Pahalgam terror attack: 26 killed
- Thread starter Tatvamasi
- Start date
- Status
It has always been known that Pakistan can move faster than India at deployment. It doesn't change anything for India.
They don't have the resources for a battle of attrition.
We have to spend on infrastructure.why not on channels.India is already spending on infrastructure what's new in it. Definately supported by a business case and to give an economic shock to Pakistan unlike your winnie the pooh CEPC and Gawadar airport investment.
Do you want the Indian army to run into Pakistan's prepared defenses like a mad boar? It is also difficult for the Indian military industry to meet the needs of a high-intensity war. On the contrary, Pakistan has assistance from China and Turkey, and their military industries are much better than India.
Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej will be linked with Yamuna. Some of it is already complete. Now we have to connect Indus and Chenab to the Ravi and Beas, which in turn will connect to the larger rivers in the heartland. It's much more cheaper and easier than building the Three Gorges Dam.
Local politics had prevented the completion of projects due to the lack of sufficient water. But with IWT gone, we can now use Indus and Chenab to fill the gaps, while also creating storage reservoirs for Kashmiris.
The Pakistanis too benefit from it because they allow too much water to flow into the sea anyway. It will solve their flood problem too. Of course, we will use it for political benefit, they have been doing the same to us for decades.
.
NATO, specifically refers to those countries, the United States, France, Poland, and Türkiye. These NATO countries all adopt completely different organizations and combat doctrines.
Are you referring specifically which those countries that believe that India's army's war theory is more advanced than their own?
That's how we have fought all our wars to date.
US and NATO are looking to India for rearmament, if you did not know.
Example:
And neither China nor Turkey have feasible access to Pakistan. PoL will be a no-go zone for Chinese supplies. The sea will be blockaded by India. And the overland routes require Iran and Afghanistan, both can deny weapons supplies in order to stay neutral.
Since I came to this forum, there have been countless people citing Indian media to prove that India is all good and China and Pakistan are all bad, don't you think this is stupid?
If the United States and Israel stand on the side of India, then Iran and Afghanistan will undoubtedly stand on the side of China and Pakistan. Moreover, India may not be able to blockade Pakistan, especially after this round of Pakistani naval expansion.
In few years, Imran will be dead. And India will be even more powerful.
Don't forget that China and Pakistan are connected by a road,
喀喇昆仑公路 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书
Last edited:
Well, fyi if India ONLY diverts 20% water, which is ALLOWED by erst-while Indus water treaty, Pakistan will be dead and dry.
Second, India does not even need to touch Indus, only Chenab, Jhelum, Ravi and Sutlej are enough to completely *censored* Pakistan up. Not to mention all these rivers are very near Punjab.
And breaking that link is as simple as destroying few bridges.
This road is hidden in the mountains at the junction of Pakistan, Tajikistan and China, at the very rear of the frontline. I don't think India has the capability to destroy it.
NATO has resource-abundance, India has resource-scarcity. Our scarcity limits logistics. Given the constraints, we can still use the full power of a division. Even our division survivability is superior to a NATO's division due to the way our HQ is structured, as mentioned by them. Our system is also more decentralized, which NATO envies.
So imagine what we can do with abundance, something we can achieve over the next 5-10 years. In some areas, we have already achieved it, like border infrastructure along LAC.
PLAGF achieved resource-abundance only a few years ago, and China still avoided a fight.
Pakistan has extreme resource-scarcity. Forget logistics, take our tank regiments for example. India's regiment has 59 tanks, Pakistan's has 45. In order to remain at 100% combat effectiveness, Pakistan can only lose 6 tanks per regiment while India can lose 20 tanks.
With much lesser resources and almost whole world backing Pakistan in 1971, we had finished the war with Pakistan in just 14 days.
I only prefer to deal with facts. We have flaws, but the flaws you prefer to look at are not flaws.
That's not how politics works. Two countries can be bitter enemies of each other but still be security partners of India. Like US and Russia.
Iran and Afghanistan have more to gain by being friends with India than otherwise. If there's an Indo-Pak war, both countries would prefer an Indian victory.
And Modi will be dead too and India may be a more sane country not RSS ruled Hindu Taliban
- Status