Pakistan-India Conflict 2025: News Updates and Discussion

[Gripen9]

Repaired by who ? Pakistan or it was sent back to Saab ?

PAF.

We have the expertise. We salvaged one of the damaged Saab post Kamra terrorist attack. Even converted one of the transport SAAB 200 into AEW platform using the radar from the written off platform.

 

[Gripen9]

Sure - but then how many of their MKis can actually launch those and the success of those sorties?

Keep in mind - many of hits that occurred were not launched from well beyond the range but rather those that occurred with a shorter reaction time.

The Brahmos depots/TEL as Beas and Sisra need to be preemptively targeted.

 

[Gripen9]

The servicability os woeful, additionally most of the avionics are outdated so unsure hopw guidence would work. Sending Jaguars in any capacity would be suicide and unsure if that underpowered jet can carry Brahmos

You also have to remember many of these jets will also be deployed on air defence.

Jaguars are equipped with Rampage and most probably AirLORAs

 

[Oscar]

The Brahmos depots/TEL as Beas and Sisra need to be preemptively targeted.

You could but how do you ensure they are actually there? They could use decoys - jam your sat links - know your sat paths etc?

What bothers me is a situation not like the ladder but this suddenly on all fronts.





And this is what you see - when what is actually happening is:

 

[White Privilege]

You could but how do you ensure they are actually there? They could use decoys - jam your sat links - know your sat paths etc?

What bothers me is a situation not like the ladder but this suddenly on all fronts.

View attachment 199904

View attachment 199905

And this is what you see - when what is actually happening is:

View attachment 199906
View attachment 199907

No we cannot ensure that, hence this a line we cannot allow Indians to cross again and re-establish deterrence, otherwise a 100+ Brahmos volley will obliterate every high value asset we have spent billions on. This deterrence will not be established by attacking/threatening to attack Indian military targets. They are far too many and too bunkered up. Trying to attack their High value assets at that moment, will also involve very high risk, likely far more riskier than the S-400 mission. We need to deliver real pain to their economy to re-establish our deterrence. Openly threaten to, and if needed, attack their economic and business centres. Go by the enemy mentality, banya cannot tolerate financial ruin. Destroy their economic centres, preferably skyscrapers housing tens on different businesses , to shut down economic activity. Also their expensive manufacturing plants producing high end expensive products need to be targetted. That's it, we cannot take such an attack lying down. Such an attack, even if partially successful, will set back out military readiness by years, we will need to drive their economy into a big shock. Deliver 100x damage in return. We always in our stupidity tie our own hands by saying shit like, minimising civilian casualties and only hitting military targets. In a war, every action is justified, nothing is off the table. We have to shut down this stupidity of ours first.

 

[Sam6536]

No we cannot ensure that, hence this a line we cannot allow Indians to cross again and re-establish deterrence, otherwise a 100+ Brahmos volley will obliterate every high value asset we have spent billions on. This deterrence will not be established by attacking/threatening to attack Indian military targets. They are far too many and too bunkered up. Trying to attack their High value assets at that moment, will also involve very high risk, likely far more riskier than the S-400 mission. We need to deliver real pain to their economy to re-establish our deterrence. Openly threaten to, and if needed, attack their economic and business centres. Go by the enemy mentality, banya cannot tolerate financial ruin. Destroy their economic centres, preferably skyscrapers housing tens on different businesses , to shut down economic activity. Also their expensive manufacturing plants producing high end expensive products need to be targetted. That's it, we cannot take such an attack lying down. Such an attack, even if partially successful, will set back out military readiness by years, we will need to drive their economy into a big shock. Deliver 100x damage in return. We always in our stupidity tie our own hands by saying shit like, minimising civilian casualties and only hitting military targets. In a war, every action is justified, nothing is off the table. We have to shut down this stupidity of ours first.

And could you handle the repercussions? Who will lead and stop the escalation? Do you think you can stop the escalation after the bombing?

Look at Russo-Ukrainian war for example, they have slogging it off for 4yrs and still trying to one up each other by targeting the economic centres + military centres + power lines. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, underwater drones, cutting power lines, gas lines, internet lines, partisan forces and whatever else modern combat has to offer, you'd find that both the nations have already done it. Modern warfare won't work like the American shock and awe tactics in Iran, power lines can be easily repaired nowadays same with most of the crucial infrastructure.

There is a reason both of our nations haven't slogged it off in a larger sustained war. Who do you think gains in a larger protracted war? Or has the larger manufacturing capacity? And who do you think has to lose more in a larger war with the larger economy?

Or do you reckon Chinese Will swoop in and pass a Lend Lease act akin to the USA?

 

[Corax]

And could you handle the repercussions? Who will lead and stop the escalation? Do you think you can stop the escalation after the bombing?

Look at Russo-Ukrainian war for example, they have slogging it off for 4yrs and still trying to one up each other by targeting the economic centres + military centres + power lines. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, underwater drones, cutting power lines, gas lines, internet lines, partisan forces and whatever else modern combat has to offer, you'd find that both the nations have already done it. Modern warfare won't work like the American shock and awe tactics in Iran, power lines can be easily repaired nowadays same with most of the crucial infrastructure.

There is a reason both of our nations haven't slogged it off in a larger sustained war. Who do you think gains in a larger protracted war? Or has the larger manufacturing capacity? And who do you think has to lose more in a larger war with the larger economy?

Or do you reckon Chinese Will swoop in and pass a Lend Lease act akin to the USA?

Your hubris is similar to the Russians before they invaded Ukraine. It's actually you indians who now advocate "non contact" conflict, there's a limit to your escalation ladder, Pakistan just needs to test that.

 

[White Privilege]

And could you handle the repercussions? Who will lead and stop the escalation? Do you think you can stop the escalation after the bombing?

Look at Russo-Ukrainian war for example, they have slogging it off for 4yrs and still trying to one up each other by targeting the economic centres + military centres + power lines. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, underwater drones, cutting power lines, gas lines, internet lines, partisan forces and whatever else modern combat has to offer, you'd find that both the nations have already done it. Modern warfare won't work like the American shock and awe tactics in Iran, power lines can be easily repaired nowadays same with most of the crucial infrastructure.

There is a reason both of our nations haven't slogged it off in a larger sustained war. Who do you think gains in a larger protracted war? Or has the larger manufacturing capacity? And who do you think has to lose more in a larger war with the larger economy?

Or do you reckon Chinese Will swoop in and pass a Lend Lease act akin to the USA?

I understand the Indian thinking that is why I am proposing exactly that. You guys think u have the larger economy so you can brace a smaller shock of a war, so the equation is simply this. For us, to make Indians rethink whether the political gains are worth the damage Pakistan can deal... When we inflict 100x damage surely it will inspire that rethinking but it could be smaller than 100x too. Just have to find the breaking point. Sure u guys can also return fire, but what good would be your decision to go to war entirely, if it sets u back 20 years?? That is the way we prevent a war between us.....You guys will be pretty cozy if we do a tit for tat proportional response, which u can absorb , but only a big shock will make u rethink....Hit military targets only if it's of very very high value and worth the risk, like their decision makers of we manage to catch them, to enforce actual military paralysis and fear...

 

[I*R*A]

Your hubris is similar to the Russians before they invaded Ukraine. It's actually you indians who now advocate "non contact" conflict, there's a limit to your escalation ladder, Pakistan just needs to test that.

It is a very small ladder now and then conflict ends. Every step up on the ladder is more costly for them. Had they been conventionally capable of severe sudden punitive action and inflicting humiliation and sending shockwaves to render Pakistan incapable of responding and running for peace, they would have unilaterally commanded the escalation ladder. However, the situation seems like that Pakistan somehow retains the control of escalation, the more they go "non contact" the more they lose conventional numerical edge. Smart and technologically more equipped smaller force can win the battle.

india should consider downsizing its military personnel. Kya faida itni bari fauj palnay ka

 

[Sam6536]

Your hubris is similar to the Russians before they invaded Ukraine. It's actually you indians who now advocate "non contact" conflict, there's a limit to your escalation ladder, Pakistan just needs to test that.

Russia invaded Ukraine though. India doesn't have any intention to invade and occupy any part of Pakistan anytime soon apart from all the nationalist jingoism online. There is no incentive to do it. And yes there is a limit to everything, we just crossed the ALCMs mark. I only pointed out what could come next as a response.

The next conflict I believe will still be a short but intensive one. Protracted war is less likely.

 

[Sam6536]

It is a very small ladder now and then conflict ends. Every step up on the ladder is more costly for them. Had they been conventionally capable of severe sudden punitive action and inflicting humiliation and sending shockwaves to render Pakistan incapable of responding and running for peace, they would have unilaterally commanded the escalation ladder. However, the situation seems like that Pakistan somehow retains the control of escalation, the more they go "non contact" the more they lose conventional numerical edge. Smart and technologically more equipped smaller force can win the battle.

india should consider downsizing its military personnel. Kya faida itni bari fauj palnay ka

Matter of perspective. I will obviously point out my strengths you'd yours.

Numerical strength is a quality in itself. But lately India has been focusing on IBGs and specialised battalions.

 

[hasssanali8998]

India doesn't have any intention to invade and occupy Pakistan

 

[Corax]

Russia invaded Ukraine though. India doesn't have any intention to invade and occupy any part of Pakistan anytime soon apart from all the nationalist jingoism online. There is no incentive to do it. And yes there is a limit to everything, we just crossed the ALCMs mark. I only pointed out what could come next as a response.

The next conflict I believe will still be a short but intensive one. Protracted war is less likely.

What could come next is very limited, there isn't that much of a gap now. The failure of the Russians is not because they invaded, but because they underestimated their opponent and overestimated themselves, sound familiar ? they still wouldn't have achieved what they wanted if they hadn't invaded. And you seem to be back peddling on the whole "we're a larger economy than you" argument, which would place you in a better position for a longer war, wouldn't it? But then again, if Pakistan is the pathetic weaker country and you're the "4 trillion supa power", we don't have much to lose, while you have everything to lose, it actually works in Pakistan's favour to push for a protracted conflict, which you'll do everything to avoid.

 

[I*R*A]

Matter of perspective. I will obviously point out my strengths you'd yours.

Numerical strength is a quality in itself. But lately India has been focusing on IBGs and specialised battalions.

May 2026 conflict has many lessons for both sides to learn, but you have every right to deny and keep pleasing your domestic audience, you can sell the barahmos lollipop for election campaigns now, before it was some other jet and what not.

For inflicting damage to civilian infrastructure, if Cyber warfare claims of Pakistan are true, then the need to bomb those is not really necessary.

 

[Corax]

Matter of perspective. I will obviously point out my strengths you'd yours.

Numerical strength is a quality in itself. But lately India has been focusing on IBGs and specialised battalions.

So india has no intention to invade, but is focused on the very things that imply the doctrine of cold start, to invade Pakistan?