1994 that their non-combat casualties since 1984 accounted for over 80 percent of total attrition. The Pakistani positions are, for the most part, at a lower altitude in the glacier area, ranging between 9,000 to 15,000 feet (some are at a much higher altitude such as Conway Saddle, at 17,200 feet, which controls doorway to the glacier). Over the last two decades, Pakistan has tried many times to displace the Indian forces, but had to retreat each time. The Indian troops have to do nothing but sit tight and periodically repel a Pakistani assault.

Now go cry me a river.

Nice try kiddo, no one is talking siachen, we are training a military operation in which you lost two bloody thousand soldierss withouta fight.

 

[Makaramarma]

Having to commit nearly twice the number of your enemy forces in such hostile land is no win either.

It is if you want the enemy burn up all its defence budget and reserves.

Nice try kiddo, no one is talking siachen, we are training a military operation in which you lost two bloody thousand soldierss withouta fight.

LOL. So death's occurred only in Indian Army and not in Pakistan Army ? ...... without a fight I may add.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Having to commit nearly twice the number of your enemy forces in such hostile land is no win either.

Thats' called defending your territory at any cost....

Nice try kiddo, no one is talking siachen, we are training a military operation in which you lost two bloody thousand soldierss withouta fight.

Unfortunately for you.. your Army will never declare the number of soldiers killed on Indian border..as that will make them look weak.


Since Modi government took charge... the number of Pakistani soldiers dying at the border is becoming Higher than Indian soldiers ...
2014–15 India–Pakistan border skirmishes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Arsalan]

Thats' called defending your territory at any cost....

Yes it is,
That is what i was saying, it is NOT called winning, jut as you said that it is defending ones territory!

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Yes it is,
That is what i was saying, it is NOT called winning, jut as you said that it is defending ones territory!

Its you who is claiming that Pakistan is apparently winning because Indian soldiers are dying defending their territory... as If Pakistani soldiers are not dying...

 

[Arsalan]

Its you who is claiming that Pakistan is apparently winning because Indian soldiers are dying defending their territory... as If Pakistani soldiers are not dying...

Will be pleased if you can guide me to that post of mine where i said such a thing!

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Will be pleased if you can guide me to that post of mine where i said such a thing!

The thread OP mentions that in his opening post... and I believe you are defending his point.

 

[Arsalan]

The thread OP mentions that in his opening post... and I believe you are defending his point.

Am i the thread OP?
You believe i am defending his point or you guess so and without giving it a second though just went ahead with a stupid onslaught?
Assumptions, and that too wrong ones wont get you anywhere. open up your eyes and see what thing you are replying to what what is that is being said in the post you are just jumping upon to reply based on your assumption.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Am i the thread OP?
You believe i am defending his point or you guess so and without giving it a second though just went ahead with a stupid onslaught?
Assumptions, and that too wrong ones wont get you anywhere. open up your eyes and see what thing you are replying to what what is that is being said in the post you are just jumping upon to reply based on your assumption.

Point taken... OP made the thread start sound like Pakistanis are jubilant as if they have won the war .. and you appeared to be defending that point...

 

[[Bregs]]

On the reasons for not going to war with Pakistan, the General of an Indian army said that they ranged from costs-benefit analysis to lack of courage. Here are some of them:

• The costs and risks of going to war outweighed the gains accruing from it.
• India did not have the stomach for war, especially with the US failing to act as a force multiplier.
• Gujarat riots opened another front for India.
• Going to war would signal the failure of coercive diplomacy.
• The Government was not as certain as the military was on the efficacy of going to war.
• As for the reasons for the failure of Operation Parakram, they are:
• Coercion was not calibrated. Issues like who is coercing whom and to what ends, were not deliberated beforehand. Last step, i.e. deployment, was taken first.
• The entire Operation lacked synergy and packaging
• Absence of an exit strategy. This resulted in the futile threat of war for a period long beyond its relevance.

Operation Parakram had positive as well as negative fallouts. Among the positive ones were:

1.Professional benefits for the Army. There was no loss of morale.

2.Infiltration came down considerably; by as much as 53% according to one estimate.

3.For the first time the complicity of Pakistan Army and its support to jehadi elements came under international scrutiny.

4.The Operation dispelled doubts of nuclear instability in the region. Between 22 May - 8 June, as many as 7-8 signals were exchanged between the two countries to present a nuclear showdown.

The negative fallouts of the Operation included the following:

1.Pakistan was emboldened by the episode. It felt they had deterred India. However, according to the speaker, India was in reality ‘self-deterred’; and only slightly deterred by the US.

2.India felt let down by the US in its mission of tackling CBT.

3.India failed to achieve strategic space as well as strategic autonomy.

 

[alimobin memon]

Now get ready to face the wrath of Pakistani poster for telling the truth.

Dear member, conventionally. In case of nuclear conflict both are in no shape to fight each other as now both are equipped reality is now there wont be any conventional war anymore.

 

[Josef K]

Some of the elements in indian traditional stories are as follows:

1. Ganesh - a walking talking elephant

2. Hanuman - a walking talking monkey

3. Kali - Multiple arms , tongue sticking out

4. Ravan - villian with multiple heads

That is some serious storytelling going on there and agree that indians are good at story telling

You forgot the flying donkey, humans made from clay, invisible creatures made from fire, birds that dropped red bricks, etc. Ummm...wait...Just remembered...those aren't from India, are they?