Pakistan-Af: Operation Khyber Storm

Status
Not open for further replies.
Russia has a GDP of $2 trillion, their military spending is $100 billion/year. They produce as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They’re also self-sufficient in producing advanced weapons. Still, they’ve been fighting for 3 years with up to 250,000 dead and over a million injured.

Pakistan has neither the money, nor weapons production, nor the stomach for hundreds of thousands of casualties.

Again the conflation with Russia and Ukraine is uncalled for... it merely a study in tactics and that is it...
Russia is a juggernaut that sustains itself. Neither Ukraine is Afghanistan nor Pakistan Russia.
Second, Russians practically have a unidirectional conflict... otherwise... their periphery is fairly secure.
Pakistan faces threat on both frontiers with a narrow trunk. The scenario at play is fundamentally different. Pakistan neither wants nor can afford a hostile western frontier.
Now translate that to Afghans...
 
Again the conflation with Russia and Ukraine is uncalled for... it merely a study in tactics and that is it...
Russia is a juggernaut that sustains itself. Neither Ukraine is Afghanistan nor Pakistan Russia.
Second, Russians practically have a unidirectional conflict... otherwise... their periphery is fairly secure.
Pakistan faces threat on both frontiers with a narrow trunk. The scenario at play is fundamentally different. Pakistan neither wants nor can afford a hostile western frontier.
Now translate that to Afghans...
leave these niggas , they are also comparing pakistan and israel .
 
Sounds like the second ceasefire isn’t holding.

It’s a bad idea to agree to ceasefire. It’s best to neutralize the Taliban after such a war no side will trust each other.

Eliminate or severely weaken their government/army, create buffer zone, they can sort out their own affairs post-Taliban.
You're suggesting blitzkrieg. Let's be patient and wait for alternatives in Afghanistan to come forward first.

Pakistan only needs to strike Afghanistan when Afghans attempt to breach Pakistani border.

This is also good psychological warfare against India. I am sure Indians are feeling helpless and pathetic while Pakistan goes about pounding the living daylights out of their wannabe ally.
 
Taliban displays the pants of a captured Pakistani soldier:


olke86vt9bvf1.jpeg
Of course the Taliban love seeing naked men
 
Russia has a GDP of $2 trillion, their military spending is $100 billion/year. They produce as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They’re also self-sufficient in producing advanced weapons. Still, they’ve been fighting for 3 years with up to 250,000 dead and over a million injured.

Pakistan has neither the money, nor weapons production, nor the stomach for hundreds of thousands of casualties.
Why does economy have to figure in every time when discussing conflicts. We have learned this Banya talk from our neighbors next door,
If money is the only criteria to win wars then:
1. A bankrupt isolated famine and pandemic stricken Russia, with an armed forces depleted by massive casualties in Workd War 1 and torn apart by a simultaneous revolution and civil war while fighting Ukraine, Poland, Finland, Japan supported by UK and France should have LOST the war it fought between 1918-1923. Russia WON the war despite losing 13 million troops and civilians to war, bombing, chemical WMD attacks, cold, starvation and a simultaneous pandemic that wiped out 6 million working age adults l
2 . A bankrupt famine stricken starving and isolated North Korea fought a multinational a UN backed force for three years forcing a stalemate lasting 75 years and survived to become a nuclear and missile power.
3. Vietnam, a rice water eating nation, bankrupt and on the verge of starvation and split in two rival regions , defeated in sequence French-Australian and US occupation forces in a war lasting 10 years.

4. In 1962, China was not a member of the United Nations and was hemmed in by the Soviet Union on land in the west and by the US Pacific fleet in the east. China was bankrupt and on the verge of mass starvation, and under strict arms embargo . Yet China beat the Sandhurst Officer led UK equipped professional Indian Army to pulp and captured 38,000 sq. km that it still holds,

Pakistan is fighting a defensive war. This is not a war of choice. It has been imposed on us. The war is not about territory or even terrorism. It is about an ideology that is to be imposed upon our people--an ideology that will reduce us into a sub-national protectorate of a so-called emirate where our children will be educated with no skills of value in this era and our women will be kept illiterate and denied medical care since there won't be any female doctors.
The other alternative is occupation and colonization by the new friends of the Taliban, their Hindutva masters who want "living space " for their 1.4 billion population.

So for this grim future should we look at ourselves as Banyas counting coins or should we stand up and fight aggression like the Russians , Vietnamese and Chinese?
 
Again you're taking it the wrong way... it is not about intent but strategy to pacify an enemy with propensity to go unconventional.
I think the best one can say about the outcome of the Russian strategy in Ukraine is that it has achieved a very expensive stalemate after grabbing some territory. Many would consider it a strategic defeat. In general, Russia is a weaker power today than it was four years ago. If any lessons are to be learnt from the Russian strategy in Ukraine, they should be about what not to do to avoid a similar or worse fate.
 
I think the best one can say about the outcome of the Russian strategy in Ukraine is that it has achieved a very expensive stalemate after grabbing some territory. Many would consider it a strategic defeat. In general, Russia is a weaker power today than it was four years ago. If any lessons are to be learnt from the Russian strategy in Ukraine, they should be about what not to do to avoid a similar or worse fate.

Again, wrong...

Ukraine on its own is nothing... the only fuel they have are men they can man with western equipment and sent to their deaths...

Whatever Russia takes is Russian... and as soon as Ukrainian capacity to either provide the meat or western largesse and support stops... the lines will collapse... it is inevitable.

Again this thread is not about finding your answers on Russian conflict but a narrow set of options that could be used to keep the lines and conflict purposefully conventional where the bellicose belligerents can find ultimate peace.
 
No, instead that violence was used to bring them to negotiate. Pakistan wishes to check if the dosage was enough or if more needs to be prescribed. Negotiations after this might not be held as amicably.
So, violence IS needed, and Pakistan had no reason to accept other than good will, which is what I first suggested.

I'm confused, what are you disagree with me on?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Pakistan Defence Latest

Back
Top