Pak Armed Forces vs. Pakistan

*** According to US intelligence sources, more than six Pakistani army brigades, plus paramilitary forces totalling some 25,000 men, have been battling Baloch Liberation Army guerillas in the Kohlu mountains and the surrounding areas.
Earlier in the year, the Human Rights Commission was given only limited access to the Kohlu area, which is at the heart of the current insurgency, and its findings disclose not only a chilling list of disappearances, but also a catalogue of deaths, described as a result of “indiscriminate bombing and strafing” by 20 Cobra helicopter gunships and four squadrons of fighter planes, including F-16 fighter jets, resulting in 215 civilian dead and hundreds more wounded, many of them women and children. ***

Balochistan after Bugti
By Sherry Rehman
http://www.dawn.com/2006/09/09/ed.htm#4

#272 by zeemax

If the major control/command centers, population centres, commercial hubs on either side are destroyed, the remainder will be good for nuts.

I think you got me wrong. I`m talking from a survival POV. No matter how hard it is hit, India will survive. Not for a moment am I under the illusion that it will continue to thrive.

#269 by harish_hyd

Even if a good portion of it is wiped out during an invasion, the remainder should be good enough to complete the mission.

So even if Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta etc are destroyed, the remainder will be good enough to complete the mission. No Saheb. If the major control/command centers, population centres, commercial hubs on either side are destroyed, the remainder will be good for nuts.

Any war from either side`s point of view is unwinnable.

what makes you think I`m for a war?

I don`t. So we are on the same page on this.

#270 by tahmed32

I think you need to read up a bit more on the nature and impact of nuclear explosions. It is more than just a very large bomb.

Sir jee, I`ve spent the better part of my college days studying Nuclear Physics and worked at the BARC (Bhabha Atomic Research Centre) in Mumbai for my college project.

#269 Even if a good portion of it is wiped out during an invasion, the remainder should be good enough to complete the mission.

I think you need to read up a bit more on the nature and impact of nuclear explosions. It is more than just a very large bomb.

#267 Sure, sure. Why dont you worry about your own problems in India? Or have you run out of problems in India that you are so concerned about Pakistan!!

#268 by zeemax

Pakistan`s doctrine is to use tactical low yield nukes on it`s `own` territory, not India`s. India does have the second-strike option but that will mean complete annihilation because Pakistan will do too. That doesn`t win the war for India, does it?

How can that be? Once Pakistan uses even low-yield nukes on Indian troops, India`s second strike will be so massive that it will cripple Pakistan. Pakistan may still use a couple of its own nukes and knock down some Indian cities, but that`s about it. India will be greatly affected, but it will mean the end for Pakistan as we know it.

If however a large invasion takes place which Pakistan is unable to repel, then there`ll be a nuking to stop it in it`s tracks.

That`s exactly what I`m saying. India maintains such a large Army exactly (around 1.2 million strong) for this reason. Even if a good portion of it is wiped out during an invasion, the remainder should be good enough to complete the mission.

So please forget a war. Let`s talk about peace.

what makes you think I`m for a war?

#265 by harish_hyd

Harish, you didn`t get it. Pakistan`s doctrine is to use tactical low yield nukes on it`s `own` territory, not India`s. India does have the second-strike option but that will mean complete annihilation because Pakistan will do too. That doesn`t win the war for India, does it?

As you say, what if India allows some troops to invade and be nuked; the answer is they will not be nuked. They will be stopped by conventional forces. If however a large invasion takes place which Pakistan is unable to repel, then there`ll be a nuking to stop it in it`s tracks.

So please forget a war. Let`s talk about peace.

It seems that Pakistan and simple citizens of Pakistan have been hijacked by bullies, and custodians have eaten the country like termite.

I quote few lines from the daily The News international of Feb20,2006 in which Senator Farhatullah Babar hints about the tricks and looting techniques of our clever kidnappers.

---

Senator Babar writes about allotment of four highly valuable land plots to Army officers during their 33 years of service

These plots provide seed money, and then Army officers grab more government land, transfer leases of government assets,perks and corruption money is on the top of this.

In short Pakistan can boast to have the world`s richest Army and government officers.

Allotment of plots to army officers by DHA

Taking prompt note of my speech in the senate on the allotment of plots Mr Shamim Junaid has sought to ‘set the record straight’ by saying that the DHA is an independent and constitutional body, that it purchases land from the local market at market rates and that the management have lent it the credibility and respect it enjoys. He also feels that in debating over DHA the precious time of the upper house was wasted. (Allotment of plots to Army officers by DHA, The News, February 18).
Independent constitutional body; but how?
The DHA Lahore was actually a private housing society set up under the Cooperative Societies Act 1925 carrying out operations on private lands.
It was forcibly taken over by the military ignoring the orders of the Registrar Cooperative Societies to hold elections. Just three weeks before the general elections on September 19, 2002 a Presidential Order No 26 replaced it with the Defence Housing Authority Lahore. The said Order was subsequently indemnified through the 17th amendment. What a constitutional body indeed.
The DHA Karachi was also a private Cooperative Housing Society formed in 1953 but abolished and replaced with Pakistan Defence Officers Housing Authority by Ziaul Haq. When no legal cover could be found, the take over was validated by giving it protection under schedule 7 of the Constitution so that no future parliament could change it except in the manner as required from amending the Constitution itself. What a constitutional body indeed.
The DHA Islamabad was set up under a presidential ordinance in February last just two days before the NA session. It has since then been re-promulgated. What a constitutional body indeed.
Purchasing land from the market?
The DHA Karachi first occupied 280 acres of the Sindh government’s land which the latter has been refusing to give to it because of an ordinance which forbade sale of government lands to other entities and also because the housing authority was not prepared to buy it at market rates. The Sindh government appealed to the Sindh High Court against the DHA. After the military take over of October 1999 the provincial government was forced to withdraw its ordinance banning the sale of land, withdraw its petition from the SHC and agree to the sale of 240 acres of land to the DHA Karachi at a pittance. What a fine example of purchase from the open market at market rates. And if the DHA Islamabad had been paying the sellers at market rates the Defence Committee of the National Assembly would not have taken notice of it and demanded that market rates be paid to the sellers.
But apart from the legal niceties and whether land was purchased from the open market at market rates I had raised a totally different issue in the senate. We have been informed that an army officer gets one benefit in DHA after 15 years of service, a second one after 25 years, a third one after 28 years and a fourth one after 33 years of service. The Navy and Air Force officers get only one.
I had said that this doling out of plots may be legal but was it also right and proper. ``Close your eyes, keep your hands on your hearts, and ask yourself this question.`` I had said. Alas this question has not been answered.
Far from wasting the time of the senate and twisting facts I believe I have done my duty to my conscience, to the senate and above all to the military itself. For let it not be said that the DHAs have become a critical example of the military first capturing the state’s political power and then employing this power to advance its corporate interests in just the same way as political parties are often accused of.
I am sorry that Junaid sahib feels that the time of the senate was wasted by raising such a frivolous issue. I wish to offer him consolation in the thought that my term in the senate has come to an end and the precious time of the Upper House will no longer be wasted. Good luck to him, and good luck to the DHAs.
Senator Farhatullah Babar
Islamabad

I quote few lines from Daily the Nation of June 14,2005 which will give some more hints about activities of Pakistan Army:

---

Senator Babar said that questions of priorities and transparency assumed serious proportion as one realizes that the military was increasingly being engaged in business, commercial and real estate activities that were not consistent with defense requirements and defense priorities.
He said that it was obvious from the fact as was revealed in the National Assembly last week that FWO and other military outfits had been awarded 35 big contracts without bidding. The military personnel until the other day were exempt from payment of toll tax but the Edhi ambulance was required to pay toll tax. Dozens of factories and mills were set up by the Fauji Foundation which received preferential treatment from state resources at the expense of the common man.
Elaborating the point about lack of accountability he said that the Auditor General of Pakistan in his report in 2001 had lamented how critical questions about disbursement of funds in Okara military farmlands were not answered.
Senator Farhatullah Babar said that the craze for plots had reached such a stage that an ordinance was issued to set up defense housing authority Islamabad just a few hours before the session of the National Assembly had been convened.
Babar said that the increasing involvement of the military in industrial and commercial activities persuaded the British High Commissioner in Islamabad Mark Lyall Grant to remark publicly in March this year that the involvement of military in commercial activities in Pakistan was impacting on the poverty alleviation programme.
The spending on education had exceeded for the first time from that on the military in Turkey. But what was most extraordinary was that the men in uniform in turkey had accepted these changes, he added.
MMA leader Prof. Khurshid while taking part in the debate said that except few sensitive points which cannot be disclosed, all other expenditures on defence should be debated in the house.
He also criticized the army’s involvement in political affairs of the country.
PML-N Senator Ishaq Dar, taking part in the debate, said during 1999-200 Rs. 142 billion were allocated for defense which included the pensions of retired armed forces personal. However, last year Rs. 192 billions were allocated excluding the pensions of retired service men which were revised to Rs. 216 billion while in the 2005-06 budget an amount of Rs. 223 billion has been allocated. Dar said Rs. 20 billion for ex-service men pensions are excluded from this amount and the total increase is 84 percent in six years.
Senator Murad Ali Shah, Azizullah Satakzai Safdar Ali Abbasi, Akbar Khawaja, and Qari Mohammad Abdullah were among other movers who expressed same views on defence during their respective speeches.
The opposition senators also strongly criticized the role of NAB in the country and said that the Bureau was used by the government as a tool for political victimization and change of loyalties.

#262 by zeemax

Pakistan`s doctrine is to invite the enemy in, and only then to invoke its trip-wire defence with sub-kiloton tactical nukes intended to stop enemy advance into its territory; in a legitimate `defensive` posture; which it is almost certain to use.

Okay, so what if India actually allows some troops to invade and be nuked, and then nukes Pakistan massively in a second-strike? After all, India`s nuclear doctrine doesn`t specify that it must be nuked only on Indian territory for it to use the second-stike option, does it?

#263 by masadi

A large scale ``suicide bomber`` mentality? Blow yourself up to blow the enemy?

Nope. Use of tactical sub-kiloton nukes does not blow up Pakistan. It only blows up one kilometer of the active field. And it is said the wind direction on the western borders is towards India and that`s where the radiation will travel.

As for the second part of your question, this will occur only IF India retaliates with large-scale nukes of its own. It doesn`t have small tactical ones; or at-least hasn`t tested them; but even if it had them these would be useless because it`s advance will aready have been stopped by Pak`s first-strike. If it resorts to its megaton versions, all it can achieve is mutual annihilation. So on the nuke strategy, Pakistan has India by the balls. Its nukes are useless in a practical war with Pakistan.

Zeemax writes <<< Not so for Pakistan. Pakistan`s doctrine is to invite the enemy in, and only then to invoke its trip-wire defence with sub-kiloton tactical nukes intended to stop enemy advance into its territory; in a legitimate `defensive` posture; which it is almost certain to use. India can only retaliate with nukes at the cost of mutual annihilation. >>>

Zeemax what is this? A large scale ``suicide bomber`` mentality? Blow yourself up to blow the enemy?

#261 by harish_hyd / #250 by tahmed32

Both of you are completely off mark. Here`s why:

tahmed says: After nuclear weapons, the question of a full-scale war is basically out.This in turn has given an impetus to peace.

harish says: Nope. If India is vulnerable to Paki nukes, Pakistan is even more so. But taking into account the fact that Pakistan had nukes and was likely to use it, why did still India go ahead and mobilize troops if it feared them? India very well knows that with Pakistan already under fire for proliferation, a nuclear strike would be the last nail in the Paki coffin.

I say: The question of a full scale war was never OUT. Why the impetus for peace was because of the difference in the two countries nuclear doctrines. For India to use nuclear first-strike would mean complete annihilation, which they cannot in any case do because they have already given up the first-strike option publicly. Not so for Pakistan. Pakistan`s doctrine is to invite the enemy in, and only then to invoke its trip-wire defence with sub-kiloton tactical nukes intended to stop enemy advance into its territory; in a legitimate `defensive` posture; which it is almost certain to use. India can only retaliate with nukes at the cost of mutual annihilation. So a first nuke strike would not be the last nail in Pak`s coffin, while any nuclear response by India will result in mutual annihilation. That places India in a fix. That was the impetus for peace and no other factor. You may have noticed that Pakistan`s conventional arms buildup like tanks, artillery etc has almost stopped since the nuke tests and the only emphasis remains on missile technology. So Indians should stop thumping their chests for any miltary superiority because there isn`t any.

tahmed/harish both quoting ... 90,000 army/troops POWs....

Yaar get your facts right. This is total misinformation. There were 30,000 civilian POWs included in the above figure. The total troop strength in EP was 80,000 out of which about 60,000 were taken POW.

The point of above clarification is that there can indeed be a war if India chooses, but it will not be in its interests. So peace is the `only` option on the table as far as India is concerned. As for Pakistan, with enemies on three sides and ocean on the fourth, everyone knows both options are practicable though peace is better. That is the Pakistan position.