Air Battle over Kashmir : MiG-21 Bison shoots down F-16

Which F-16 excellency. The one that did not venture beyond the safe zone?

You are right. You cannot allow the F-16s to roam freely. I mean who is going to pay for the fuel and spares?

PS - Avenger 1 is well and says hello and hopes your Vipers will not chicken out the next time.
Imagine these guys in F-16 were so scared of Su-30s that they were firing away from Dmax and then as the Su-30 turned towards them, they *censored*ing ran away to safety without even bothering to guide the missile to the target.
 
Imagine these guys in F-16 were so scared of Su-30s that they were firing away from Dmax and then as the Su-30 turned towards them, they *censored*ing ran away to safety without even bothering to guide the missile to the target.
Recently i had been to Northern Army Command, Udhampur where i interacted briefly with one Major General. I asked him about the F-16 loss since social media has a lot of news that is just 'social'. He said that definitely an F-16 was down but remained non-committal about the MKI.

He said that the present behaviour of Pakistan has been affected by what happened on 27-28 Feb 2019, otherwise they would not have gone for a ceasefire. But that argument can be turned around by saying that why did we being so much better off than Pak agree for a ceasefire, we could have pressed the advantage, but we agreed to the ceasefire since we came second best on 27 Feb.

The Maj Gen also said that we have the moral ascendancy on the border post the Feb aerial skirmish. Other that what @Falcon says about PAF staying away from the borders, what is the behaviour of the field formations etc. if they are down?

@Falcon
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hellfire and Paro
Recently i had been to Northern Army Command, Udhampur where i interacted briefly with one Major General. I asked him about the F-16 loss since social media has a lot of news that is just 'social'. He said that definitely an F-16 was down but remained non-committal about the MKI.

He said that the present behaviour of Pakistan has been affected by what happened on 27-28 Feb 2019, otherwise they would not have gone for a ceasefire. But that argument can be turned around by saying that why did we being so much better off than Pak agree for a ceasefire, we could have pressed the advantage, but we agreed to the ceasefire since we came second best on 27 Feb.

The Maj Gen also said that we have the moral ascendancy on the border post the Feb aerial skirmish. Other that what @Falcon says about PAF staying away from the borders, what is the behaviour of the field formations etc. if they are down?

@Falcon
U have not understood what you want to convey.
 
U have not understood what you want to convey.
The Maj Gen said that Pak behaviour has changed after Feb 26-27. That's why they agreed for the ceasefire. But Pak can say that India despite being much stronger has agreed for a ceasefire and this shows that IAF was inadequate on 27 Feb. So as a layman i still do not know what happened. That's why i asked what kind of behavioural changes have happened on the side of Pak armed forces that shows that the Feb 26-27 air-battle went against them.
 
The Maj Gen said that Pak behaviour has changed after Feb 26-27. That's why they agreed for the ceasefire. But Pak can say that India despite being much stronger has agreed for a ceasefire and this shows that IAF was inadequate on 27 Feb. So as a layman i still do not know what happened. That's why i asked what kind of behavioural changes have happened on the side of Pak armed forces that shows that the Feb 26-27 air-battle went against them.
Pak has realised that India will no more stay quiet and will retaliate to any extent by dominating the escalation ladder. Plus the pathetic economic condition and internal rebellions have forces Pakistan to seek peace. The so called Iron brother China has turned out bo be a real pain for them as they realised that even the ME Asia countries have started shunning them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thinkingcap81
The Maj Gen said that Pak behaviour has changed after Feb 26-27. That's why they agreed for the ceasefire. But Pak can say that India despite being much stronger has agreed for a ceasefire and this shows that IAF was inadequate on 27 Feb. So as a layman i still do not know what happened. That's why i asked what kind of behavioural changes have happened on the side of Pak armed forces that shows that the Feb 26-27 air-battle went against them.
Ceasefire comes to existence recently, we were engaging Pakistan even during indo china standoff. The feb 26-27 events has nothing to do with current ceasefire.
 
So you think the Americans are practically handing over Afghanistan to Pakistan?
Alternatively, the US withdrawal would mean that Pak will not have the US to shield them. After all, China does not have the power to unilaterally take Pak out of the woods. So Pak has decided to back off for now. If Afghanistan is given to Pak on a platter then they will try to bog us down more in J&K. If this is true then the ceasefire has very little to do with the Feb 2019 events, rather it's all about geopolitics.
 
Alternatively, the US withdrawal would mean that Pak will not have the US to shield them. After all, China does not have the power to unilaterally take Pak out of the woods. So Pak has decided to back off for now. If Afghanistan is given to Pak on a platter then they will try to bog us down more in J&K. If this is true then the ceasefire has very little to do with the Feb 2019 events, rather it's all about geopolitics.

There are a lot of players in Afghanistan. Af govt, Pak, Taliban, Iran, Russia, Islamic State and all their proxies, apart from the US and India. China will find a way in as well.

I don't think the ceasefire has anything to do with Pak and India, but has everything to do with the significant change in status quo that's about to occur in Afghanistan. Perhaps the US had to deliver the Pakistanis a ceasefire from India in exchange for a less volatile Afghanistan than what's going to happen. The Americans may have promised something from Pakistan to India, like an end to terrorism, but I think that's gonna be more of a lip service since it can't be guaranteed, so we have to see how things turn out eventually at the LoC. Maybe the US has promised something else to offset that possibility to India.

India also has a stake in Afghanistan. India does not want the Af govt to fall, without it Indian presence is pretty much gone, and it appears unlikely for the Af govt to survive long term if Pak+Talib decide to take back the country. Perhaps the ceasefire means there won't be a civil war in Afghanistan.

Of course, if Pak plays truant, I hope the govt tears up the ceasefire agreement and Indian guns open up again.
 
There are a lot of players in Afghanistan. Af govt, Pak, Taliban, Iran, Russia, Islamic State and all their proxies, apart from the US and India. China will find a way in as well.

I don't think the ceasefire has anything to do with Pak and India, but has everything to do with the significant change in status quo that's about to occur in Afghanistan. Perhaps the US had to deliver the Pakistanis a ceasefire from India in exchange for a less volatile Afghanistan than what's going to happen. The Americans may have promised something from Pakistan to India, like an end to terrorism, but I think that's gonna be more of a lip service since it can't be guaranteed, so we have to see how things turn out eventually at the LoC. Maybe the US has promised something else to offset that possibility to India.

India also has a stake in Afghanistan. India does not want the Af govt to fall, without it Indian presence is pretty much gone, and it appears unlikely for the Af govt to survive long term if Pak+Talib decide to take back the country. Perhaps the ceasefire means there won't be a civil war in Afghanistan.

Of course, if Pak plays truant, I hope the govt tears up the ceasefire agreement and Indian guns open up again.
Maybe true. The ceasefire is going to be tenuous. Once things become better for Pak in Afg, J&K will boil again. We need to seize this opportunity to bolster ourselves against China and have more offensive capabilities against Pak.
 
Maybe true. The ceasefire is going to be tenuous. Once things become better for Pak in Afg, J&K will boil again.

I don't think they will be able to do much in J&K at this time. But there will definitely be more attempts at infiltration with a long term plan to create problems via new sleeper cells.

We need to seize this opportunity to bolster ourselves against China and have more offensive capabilities against Pak.

It's the opposite. The ceasefire and access to international funds will allow Pakistan to bolster themselves against India instead. Just before all this, they were quite screwed without access to international funds.

There's a good chance things will go worse for them if they mess around in J&K or Afghanistan, so they are not gonna upset that applecart at this time. That nonsensical lip service from Bajwa proves that Pak's gonna keep its nose clean for sometime. But they are definitely going to modernise their military with foreign funding because of the Afghan deal.

This will also allow China to funnel advanced technologies into Pakistan at minimal costs, and that's going to be the real problem. 'Cause China can easily drop in billions of dollars of equipment into Pakistan every year if they want to, effectively countering India's defence capital budget to a significant extent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
There are a lot of players in Afghanistan. Af govt, Pak, Taliban, Iran, Russia, Islamic State and all their proxies, apart from the US and India. China will find a way in as well.

I don't think the ceasefire has anything to do with Pak and India, but has everything to do with the significant change in status quo that's about to occur in Afghanistan. Perhaps the US had to deliver the Pakistanis a ceasefire from India in exchange for a less volatile Afghanistan than what's going to happen. The Americans may have promised something from Pakistan to India, like an end to terrorism, but I think that's gonna be more of a lip service since it can't be guaranteed, so we have to see how things turn out eventually at the LoC. Maybe the US has promised something else to offset that possibility to India.

India also has a stake in Afghanistan. India does not want the Af govt to fall, without it Indian presence is pretty much gone, and it appears unlikely for the Af govt to survive long term if Pak+Talib decide to take back the country. Perhaps the ceasefire means there won't be a civil war in Afghanistan.

Of course, if Pak plays truant, I hope the govt tears up the ceasefire agreement and Indian guns open up again.
The day pak stop terrorism in j&k, we will loose a chance to declare war on pak. In modern world you cannot declare war on any other nation to change the map, it doesnt matter wheather you are the righteous owner of that particular territory /land you fight for. So lets hope pak will not stick witj ceasefire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shekhar Singh
Current ceasefire nicely explained by US decision on drawdown of troops from Afghanistan with ultimate exit in September 2021.
To be very honest with you, I have a very nasty feeling that once US withdraws from Afghanistan, the vaccum will be filled in by PLA and Russians with Pakistan as their supporter. India will be thrown out of Afghanistan. The entrapped Oil of Central Asian republics will then be controlled by Russia and China to create a counter to OPEC as was the case during Soviet times. Plus thru CPEC, China and Russia will get a direct access to Arabian sea.
 
To be very honest with you, I have a very nasty feeling that once US withdraws from Afghanistan, the vaccum will be filled in by PLA and Russians with Pakistan as their supporter. India will be thrown out of Afghanistan. The entrapped Oil of Central Asian republics will then be controlled by Russia and China to create a counter to OPEC as was the case during Soviet times. Plus thru CPEC, China and Russia will get a direct access to Arabian sea.

Central Asia Trade and CPEC Are all overrated Hyped up things

The 5 countries of Central Asia are already dependent on Russia and China

Our concern is that Pakistan will divert Taliban fighters to Kashmir

So our response has to be heavy handed and not wishy washy like Feb 26

Also there is another dimension

The Afghans have seen a better life in the last 20 years , they will not easily surrender to Taliban

US Afghanistan are working out an agreement about future help based on contingencies

So Pakistan will have to watch out

US has so far avoided directly naming Pakistan for destabilizing Afghanistan


That can change , Once reports reach the West about Taliban atrocities and beheadings , US will be forced to act against Pakistan
 
That can change , Once reports reach the West about Taliban atrocities and beheadings , US will be forced to act against Pakistan
You are wrong. US came to Afghanistan not to help Afghans but to get rid of Al Qaida who did 9/11. They care two hoots for civil rights anywhere in the world as most of the time they are on the side of the opressor. Do you remember 1971 West Pakistan?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot and jetray
You are wrong. US came to Afghanistan not to help Afghans but to get rid of Al Qaida who did 9/11. They care two hoots for civil rights anywhere in the world as most of the time they are on the side of the opressor. Do you remember 1971 West Pakistan?

That was a different era

Let us wait and watch

US knows that Pakistan has sabotaged their mission in Afghanistan

Now it is upto them how they take revenge , it will not happen immediately

But slowly and surely it will happen

US carried its Grudge against Vietnam for a long time till 2016 , till the Chinese became the bigger threat

So if Pakistan thinks that it has gotten Away with its Afghan adventure , it is wrong
 
That was a different era

Let us wait and watch

US knows that Pakistan has sabotaged their mission in Afghanistan

Now it is upto them how they take revenge , it will not happen immediately

But slowly and surely it will happen

US carried its Grudge against Vietnam for a long time till 2016 , till the Chinese became the bigger threat

So if Pakistan thinks that it has gotten Away with its Afghan adventure , it is wrong
who is supporting Dictators in Central America and Ukraine today?
 
who is supporting Dictators in Central America and Ukraine today?

US Policy whether in Europe or Asia or Burma , is purely driven by its self interests -- as it should be

So we have to wait for the situation in Afghanistan to evolve

But Pakistan , China, Iran and Russia will try to remove US influence from Afghanistan

That will be the starting point for a clash of interests and narratives