India Lucky Not To Lose More Than Four Rafales

[Olympus81]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Post 6/7 May, PAF took down 4-6 IAF jets and struck S400 cheeseboards the Indians were suing for peace as evidenced by their spokesperson.

The absence of Pakistan’s response they will not respond, is what allowed Indians to regroup and start shifting their strategy towards deploying loitering munitions, drones and eventually Brahmos at Pakistan’s AFB.

In my opinion, BuM should have started the next morning (7/8 May) with F1, F2 lighting up Indian airbases. The LoC I believe was being lit up already.

It’s highly probably the politicians (PMLN and the cabal) were chickening out due to Sharif’s interests and foreign pressure. That murkied the decision making.

Lesson learned, premptive strikes by Pakistan are on the table. F1, F2, Baburs should light up Central India, Gujrat, UP belt to keep the RSS folks honest. And lastly, if given the chance PAF should strike IAF with no strings attached.

 

[user]

Thank you Sir for highlighting this. Now we will work on it and make sure no such hypothetical scenario could be conceived the next time.

Btw this was a scene out of the Top gun: Maverick, where they later send strike package; however, drones replaced Tom Cruise and his team so as to avoid being shot down over Pakistan airspace.

 

[harpy1]

There is not going to be next time guys
Having seen the devastating effects of your biggest air bases struck without a single plane crossing th international border with pin point accuracy thanks to Navic satalites the cost of war and escalation to nuclear threshold is too risky

I suspect return to proxy activity and denile

No Sindoor two despite bravado India lost planes too so their idea of conventional superamcy is proven wrong too

In a skirmish or short war Pakistan will give as good as it's gets
Risk both sides

 

[Gripen9]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Post 6/7 May, PAF took down 4-6 IAF jets and struck S400 cheeseboards the Indians were suing for peace as evidenced by their spokesperson.

The absence of Pakistan’s response they will not respond, is what allowed Indians to regroup and start shifting their strategy towards deploying loitering munitions, drones and eventually Brahmos at Pakistan’s AFB.

In my opinion, BuM should have started the next morning (7/8 May) with F1, F2 lighting up Indian airbases. The LoC I believe was being lit up already.

It’s highly probably the politicians (PMLN and the cabal) were chickening out due to Sharif’s interests and foreign pressure. That murkied the decision making.

Lesson learned, premptive strikes by Pakistan are on the table. F1, F2, Baburs should light up Central India, Gujrat, UP belt to keep the RSS folks honest. And lastly, if given the chance PAF should strike IAF with no strings attached.

Do PMLN have any say in Pak Affairs?

 

[ThoroughPro]

Reality is no one knows about the claims of six shot down or pak.sssets lost in raids accross your entire air bases accross the entire line of control borders even your biggest cities...it's all propaganda X

Pakistan we defeated India shot down six jets in one hour on 7th

India we bombed their bases destroyed infrastructure and damaged assets I hangors.

Pakistan we could have destroyed lots more planes showed restraint

India we had 14 warships off Karachi cosst ready to launch massive cruise missle raid

Will never know

Pakistanis know the reality so do Indians but you guys either just can't believe it or don't want to believe it.

And nothing of the crap you typed, ever happened.

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

I am not under any illusions, on the contrary I am a very realistic and practical person. The enemy/war came knocking at our door, what our Airforce did on the night of 6/7 was not an aggression rather a fully justified act of self defense.

Shooting down only six jets was apparently not a big cost to the enemy, that is why they comeback again on 9th / 10th to strike our bases and damage an air asset, we were lucky or it could have been an even greater tragedy and loss to our assets only because we did not exact a heavy enough cost on the enemy.

Had we shot down 25/30 of their jets including 10/12 Rafales, their appetite for counter attacks would have dissipated faster than spark in the rain. By not shooting down more planes, we gave them the initiative, and that resulted in us incurring more costs by spending offensive and defensive ammunition, losing precious lives, and sustaining some damage to our bases.

I have a very simple logic, if someone slaps me, I am not going to respond by counter slap and then wait for the reaction, I am going to break their arm so there is no response.

I’m 41 years old, an FCCA and FRM, with a Master’s degree from UCL—earned with distinction in both qualifications (6 top quartiles in FRM and 77% Distinction in Masters). Over the past five years, I’ve witnessed three cancer patients struggle through treatment. One was diagnosed with Stage IV; his six-week dosage currently costs PKR 400,000—discounted to PKR 200,000. These treatments are prescribed for life.


I’m not here to engage in endless debate, nor do I intend to belittle you.


I still remember 1998, when within a single week, the price of petrol surged from PKR 16 to PKR 40 per litre. Ordinary citizens were shell-shocked by the scale of the increase.


Let’s not live under any illusion: for smaller countries, the outcome of war is rarely decided on the battlefield. We are teetering on the edge of economic collapse. I know you may still refuse to believe it.


War is always the last resort—when no other options remain

 

[TAC]

There is not going to be next time guys
Having seen the devastating effects of your biggest air bases struck without a single plane crossing th international border with pin point accuracy thanks to Navic satalites the cost of war and escalation to nuclear threshold is too risky

I suspect return to proxy activity and denile

No Sindoor two despite bravado India lost planes too so their idea of conventional superamcy is proven wrong too

In a skirmish or short war Pakistan will give as good as it's gets
Risk both sides

You continue to prove yourself to be a pathetic coper by desperately trying to push the narrative that it was somehow a draw. 6-0 is not a draw pal, it’s epic humiliation. Having failed so badly in the air despite superior numbers, India then resorted to stand off missiles and drones to try to salvage some semblance of dignity. Impact on Pakistan side was damage to one asset & more importantly loss of precious lives. After Pakistan responded,India admitted to losses to its bases in both material & manpower, but unlike Pakistan gave no specifics.
That is not a draw, no matter how much u want it to be.

 

[Master Chief]

I’m 41 years old, an FCCA and FRM, with a Master’s degree from UCL—earned with distinction in both qualifications (6 top quartiles in FRM and 77% Distinction in Masters). Over the past five years, I’ve witnessed three cancer patients struggle through treatment. One was diagnosed with Stage IV; his six-week dosage currently costs PKR 400,000—discounted to PKR 200,000. These treatments are prescribed for life.


I’m not here to engage in endless debate, nor do I intend to belittle you.


I still remember 1998, when within a single week, the price of petrol surged from PKR 16 to PKR 40 per litre. Ordinary citizens were shell-shocked by the scale of the increase.


Let’s not live under any illusion: for smaller countries, the outcome of war is rarely decided on the battlefield. We are teetering on the edge of economic collapse. I know you may still refuse to believe it.


War is always the last resort—when no other options remain

Very well reasoned points Sir.

Full scale war would of course be catastrophic.

However, decimating the IAF is not what India would have expected and did not break any rules of engagement, especially since India fired first.

India had not thought through its plan from the moment of its inception.

Arguably the single most stupid statement to emerge from their leadership on Day 1 was words to the effect of: "we are deliberately targeting your innocent civilians, and avoiding your military".

In my opinion, and probably anyone who has now had the opportunity to reflect on that, this one statement was a green light for our air force to wreak havoc upon them.

India had set itself up in a trap and yet, we FAILED to take advantage. Certainly, our warriors fought admirably and 6 jets downed is no small feat. Moreover, we know that Vikrant had to turn tail and hide in its port. We know that the Army took over several enemy LOC positions and destroyed many barracks and posts.

Yet, remarkably, we had been green lighted by our enemy, who admitted the targetingand murder of our civilians by their military assets via a central chain of national command - let me reiterate the fact that they OPENLY ADMITTED THIS ON DAY 1.

I know we did remarkably well. However, it should have been harder than that and knocking out their air force was the best way to achieve an unassailable advantage.

The same sequence of events would have unfolded thereafter and the conflict would have died down when India realised they could not achieve conventional "victory" of any sort, but the cost would have been substantially more.

Let me finish with a contemporary example: Russia has brushed off COUNTLESS losses, not to mention embargoes and sanctions up to their necks and still continues to grind on into Ukraine. If India wanted to, they could likewise make war for a long time and absorb significant pressures. If an opportunity to cripple their numerically superior war machine presented itself on 10th May, woe on us for failing to capitalise.

 

[Areesh]

SL Osama is credited with the Rafale Kill over Bhatinda.

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

MashaAllah

First pilot ever to shoot down a Rafale in combat. A national hero for Pakistan indeed

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

Very well reasoned points Sir.

Full scale war would of course be catastrophic.

However, decimating the IAF is not what India would have expected and did not break any rules of engagement, especially since India fired first.

India had not thought through its plan from the moment of its inception.

Arguably the single most stupid statement to emerge from their leadership on Day 1 was words to the effect of: "we are deliberately targeting your innocent civilians, and avoiding your military".

In my opinion, and probably anyone who has now had the opportunity to reflect on that, this one statement was a green light for our air force to wreak havoc upon them.

India had set itself up in a trap and yet, we FAILED to take advantage. Certainly, our warriors fought admirably and 6 jets downed is no small feat. Moreover, we know that Vikrant had to turn tail and hide in its port. We know that the Army took over several enemy LOC positions and destroyed many barracks and posts.

Yet, remarkably, we had been green lighted by our enemy, who admitted the targetingand murder of our civilians by their military assets via a central chain of national command - let me reiterate the fact that they OPENLY ADMITTED THIS ON DAY 1.

I know we did remarkably well. However, it should have been harder than that and knocking out their air force was the best way to achieve an unassailable advantage.

The same sequence of events would have unfolded thereafter and the conflict would have died down when India realised they could not achieve conventional "victory" of any sort, but the cost would have been substantially more.

Let me finish with a contemporary example: Russia has brushed off COUNTLESS losses, not to mention embargoes and sanctions up to their necks and still continues to grind on into Ukraine. If India wanted to, they could likewise make war for a long time and absorb significant pressures. If an opportunity to cripple their numerically superior war machine presented itself on 10th May, woe on us for failing to capitalise.

100% true and I agree with that, we did show complacency..

but thats not because we cannot fight or we did not want to fight..

financial realities are never written off, as per my understanding.
Although, militarily speaking, others could be 100% right as well!

i m not a military strategist or war historian or war specialist..

I m just trying to portray what war would look like to an ordinary citizen, who thinks, war is like playing a video game on a console!


In 2001, you cannot imagine the pressure we were in when we faced a real war like scenario. In those days, no body wanted to Pak. I was all for war then, as I was a teenager then.

back in those days, great AC Mushaf Mir (late), use to tell us not to worry and I used to sleep tight, as he was a fine gentleman!

May Allah bless his soul

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

.... before you lose you shite, no, Babur can be used as conventional weapons. If enemy ground forces, their army, is firing their cruise missiles at you, you reply in kind, not by firing some battlefield rockets like we did with Fatah. ...

India, after the conflict said their Brahmos are conventional weapons and not part of their nuclear arsenal.

Pakistan's Babur and Ra'ad have always been declared as part of its nuclear weapons arsenal.

So, after India used Brahmos, Pakistan started preparing to use everything in its arsenal it saw fit (this would've included Babur and Ra'ad). This is what the US intelligence also picked up and told India that Pakistan is about to go nuclear. That's when India asked for ceasefire. Rest is history

Now, why is it important for you that strategic weapon, Babur should have been used against Indian when guided rocket Fatah could do the same job considering Indian air defences were pretty much suppressed? End of the day, Pakistan hit 34 targets on 10 May. Did Fatah not do a good job or something?

 

[SoulSpokesman]

@Pakistan Space Agency

PSA sb,

End of the day, Pakistan hit 34 targets on 10 May.

And even your tallel than mountain fliend couldnt provide satellite images to verify the damages.

Regards

 

[SD 10]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Post 6/7 May, PAF took down 4-6 IAF jets and struck S400 cheeseboards the Indians were suing for peace as evidenced by their spokesperson.

The absence of Pakistan’s response they will not respond, is what allowed Indians to regroup and start shifting their strategy towards deploying loitering munitions, drones and eventually Brahmos at Pakistan’s AFB.

In my opinion, BuM should have started the next morning (7/8 May) with F1, F2 lighting up Indian airbases. The LoC I believe was being lit up already.

It’s highly probably the politicians (PMLN and the cabal) were chickening out due to Sharif’s interests and foreign pressure. That murkied the decision making.

Lesson learned, premptive strikes by Pakistan are on the table. F1, F2, Baburs should light up Central India, Gujrat, UP belt to keep the RSS folks honest. And lastly, if given the chance PAF should strike IAF with no strings attached.

politicians dont have any say reality is we were happy in defense only until they attacked the airbases!

 

[Olympus81]

politicians dont have any say reality is we were happy in defense only until they attacked the airbases!

Contrary to what we think, the politicians created doubt, confusion in the decision making process. Maybe that delayed BuM or the logistics necessitated that it start 10-May.

Rana Sanaullah comments were quite clear post May 6/7. He said retaliation has been complete, and there is no need for further escalation. That was PMLN line of thought.

 

[Olympus81]

Discussing on a tactical level is well and good but Pakistan on a strategic level is still at a loss.

There is a simple questions to ask.

Has Pakistan created a new normal where it’s allowed to perform preemptive strikes at India?

The answer is a resounding no. And that translates into Pakistan being handicapped on a tactical level. How many times will we get lucky when the adversary has an initiative and we’re on the back foot hoping to pounce back.

I would be having sleepless nights if I was part of Pakistan’s security establishment.