India Vs Pakistan Military - In Numbers

[Daredevil]

This article contains a lot of numerical data on armed forces, navy, air force, missiles, nukes etc in addition to doctrines and technology. Comes in handy when comparing our two armed forces. Read it fully. If there are any errors (most likely), just make a point for future reference.


[PDF]http://www.nps.edu/Academics/Centers/CCC/PASCC/Publications/2012/2012_002_Ahmed.pdf[/PDF]

 

[agentperry]

they have defense first policy and more no fighters to satisfy it.
but we have no first use policy and have more ground attack planes. instead we should have more fighters in compliant with our policy

 

[farhan_9909]

Pakistan military is just a defensive force

 

[Oracle]

Pakistan military is just a defensive force

Yeah. We know that. We have seen it in 47, 65, 71 & 99.

 

[farhan_9909]

Yeah. We know that. We have seen it in 47, 65, 71 & 99.

only in 99.yes

bt now things are changed

 

[Oracle]

only in 99.yes

bt now things are changed

Now I know you were born pre 99' and your history is good.

 

[Daredevil]

only in 99.yes

bt now things are changed

In 1947, 65 and 99 Pakistan was the agressor. You should read about these from neutral observers not the Pakistani textbooks.

 

[bose]

One have to remember that Inida have to account for China too, so it is foolish not to take into the account of Chineese buildups in the North East... India lacks considerable in fire power and logistics for a two pronged war. Inida need to do a lot of catch up in next decade.

India have to make 4% of GDP available for military buildup in next 10 to 15 years in a consistent manner.

 

[farhan_9909]

Now I know you were born pre 99' and your history is good.

both sides responsible

 

[bose]

only in 99.yes

bt now things are changed

I would say 65 was the turning point in the fragile Indo - Pak relation. I was told that before 65 there was no Visa requirement for travel to each other country, I am very much sure if there were no 65 there neither be 71 too. Anyway all is history now. One should learn from it.

 

[Apollyon]

both sides responsible

another delusional Paki ...

 

[Oracle]

both sides responsible

 

[farhan_9909]

In 1947, 65 and 99 Pakistan was the agressor. You should read about these from neutral observers not the Pakistani textbooks.

well as i said both sides were responsible

and the literacy rate was much compare to now(63% if i am nt wrong)

so it was easy to fool the illetrate people by the ruler.


as i said wont happen again
and under IMRAN KHAN impossible

 

[farhan_9909]

In 1947, 65 and 99 Pakistan was the agressor. You should read about these from neutral observers not the Pakistani textbooks.

well as i said both sides were responsible

and the literacy rate was much low compare to now(63% if i am nt wrong)

so it was easy to fool the illetrate people by the ruler.


as i said wont happen again
and under IMRAN KHAN impossible

 

[agentperry]

cut the crap both side. comparing forces they have arranged themselves in line with their doctrine and we dont have doctrine. we are no first use people with no protective cover but yes to have second strike we have more ground fighter. they have more apc to and we have less. in case of army they have all the things set to give us a tough fight, with defensive role i find them totally prepared. we dont have shield and we talk about second strike. irony