LOC Flare up: Related news and Discussions

Taking PoK is all well and good, but can we keep it? The population is 4.2 million. Assuming even 1% of the locals take up arms against us, we're talking about 42,000 armed militants. It's proximity to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa means foreign terrorists and weapons can be smuggled in easily in large numbers before the border is secured. Building a fence will take some time. Assuming they can get in 20,000 well trained terrorists, ISI operatives and SSG commandos for training local militias, we're going to have a big problem. Air power and armour might need to be used, and the government cannot be concerned about PR and optics if they want to keep PoK. And with the new pak border, Kashmir valley and PoK combined, we'll need well over 500,000 (?) troops to combat threats.

I think we need to take the initiative and resort to unconventional warfare. There will be people on both sides of the spectrum and in the middle in PoK. Against India and Pakistan respectively. Use the lessons learnt with the failed LTTE experiment and get things right this time. And get the PoK leadership on our payroll. They can be made to accede to India, when Pakistan has enough to worry about internally and in PoK as well, and cannot sustain the costs or manpower involved with preventing the accession.

I'd like to hear your opinion on this @Falcon , sir. @vstol Jockey @Milspec, your inputs would also be much appreciated.

Still it wont be that successful.
Any kind of aggressive action from India will only help to unify Pakistan more .Turkey and China willplay what they did in Azerbaijan.
US and Russia willkeep neutral.

Its a non starter and wont work . I think current Govt policy is much more effective.Keep them unstable through variousways .Mean while we should further strengthen our economy , technology and clout .
China wont attack India not because they are afraid of US.They are afraid of us.If we were weak like Taiwan they would have attack us .
Especially the windjammer guy. Such an a** h*le.

Most of them.
Especially Punjabis .
There is a reason for it . They still cant comprehend how they become nothing but the other side become very influential in this world.
False pride,inferiority complex are part of their culture.
 
The problem with the population in PoK is they will become a problem after we take over the region. The situation can turn into an insurgency after major combat operations are complete. Also, I believe the problem will come from outside PoK and not from within PoK. Since there's no fencing or surveillance available right after we take the region, we are going to see a lot of infiltration and indeed a lot more fighting. This is in fact what will make the entire exercise extremely expensive, both money and men. Bringing about any kind of normalcy to the region will take a decade or more, even with a proper outreach program for the local populace, winning hearts and minds.

There's also the question of money. It's difficult to say if we can occupy hostile land with our current financial strength.

One advantage is there will be a significant amount of population displacement, where people will leave PoK to Pak at the start of the war. So we can make use of that by not allowing them back in.

Another major advantage will be in the field of surveillance, robotics and infantry modernisation. In the course of a decade, the world will experience a major RMA when it comes to infantry technology. Wearable sensors, integrated comm systems, HMDS, aiming assistance, smart ammo etc in the electronics field. And in the biomechanical field, we may see the use of exoskeletons, heavier rifles, BPJs etc that an ordinary assault rifle will not be able to defeat. And the infantry will be able to call on indirect fire support from IFVs. So an insurgent will not be able to fight against a future soldier, and technology will play a massive role in reducing the effect of insurgencies.

As for supporting an insurgency within PoK, I don't think that's advisable, since we have to take care of the insurgents after we have taken over PoK. If we discard them, then they will turn against us, and the biggest problem will be their local PoK roots which will gain them both local and international sympathy. Pak learnt that the hard way. Plus, it will allow the PA to concentrate forces in PoK, which we will also have to fight. We have to be clean in PoK. Rather we need to support insurgencies elsewhere, like the TTP and BLA, which will force the PA to distribute their forces and thin them out. It's easier for us to run an insurgency from Afghan soil than from Indian soil. Funnel money towards the right areas and the local forces will take care of it on their own. Unfortunately, the govt has not shown any inclination towards actively supporting an insurgency inside Pak.
Well, some of the costs and risks involved in a military operation can be mitigated if PoK's political leadership acceded to India. Facing an insurgency after PoK falls under Indian control has always been a given. What is also given is that we cannot hope to maintain it if all of pakistan's effort is concentrated on maintaining an insurgency in the region. It'll be 10 times as bad as Kashmir considering PoK was administered by pakistan until we took it. If we take it, that is.

Also, you are not considering the fact that insurgents can 'evolve' to, get new technology, especially if china gets involved. Not on the scale of a large regional power backed army, but enough to be more of a threat in battle. Especially considering that they'll employ suicide attacks. CPEC is going to pass through PoK, so even chinese investments are at stake.
 
Last edited:
I had heard during 90s most of them wven dobt know South Indian states are part of India .
They dont know South Indians.When their ancestors were totally effed up in front of Arab and Central Asian invaders ,it was the South Indian Kingdoms like Chalukya that routed the Arabs from our region.

They have a very different idea of South India. And they definitely have no clue about the South. In fact even other Indians have no clue about the South.
 
Well, some of the costs and risks involved in a military operation can be mitigated if PoK's political leadership acceded to India. Facing an insurgency after PoK falls under Indian control has always been a given. What is also given is that we cannot hope to maintain it if all of pakistan's effort is concentrated on maintaining an insurgency in the region. It'll be 10 times as bad as Kashmir considering PoK was administered by pakistan until we took it. If we take it, that is.

Also, you are not considering the fact that insurgents can 'evolve' to, get new technology, especially if china gets involved. Not on the scale of a large regional power backed army, but enough to be more of a threat in battle. Especially considering that they'll employ suicide attacks. CPEC is going to pass through PoK, so even chinese investments are at stake.

PoK's local leadership is largely irrelevant. They are just puppets of the PA and will be replaced by our central govt anyway.

Insurgents can't get this new tech. The kind of money needed is impossible even for PA to procure, let along supply all of that to the insurgents. China won't do it either, they are not dumb enough to act against India so openly. The thing is technology has to be carried into the field, and if the insurgents die, they leave all their gear behind as well. Nobody can afford that when it comes to hitech gear.

Anyway, right now, our best bet is to soldier on as usual for a few more years. Possibly see if we can deal with PoK military in 2025, or even push it all the way to 2030. A $10T economy can justify an act of aggression by simply saying "meri marzi".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
PoK's local leadership is largely irrelevant. They are just puppets of the PA and will be replaced by our central govt anyway.

Insurgents can't get this new tech. The kind of money needed is impossible even for PA to procure, let along supply all of that to the insurgents. China won't do it either, they are not dumb enough to act against India so openly. The thing is technology has to be carried into the field, and if the insurgents die, they leave all their gear behind as well. Nobody can afford that when it comes to hitech gear.

Anyway, right now, our best bet is to soldier on as usual for a few more years. Possibly see if we can deal with PoK military in 2025, or even push it all the way to 2030. A $10T economy can justify an act of aggression by simply saying "meri marzi".
All that you need is a few idiots to attack and create disturbance. There is no shortage of useful morons around the world who have been religiously radicalized, best thing is to secure borders and watch the show. Frankly there is no need for expensive tech even bio-terrorism is good enuf to cause large scale damage.
 
Won't work for two reasons.

One, the PAF can protect itself by hiding. They did it in 1971 and they will do it again in 2021. You can only force them out by running tanks over them. Underground hangars cannot be effectively attacked from the air. This plan will work out only if the PAF actually puts up a fight, which is unlikely to happen after the first few hours.

Two, even if the entire PAF is destroyed, for the Chinese the entire PAF is just a 3-year production run. The PAF can get back to 200+ jets in a handful of years.
Rejigging the entire supply chain for Pakistan's sake is difficult.. It would take many years for China to supply Pakistan with 200 fighters. They would rather provide J10 and J11 from the inventory.. while also ramping up Junk fighter production..
 
That's easier said that done. Killing the chain of command requires nukes for started.
I don't wont to suggest such things online, but think carefully about this. Remember human capital is indispensible.
 
Rejigging the entire supply chain for Pakistan's sake is difficult.. It would take many years for China to supply Pakistan with 200 fighters. They would rather provide J10 and J11 from the inventory.. while also ramping up Junk fighter production..

They don't have to rejig anything. They can currently produce 50-60 J-10s a year. And possibly 24 JF-17s. They can supply about 150 J-10s and 75 JF-17s in a 5-year cycle. Anyway, this stuff is hypothetical so there's no point in discussing this.