Pakistan-India Conflict 2025: News Updates and Discussion

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Indians have yet to provide the evidence of F16 that was shot down in 2019, we will come back to 2025 later on.

Reading their comments here and on other social media platforms, it is abundantly clear to me that showing restraint to them has been the biggest blunder from our side. This isn't your average peer adversary, this is a genocidal adversary who has no moral rules left whatsoever.

Forget about 2025, i need the evidence of 2016 Surgical strikes first, second i need evidence of F16 lost on 2019. Indian show a damaged hanger and present it as an evidence of c130 lost, saab 2000 lost. Let's ask them to show us saab or c130 pictures first. AVM Aurangzeb showed a lot of unnecessary respect to clowns of IAF or Indian air FARCE.

If there is anything indians hate more than Pakistan and Muslims it is evidence, truth and reality.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

So, slowly aerial engagement and airforce are not as important because both side does not has the ability to carry out mission across the border, what a load of bs, what a way of admitting failure and find a new toy to boast, lol, it just too obvious from these people.

There’s a reason why countries are pouring billions into 5th-gen stealth aircraft. I never said that **air dominance no matters.** And No one’s can denying that.

But here’s what most people missed in what I said:

Modern air power isn’t about rushing into enemy territory for deep strikes like in the old days. That era is over or doing dogfights

Today, no air force can dominate the skies unless the enemy’s air defenses are first neutralized.

You don’t just fly in—you prepare, you suppress, and then you engage.

That’s the shift I was talking about. It’s not about less importance of airpower—it’s about how its role has evolved.

It now works in sync with standoff weapons, UAVs, EW systems, and missile defense networks. So yes, air dominance is still critical—but it’s no longer step one.

Air dominance today is the outcome of a layered strategy—not just about sending in fighter jets first.

Now, the first moves are made by standoff weapons, suicide drones, and precision strikes aimed at neutralizing enemy air defenses, air bases, and key military infrastructure.

Only after those threats are suppressed can the air force truly dominate the skies.

In the past, fighter jets were often the first strike option. But modern warfare has changed. Now, air power waits for the window— it's no longer the opener, it's the finisher.

That’s the shift I was pointing out and that's the reason - a country must have better defence systems with offesencive capabilities if you want to have upper hands and just airforce, can't win war for you... Now it has changed a lot

 

[Whirling_dervesh]

There’s a reason why countries are pouring billions into 5th-gen stealth aircraft. I never said that **air dominance no matters.** And No one’s can denying that.

But here’s what most people missed in what I said:

**Modern air power isn’t about rushing into enemy territory for deep strikes like in the old days.** That era is over or doing dogfights

Today, no air force can dominate the skies unless the enemy’s air defenses are first neutralized.

You don’t just fly in—you *prepare*, you *suppress*, and then you *engage*.

That’s the shift I was talking about. It’s not about less importance of airpower—it’s about how its role has evolved.

It now works in sync with standoff weapons, UAVs, EW systems, and missile defense networks. So yes, air dominance is still critical—but it’s no longer step one.

Air dominance today is the outcome of a layered strategy—not just about sending in fighter jets first.

Now, the first moves are made by standoff weapons, suicide drones, and precision strikes aimed at neutralizing enemy air defenses, air bases, and key military infrastructure.

Only after those threats are suppressed can the air force truly dominate the skies.

In the past, fighter jets were often the first strike option. But modern warfare has changed. Now, air power waits for the window— it's no longer the opener, it's the finisher.

That’s the shift I was pointing out and that's the reason - a country must have better defence systems if you want to have upper hands

You should have told this to IAF dont think they received the memo

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Tharoor is insulting Trump in USA while on political tour. Someone show this to Trump....

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

Another **** you to India by Trump. Now Indians will pay 3.5% tax on remittances.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Vapnope]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Tharoor is insulting Trump in USA while on political tour. Someone show this to Trump....

Says a guy whose PM is Modi. Haha

 

[Maarkhoor]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There is saying "Kuta ban muagar kutay ka bhai na ban".

And Indian doing both.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

There is saying "Kuta ban muagar kutay ka bhai na ban".

And Indian doing both.

Please don't be offensive to dogs by calling them indian.

 

[Olympus81]

Air dominance or Spectral dominance can be achieved through any means necessary. There is no written script and the strategy continues to evolve.

In the Indo Pak battle in 2025, India’s aim was to strike at alleged camps and deny or limit Pakistan’s response hence controlling the escalation ladder. The answer lies within those questions. Did India overwhelm Pakistan and translate that into forcing Pakistan’s hand tactically (from a war perspective) or strategically (from diplomacy perspective).

Tactically, the PAF knew the IAF were coming, it was a matter of when. When the IAF came, they lost the initiative due to losing several of their jets. More importantly, from a tactical perspective, the outcome was PAF was able to set a 200km buffer inside of Indian territory or Pakistan’s resolve not to retaliate. (Look at the bigger picture rather than seeing what toys fell)

Next day, the drones were deployed, in the hope that Pakistan’s AD will be overwhelmed. Did they or did they deter Pakistan’s strike next morning? (Again look at a bigger picture rather than how many installations could the drones destroy)

On May 10 early morning, Pakistan retaliated. Multiple installations and S400 (allegedly) hit. Again, look beyond how many installations and airfields were cratered, what did this move able to achieve? Look no further to Sofia Qureshi request of de escalation and a tacit signal to the Americans to get involved.

Post the Pakistan’s strikes, the Indian resorted to using Brahmos on Pakistan airfields. Again, look beyond what was able to be achieved? An adversary throwing in their top of the line weapon, signaling their escalation ladder has gone very high.

And then the US tweeting to get both sides to sit the **** down.

My advise to people on both sides of the isle, read between the lines and look at what war strategies aim to provide rather than focusing too much on actual damage.

 

[Bilal]

Says a guy whose PM is Modi. Haha

Do what the indians would do. Retweet and tag white house, trump, Marco Rubio and Trump associates and family.

 

[Yasser76]

Most of the Brahmos went through and hit the intended targets. The targets engaged were all high value assets. The claim that many were intercepted doesn’t seem to hold an unbiased scrutiny. If the high value assets were engaged then what were the intercepted missiles attacking?

It may also be kept in mind that this attack wasn’t an all out one but just signalling to indicate, what can be hit, if further escalation takes place. Thats why missiles were fired at targets from north to south at varying depths to attack one target at each place.

Whether, Mobile Command Centre at Nur Khan was still not commissioned or Bholari hangar had nothing inside or Runway attacks caused minor scratches is secondary.
The attacks were precise and indicated accurate intelligence.

"accurate intelligence" on targets I can find in 5 seconds on Google Maps?

Yes, of course, we are dealing with Indian forces I guess....

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

That's about trust - just like you trust blindly on Chinese systems.

But in those critical 4 days, Indian-developed drone and SAM systems proved everyone wrong. They did performed beyond the expections.

Most incoming rockets and missiles were intercepted—**not by imported tech**, but by our own **Akash missile systems** and sams and others with integrated radar networks. Even older platforms like the **L70** were actively used against drones, showing that when modern upgrades meet legacy strength, the result is powerful.

Indian radars have integrated with multiple sam systems, based on the threats they response. For example drones - they don't use costly missiles or systems alike s400 or akash.

**S-400** That was held in reserve—used sparingly. Because our homegrown systems handled the bulk of the threat.

This wasn’t just defense—it was performance under pressure. Integrations is not an problem, it's a something not depending on share their key technology. India has developed on these areas very strongly.

It’s clear that many from Pakistan are busy glorifying the PAF. But let’s be real—**in any modern India-Pakistan conflict, the role of the air force will be limited.

Even israeli fired missiles on iran from the safe distance - this is what going to be happened in next wars - old method of using gone a long back. Now a days, crossing the borders and planning to for deep strikes - probability of success has dramatically very down. It's will be kind of suicide missions.

The current structure of the PAF is decent when it comes to defending its own skies—with support systems geared toward protection. But when it comes to **offensive capability**, it doesn’t hold up. The support infrastructure they rely on isn’t designed to operate beyond borders. That’s a big limitation. They don't have solutions against the same systems if talk about india.

Future wars won’t be about dogfights.
They’ll be about **standoff weapons, layered defenses, and who can strike with precision while staying protected.**

The side that defends better, absorbs the least damage, and maintains operational capability will have upper hands

I’m a practical person—I don’t waste time hyping things that don’t matter.

Let’s be honest: **air dominance today is only possible when the enemy’s air defense is neutralized.**

No matter how powerful your air force is—even **China’s can’t control the skies** unless opposing SAM systems are dismantled.

Modern warfare has shifted. It’s not about swarms of jets or flashy dogfights anymore.

It’s about: Standoff missiles, UAVs, Suicide drones And integrated defense systems.

Air forces now have a limited tactical role, especially in contested environments. The real game is about striking without being seen, defending without gaps, and adapting fast.

Anyone still talking about old-school air dominance is stuck in the past.

What the hell are you on about mate?!!!
I agree AD matters, but not that extent, to which you think.

 

[CSAW]

There’s a reason why countries are pouring billions into 5th-gen stealth aircraft. I never said that **air dominance no matters.** And No one’s can denying that.

But here’s what most people missed in what I said:

Modern air power isn’t about rushing into enemy territory for deep strikes like in the old days. That era is over or doing dogfights

Today, no air force can dominate the skies unless the enemy’s air defenses are first neutralized.

You don’t just fly in—you prepare, you suppress, and then you engage.

That’s the shift I was talking about. It’s not about less importance of airpower—it’s about how its role has evolved.

It now works in sync with standoff weapons, UAVs, EW systems, and missile defense networks. So yes, air dominance is still critical—but it’s no longer step one.

Air dominance today is the outcome of a layered strategy—not just about sending in fighter jets first.

Now, the first moves are made by standoff weapons, suicide drones, and precision strikes aimed at neutralizing enemy air defenses, air bases, and key military infrastructure.

Only after those threats are suppressed can the air force truly dominate the skies.

In the past, fighter jets were often the first strike option. But modern warfare has changed. Now, air power waits for the window— it's no longer the opener, it's the finisher.

That’s the shift I was pointing out and that's the reason - a country must have better defence systems with offesencive capabilities if you want to have upper hands and just airforce, can't win war for you... Now it has changed a lot

That's a long route taken to say ...

" Guys we lost our capability of First See first shoot despite Rafales"




---------------------------------------

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

Like many others, you sound like a fanboy. And there is no way to convince one.

Not one element of proof of any attack on Indian high value targets claimed by you. DGISPR claimed that we attacked across the entire front and 26 airbases, but went silent when it came to proving any proof of these.

All about radiation leak etc was propagated about Kirana Hills too but it was all part of misinformation campaign. It was OK to believe the narrative being dished out by one’s own side when the conflict is On, but 2 weeks later any rational person would start sifting trough chaff and grains and see the reality.

There is no element of doubt now that Air Defence this side did a stellar job and didn’t let anyone through to attack any high value target. How do we know? If there was even a partial success in any of these attacks from Pakaistn side then they would have come out with battle damage assessment, the way it was brought out for the Paksiatni side.

Forget about them, even the private agencies have got hold of these and are available all over as a proof.

So chest thumping is fine for Air to Air part, where IAF suffered losses.

But your side AD was exposed and found wanting and couldn’t protect high value assets even within few miles from the National Capital.

absolute non-sense and without any substance, just emotions, buffoonery and wishful thinking.