2019 India-Pakistani border clash

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by [email protected], Feb 27, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,909
    Likes Received:
    10,274
    Yes they allowed access after a long delay. Which read the whole statement not just the bold portion.

    Indians may claim that delay was a damage clean up but satellite imagery says no to that.

    If the Indian original claim had anything to it that delay could have allowed relocation of a staging area.

    Of course you can feel free to call me on that. I have no evidence. I admit that. It's pure conjecture.

    You claim security which is also conjecture.
    All we know is that they took their time.
     
  2. maint1234
    Offline

    maint1234 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2019
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Pakistan ispr case is like the boy who cried wolf. He gives so many official statements and then discredits them by changing them.
    A official statement is called " official" for a reason. Its supposed to have some gravity and reliability behind it. Or it becomes a case of Baghdad Bob junior.
    I see many Pakistani and Chinese posters trying to excuse the delay and brevity of media visit to the madrassa by saying their could be many reasons.
    What logically could be the reason ? Just saying security reasons is not enough. Who's security ?Ignoring the uncomfortable questions won't make them disappear.
     
  3. ougoah
    Offline

    ougoah Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    1,510
    Use your imagination. Are you seriously that far up India's ass you can't think of any good strategic reasons at all? I'm not referring to security. Maybe they don't want to reveal what is actually there. A terrorist training ground or not... details are important. No one but you is ignoring the important questions. Can you please answer the questions I raised? You can't even answer one satisfactorily and you have been ignoring all of them so far. Refer to posts 552, 563, 566, and 569. Start by addressing the questions raised in those posts please.
     
  4. Mohsin77
    Offline

    Mohsin77 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2019
    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    266
    Don't rely on the ISPR. I don't, and I'm a Pakistani. I've been telling other Pakistanis the same thing from Day 0. The problem for you is not the ISPR. It's Reuters, BBC, NY Times, and independent teams like BellingCat and The War Zone and the private Satellite Imagery firms. In fact, even pro-Indian US analysts like Christine Fair and Michael Kugleman who regularly appear on Indian news channels. Even some very senior Indian defense analysts like Praveen Sawhney.

    At the end of the day, the known facts are as follows:
    • 1 Mig downed
    • 1 pilot captured
    • 1 frat Mi17, killing all on board
    • no evidence of a successful bombing by the IAF
    • no evidence of a downed Viper
    Everything else is conjecture. For example, my side's claim of downing a Flanker (of which our pilots are convinced, and I've spoken to one) I still do not believe, for the same reasons that I do not believe your IAF's story. They might have thought they were successful at doing something, but I'm not gonna take their word for it. I need verifiable evidence of confirmed kills, before I give credit to anyone (including my own side.) This happens all the time in every military conflict. There is a counter for "claimed kills" and a separate counter for "confirmed kills." You're basing everything of the former counter, when everyone else is going by the latter. That's your problem.

    You are not applying this same principle of rigor. But most 3rd parties are, including members of this forum. For example, you're pointing to the screenshots of the "radar images" even after independent analysts have rejected them. If you have the radar scope data, you have the video, so release the video, don't selectively cherry pick screenshots because that doesn't prove anything. Contacts pop in and out of radar all the time. But even if you did that, it wouldn't prove a Viper kill, until there's evidence of a wreckage, a missing Viper, or a confirmation from our side, none of which exist.

    As for the Balakot strike, it's been debunked ad nauseum, so I will not go over this again. Now instead of throwing mud on the members here, realize that everything you are saying is based on conjecture. Regardless of what the ISPR or the IAF has said, the known facts which I listed, are undisputed. And they are enough to paint a very damning picture. If you want to change that picture, conjecture will not be enough.

    By the way, here's Sawhney, a senior Indian analyst talking about this whole episode. And he is specifically talking about "deterrence" (which you are so interested in) so you should pay close attention. Notice how his conclusion is the exact opposite of yours:

     
    #574 Mohsin77, Apr 14, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2019
  5. localizer
    Online

    localizer Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2018
    Messages:
    490
    Likes Received:
    724
    Their logic circuit shortcircuited ever since 2/27.
     
    Aliusman likes this.
  6. manqiangrexue
    Offline

    manqiangrexue Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,117
    Likes Received:
    6,792
    These:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-16s-shot-down-in-indian-battle-idUSKCN1RH0IM
    https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/04/did-india-shoot-down-a-pakistani-jet-u-s-count-says-no/
    https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-them-missing-report/articleshow/68733231.cms
    So the Pentagon didn't make an official statement because it wasn't important enough. They didn't contradict the media statement. There is no reason to doubt these articles.
    Yes, I think they're stupid for sending a MiG-21 into this fight in the first place. However else they lie is not my concern. My concern is that India's claim cannot be backed by evidence but can be disproven by counter-evidence.
    I already think India's incompetent for sending a MiG-21 into Pakistan, getting it shot down, then claiming to down and F-16, which was proven incorrect. I don't need to see specific lies to determine if someone is incompetent.

    Maybe Pakistan captured a guy who they thought was a pilot but he wasn't. I don't know why they would purposefully say they have 2 pilots when they had 1. Certainly not as big a mistake as India's intentional lie.

    Biggest problem right now is that India has lost 1 MiG-21, 1 Mi-17, 7 airmen, and 1 pilot (who was returned), fired their Air Marshall in hours, has absolutely no evidence that Pakistan has lost anything at all, and they are still trying to paint this as an Indian victory. If this is what an Indian victory looks like, then an Indian defeat would probably have to involve the dissolution of the IAF.
     
    #576 manqiangrexue, Apr 14, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2019
    DigoSSA, KIENCHIN, timepass and 2 others like this.
  7. manqiangrexue
    Offline

    manqiangrexue Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,117
    Likes Received:
    6,792
    These questions aren't uncomfortable; they are inconsequential. The fact is that there is plentiful evidence of Indian losses and none of Pakistani losses so you are trying to concoct and imagine them by asking questions that could have any multitude of answers all of which require a mind-boggling number of illogical assumptions to go in the direction you wish to take them.

    Losses aren't determined by questions; they are determined by evidence. If you don't have evidence, you don't have anything.
     
    #577 manqiangrexue, Apr 14, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2019
    DigoSSA, Equation and Mohsin77 like this.
  8. Zool
    Offline

    Zool Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    956
    This stuck out to me because immediately after the Indian Balakot air strike, media was reporting from Government Sources (almost certainly BJP), that the strike was a success and that approx. 300 militants had been killed: Indian air strike in Balakot killed 300 militants: Sources

    Then there was push back from the Indian Congress Party to prove it, since BJP was wanting to use this as a show of strength in the elections, and suddenly this comes out from the Home Minister: Number of terrorists killed in Balakot will be known by tomorrow: Rajnath Singh

    He said that beginning of March, and as far as I can tell, neither the Home Minister or anyone else in Government has lived up to that promise. Sat photos of the area have not helped here either. Now the focus is on the F-16, to apparently try to salvage something from a seemingly failed air strike that resulted in a Pakistani shoot down of a MiG-21, and a Helo with 7 Soldiers downed by friendly fire. Can you objectively say the chest thumping and mixed messages of success from India actually match the factual results of this skirmish?

    Maybe you are ignoring contrary arguments because you do not like the conclusions? Let me try:
    1) A loss of radar track does not prove an aircraft has been shot down. It only conclusively proves the radar has lost the target track. Range, Altitude, ECM all have an affect on this.

    2) Similarly, salvage of an AIM-120 shot at Indian aircraft does not mean an F-16 was brought down. There is no correlation. It does strongly indicate F-16's were part of the operation.

    3) The radar images released by IAF prove nothing beyond point #1. What would have supported the argument for an F-16 shoot down would have been a missile vector shown on a short radar video clip moving away from launch, towards the F-16 and the fighter disappearing from radar. Since this was claimed to be a BVR engagement. That's not what is given by IAF however.

    4) Pakistani F-16's are inventoried by the US and we have word that post engagement, all are accounted for.

    Seems like logical contrary arguments, versus what is has come out of India thus far.

    BTW, I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm not Indian, Pakistani or Chinese. But as someone mentioned earlier and I have commented on in the past, India is not exactly open and honest about its wartime history. Few Indian's are taught about the 'Forward Policy' land grabs by the Indian Army that precipitated the 1962 War. China fired the first shots, yes, but India tried to scoop up disputed land by force creep as part of an official strategy, all the while ignoring Chinese warnings to stop. I do see this as revisionist history and not a plus for the Indian transparency column.
     
  9. siegecrossbow
    Offline

    siegecrossbow Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,952
    Likes Received:
    8,177
    I think we'll get a better picture of what has happened after the Indian elections are over. Patriotic fervor is at an all time high right now.
     
  10. AssassinsMace
    Offline

    AssassinsMace Brigadier

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    7,652
    Likes Received:
    8,629
    The US and allies knew India started the 1962 war but it was better to just blame China and that's the way it's been since. It's that simple. No need to concoct stories and evidence. People just wanted to believe it because of their prejudices. India's mistake was half-bragging they shot down an F-16 which is nationalistic meat that Indians bested advanced American technology. And then using the same wreckage of the AMRAAM found for two different stories. One as evidence that India shot down an F-16 because it would only be used on a F-16 but no F-16 found with the wreckage of the AMRAAM it was attached to. Second, India wanted the US to punish Pakistan for illegal use of the AMRAAM sold to Pakistan. But if the AMRAAM was attached to the F-16 used as evidence India shot it down, it wouldn't have been used if it was found with the wreckage. I'm sure it bugged the hell out of US military circles hence why the claim was rebuffed in the US. India could've said anything and would've been supported by the US if they just didn't use the US like that. India could've said they shot down 20 JF-17s and the US would've supported it but an F-16...? They couldn't pass up the opportunity.
     
    Equation, Mohsin77 and Dolcevita like this.
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page