Pakistan Army Aviation Possible acquisitions

[Thorough Pro]

Alan Warnes

Whom ?

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

He also disclosed something big cooking on the eastern front...
...it's a very vague statement and could mean a number of things...

However if it specifically means war with India...in that case I'm on the fence...

1) A part of me thinks that a war scenario against India...with China in the mix(as is currently)...would settle once and for all the Kashmir issue. India would struggle to fight on two fronts with both China/Pak and around LAC/LoC a combined attack of Pak/China would be able to seize enough territory to cut off key roads(effectively cutting off supply routes to Indian forces deployed in difficult terrain).
- US would be reluctant to get involved militarily...the economic toll of the two wars(Iraq and Afghanistan) then the 2008 economic meltdown...and now the COVID19 pandemic causing economic slowdown...
...US is looking for a way out of Afghanistan...not to get bogged down in a messy war with another country that is considered a superpower second only to the US. So besides warnings and diplomatic actions or sanctions in the worst case scenario...I don't think US would get involved militarily. By extension western European countries, Australia, and other US allies in the region like Japan, SK, Phillipines, etc. wouldn't get involved militarily either.

in conclusion of the above...this seems like the best time(geostrategically) to forcibly settle Kashmir...which is the only way to settle it bcuz India doesn't want to settle it peacefully.

2) Another part of me doesn't want war...thinking of the economic cost. Although geostrategic variables have fallen into place where China has been dragged into the conflict against India(which favors Pak)...and Indian allies wouldn't risk jumping into the mess militarily...
...economically Pak would not be able to support this costly war. At the end of all the destruction and economic slowdown that would follow...coupled with the cost of the war and the existing loans(potentially more taken to support the cost of war)...might just make Pak go bankrupt.

@Khafee @Counter-Errorist @HRK thoughts?

@Khafee plz move it to some relevant section if it derails this thread too much. It's just that Arkangel's title is listed as "professional"(on another forum)...and his veiled mentions of the threat at the eastern border is worth discussing.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt war boost the economy? All the mass industrialization that would kick in with alot of open jobs.

Refer to america during WW2.

 

[Signalian]

How many Z 10 ME could be inducted. In my opinion more than 60 should come

 

[Cookie Monster]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt war boost the economy? All the mass industrialization that would kick in with alot of open jobs.

Refer to america during WW2.

It can boost the economy when u r exclusively selling. With the war taking place at its biggest scale(WW2) US was not being bombed to the stone age...unlike Germany, Britain, France, Poland, Russia...all US industry was safe...all its resources(raw materials to make everything from bullets to bandages) were not falling into the enemy's hands. Moreover there was demand for US to sell all the weaponry imaginable to its allies...which it did in copious amounts.

If what u say is true...then Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Italy, and all the European powers involved in the war would've come out economically stronger...right?
But they didn't...their economies were in tatters and US had to rebuild Europe(Marshall Plan).

Just like that...in case of an India/Pak war...no matter who wins...both will suffer heavy damage to their industry and infrastructure. All the incoming foreign investment will stop bcuz no person or company in their right mind will invest in an active war zone(especially considering that the two are nuclear powers and there could be mushroom clouds over their territories)...and by the end of it...with little infrastructure and industry to speak of...economic recovery(if we can call it that) will be painfully slow for a long long time.

Also consider the much talked about "strategic depth"...Pakistan is a relatively narrow country...pretty much all of Pak's industry and major cities are within India's reach(jets and missiles...if not the advancing army)...
...over an extended full blown war...expect those to be destroyed. Destroying an enemy's industrial capacity to hamper their war efforts(like churning out more jets, tanks, etc.) is an expected response. India having more depth will be able to retain some of its industry and infrastructure.

There's absolutely no way Pakistan doesn't suffer huge economic loss...even if a victory is achieved militarily with gains in territory(like J&K).

 

[War Historian]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt war boost the economy? All the mass industrialization that would kick in with alot of open jobs.

Refer to america during WW2.

Sir off the topic,
You are right Sir, war has its own positive effects along with the negative ones. Today the countries are ruling the world are all those who fight in second world war, winners and losers. But still they manage to dictate the world. If Pakistan want its share in world power hub, then they must break their shackle of defensive offence. And took the war to indian soils just like the ottoman bring the war to inside Europe from Asia Minor.
We had missed the train on several occasions to become a regional power. In 1962 when Mao Zedong invites Gen Ayub to take the Kashmir, he was reluctant because of american lines. Then 1990 Gulf war we again lost the opportunity, when saudi government ask Pakistan for heavy deployment of troop, we not respond them and egypt earn the opportunity. In first decade of new century American were face difficulty in Afghanistan on that time we could merge some afghan territory in to Pakistan, mainly pashtun provinces, we had also lost the Yeman war opportunity which could give us great economic and military support in short and long term. Most of the GCC nations are worried from Iran, in Yeman we can defeat pro Iranian and with large saudi and Emirates funding and their military equipment we can force the Iranian on their own soil. No one was along with them. We can also gain the control of iranian oil fields. But we miss and egypt again avail the opportunity on a small war they got everything on saudi royalty.no its the last one for us the china inda stand off , after that door will be closed for us to take Kashmir. But current leadership has no balls to fight against fanatic hindu state.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Sir off the topic,
You are right Sir, war has its own positive effects along with the negative ones. Today the countries are ruling the world are all those who fight in second world war, winners and losers. But still they manage to dictate the world.

U r partially right...the countries that did fight in WW2 are ruling the world...but that war itself(and the one before it WW1) are among the biggest reasons the pecking order was changed.

Prior to that US was the newcomer on the stage where the imperial powers already had the world carved up and colonized. US industrialized and built a strong economy...but wasn't the sole superpower. After the two world wars...the European world powers were so utterly destroyed that not only could they not maintain their vast overseas territories(colonies) but they have also been playing second fiddle to the US since then. US took no damage from those wars on its mainland...the manpower that was depleted by having men fighting abroad was filled up by women stepping up and working in the factories...and one can see how that translated as to which country climbed up into the superpower status...and which countries slid down...

They(European powers) are only on top(along with the US) bcuz of the US...but don't mistake them for world powers. US can dictate even minor things like having Britain alter its deal with Huawei or have France not sell meteor(with Rafale) to Egypt. They seem powerful when they are rolling in a gang with the big boy(US)...but they are just a mere shell of their former selves. Such is the destruction that war brings.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

Sir off the topic,
You are right Sir, war has its own positive effects along with the negative ones. Today the countries are ruling the world are all those who fight in second world war, winners and losers. But still they manage to dictate the world. If Pakistan want its share in world power hub, then they must break their shackle of defensive offence. And took the war to indian soils just like the ottoman bring the war to inside Europe from Asia Minor.
We had missed the train on several occasions to become a regional power. In 1962 when Mao Zedong invites Gen Ayub to take the Kashmir, he was reluctant because of american lines. Then 1990 Gulf war we again lost the opportunity, when saudi government ask Pakistan for heavy deployment of troop, we not respond them and egypt earn the opportunity. In first decade of new century American were face difficulty in Afghanistan on that time we could merge some afghan territory in to Pakistan, mainly pashtun provinces, we had also lost the Yeman war opportunity which could give us great economic and military support in short and long term. Most of the GCC nations are worried from Iran, in Yeman we can defeat pro Iranian and with large saudi and Emirates funding and their military equipment we can force the Iranian on their own soil. No one was along with them. We can also gain the control of iranian oil fields. But we miss and egypt again avail the opportunity on a small war they got everything on saudi royalty.no its the last one for us the china inda stand off , after that door will be closed for us to take Kashmir. But current leadership has no balls to fight against fanatic hindu state.

U r partially right...the countries that did fight in WW2 are ruling the world...but that war itself(and the one before it WW1) are among the biggest reasons the pecking order was changed.

Prior to that US was the newcomer on the stage where the imperial powers already had the world carved up and colonized. US industrialized and built a strong economy...but wasn't the sole superpower. After the two world wars...the European world powers were so utterly destroyed that not only could they not maintain their vast overseas territories(colonies) but they have also been playing second fiddle to the US since then. US took no damage from those wars on its mainland...the manpower that was depleted by having men fighting abroad was filled up by women stepping up and working in the factories...and one can see how that translated as to which country climbed up into the superpower status...and which countries slid down...

They(European powers) are only on top(along with the US) bcuz of the US...but don't mistake them for world powers. US can dictate even minor things like having Britain alter its deal with Huawei or have France not sell meteor(with Rafale) to Egypt. They seem powerful when they are rolling in a gang with the big boy(US)...but they are just a mere shell of their former selves. Such is the destruction that war brings.

These are both some very quality replies. I believe this deserves it's on thread "potential war with india". Where this could be discussed further.

1962 was a major major blunder, especially since we went to war 3 years later. This might have stopped them from meddling in 71 too. Alas u cannot turn back time so I agree with War historian. Our major problem is our defensive policy. There can only be 1 power in south Asia/central Asian and Persia. If we play out cards right we could reach that place especially with the backing of an Asian monster(china).

 

[Cookie Monster]

These are both some very quality replies. I believe this deserves it's on thread "potential war with india". Where this could be discussed further.

1962 was a major major blunder, especially since we went to war 3 years later. This might have stopped them from meddling in 71 too. Alas u cannot turn back time so I agree with War historian. Our major problem is our defensive policy. There can only be 1 power in south Asia/central Asian and Persia. If we play out cards right we could reach that place especially with the backing of an Asian monster(china).

That defensive policy CANNOT be changed until the economy is there to support a major war effort. To gain superiority(or even just parity) in quality and quantity with India...one needs the economy to support it. Can't exactly be bankrolling those purchases on more and more loans...that's simply unsustainable. Nor are there going to be handouts at enough scale to match India.

This massive quantitative difference...means greater resilience for the side with more numbers when it comes to attrition. If let's say PAF destroys 80 IAF jets...and IAF destroys 50 PAF jets...
...even though PAF did well...but as a percentage of its total fighter jets...PAF suffered a greater attrition rate. Even continuing at that ratio...where PAF seems to be destroying more IAF jets than vice versa...before long PAF will be out of fighter jets...while IAF will still have enough to continue bombing(and now unopposed with PAF gone). The same concept applies in other war equipment.

Other than attrition...the massive numbers also mean that they can open more fronts simultaneously...send in reinforcements in more sectors...and so on. So u see...in theory it would be great if Pakistan can be more offensive than defensive...but in reality Pak doesn't have much of a choice but to act defensively.

 

[TsAr]

I dont understand why they are after Alan Warnes he is great guy but AH1Z was never PAF territory

Some A**holes will always remain in denial, even if they are shown the pics, this is the sad reality.

 

[TsAr]

That archangel confirming @Khafee 's news but also calling him a fraud disseminating scuttlebut on this forum LOL
up is down, left is right... what in the world

****Intentionally wrote his name the way I did

I have confronted him on the other forum lets see if he replies or not....

 

[TsAr]

Khafee has been proved right yet again.

I have always maintained this point defense deals are not like buying a used car, they depend on a lot of factors. @Khafee shares info with us which is correct to that moment, now things are very fluid deals can break that does not mean that he was wrong.....

 

[Armchair]

I have confronted him on the other forum lets see if he replies or not....

Ark Angel is not on this forum. At least not the same one I think.

 

[Khafee]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt war boost the economy? All the mass industrialization that would kick in with alot of open jobs.

Refer to america during WW2.

When money flows like water, which is not the case here. The economy would be devastated, with the blue collars being hit the hardest.

 

[Khafee]

Ark Angel is not on this forum. At least not the same one I think.

Oh that monkey is lurking here, you can be sure of that, check his comments.

 

[Khafee]

Why are you getting angry, a well wisher, is wishing his best, for his motherland, and his first line of Defence i.e. PA.

It is not, as if he passed a resolution in Parliament forcing PA to buy something PA did not want!