This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
The air losses section is maligned with misleading information claiming that independent sources are being used when clearly Indian writers have created this information and presented it as "neutral" I propose using legitimate neutral sources not Indian pov sources painted as "neutral" 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Chowk a blog with hardly any credibility is being used as a legitimate source to portray India having won the air war
Singh, Pushpindar (clearly and indian writer and an indian perspective on the war
D. R. Mankekar again and Indian writer with a title of "Twentytwo fateful days: Pakistan cut to size"
How on earth people get away with portraying this one sided sources as "neutral" is beyond me 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Praagh, David. The greater game: India's race with destiny and China. the synopsis of this book states "indias struggle with china and pakistan" doesnt sound very neutral to me depicting India as a victim from 2 nations 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm totally surprised because 2 months ago when I visited the article, pakistan was the winner of 1965 war but now the results are completely changed and the changes are totally out of course... Please, it is not a forum so put the relevant information on site... Ali khan dhudi ( talk) 15:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
India is a brave country pak lost all wars against her Indian army has no match in world for her braveness.this is what all Indian Pakistan war related articles at wiki says.-- Balti sahib ( talk) 05:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The casualties and losses are extremely biased and unacceptable Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
As we all know that pakistan lost atleast 300 tanks(US was ally of pakistan in 1965 and its desperation to lower its casualty is well know further its support in 1971 is out in the world). We displayed 100 tanks in khemkaran , 58 in phillora in short INDIANS DISPLAYED 158 tanks of pakistan on display then how is it possible that only 200 pakistani tanks was destroyed on the other hand pakistan dont show a single INDIAN TANK(it has shown folland jet but no tank this raises suspicion) on display.
I think we need to have discussion that "CAN WE ACCEPT US SOURCES AS NEUTRAL SPECIALLY WHEN WE KNOW THAT US WAS A HARDCORE PAKISTANI ALLY AND ITS OPEN HEARTED SUPPORT TO PAKISTAN IN 1971 IS EXPOSED BY MANY WRITERS INCLUDING US AUTHORS".
We must remove US from NEUTRAL sources reason this contradicts the fact that they openly supported pakistan throughout 1965 and 1971 and it was only in 1990s that when INDIAN ECONOMY boomed then US started supporting INDIA over Pakistan(Kashmir issue is a point where US maintains that no foreign country has anything to do with it hence supporting INDIA's stand). ABDEVILLIERS0007 ( talk) 07:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Indian tank losses were higher according to many sources.Indian tanks are also displayed by Pakistan but many Indian tanks were so badly destroyed especially the ones in Chawinda they were not displayed. Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
this article is not neutral and writen by indian point of view King2k ( talk) 22:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
this article is not neutral and writen by indian point of view and is biased Ahsan szabist ( talk) 17:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
this article is mostly based on the indian version of war.it does not contains the sufficent point of view of pakistan about the war its results and consequences .hence it should be eddited to represent the point of view of both countries Ahsan szabist ( talk) 19:21, 15 August 2013 (UTC) the author of the page is requested to edit the page to remove one sided point of view.it has been previously requested but no action is done on previous posts Ahsan szabist ( talk) 19:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
It's true that much of the information is biased especially the casualties and losses.It was even accepted by some Indian high ranking officers that their infantry losses were much higher due to poor planning and execution. Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to add following references from international news papers on the indo pak war 1965 that will increase the credibility of the artile — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammadkhaliq ( talk • contribs) 11:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I am suggesting adding the following in article Pakistan did not gain anything from the war and it was disastrous for Pakistan based on two books below
There are two publications by Oxford scholars who have stated that " The war proved disastrous for Pakistan "
The following are the author quotes In Page 142 " India could have sustained the conflict and turned it into a outright victory In page 143 " Pakisthan made no gains in the war" C. Christine Fair
This book mentions
In page 130 "The operation ended in a stalemate and proved disastrous for Pakisthan"
Peter Lyon — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Janwar jibba (
talk •
contribs) 01:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
India attacked on pakistan and as a result pakistan army defeated india. Thousands of Indian officers were killed by pakistan Army. Zulkaifriaz ( talk) 18:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Malaiya I have not reverted but your edits do look WP:UNDUE and are better suited on Defence Day (Pakistan). Accesscrawl ( talk) 03:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Indian victory is false. Actually it was Pakistani victory. So Kindly check action against this. Riyasenluvurself ( talk) 16:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
References
What did India gain? They wanted to have noon tea at lahore gymkhana but couldn't cross the border Huzaifa 18 ( talk) 09:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
References
See the map at Operation Grand Slam. The Pakistanis advanced from aroud the Dawara stream (which is where the 1947 cease-fire line was) till about Jourian. How the Indians managed to stop them there is a mystery. They appear to have positioned themselves on the heights at Kaleeth, where they had a strategic vantage point. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Ahmad Sajid ( talk) 11:21, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello there could u change the article. it say it was an indian victory but it actually was a Pakistani victory and i have reliable sources to back this up.
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please make the following changes: Change-1: Change the insert a higher level heading named "Awards" above "Military awards" in such a way that the "Military awards" become a sub-heading, then add another subheading "Civilian awards" at same level as "Military awards". Under the "Civilian awards" create a sub-heading "India" and insert the following bullet point:
Thanks. 222.164.212.168 ( talk) 13:41, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the result of the war to ""Pakistani victory"" The result of the war was the Victory of Pakistan as one Australian Newspapers Headlines on their Front Page "Biggest tank battle since world war II. Pakistani victory" Hammadhassansheikh ( talk) 18:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
In the Tank battles section there is this passage:
At the beginning of the war, the Pakistani Army had both a numerical advantage in tanks, as well as better equipment overall.[92] Pakistani armour was largely American-made; it consisted mainly of Patton M-47 and M-48 tanks, but also included many M4 Sherman tanks, some M24 Chaffee light tanks and M36 Jackson tank destroyers, equipped with 90 mm guns. The bulk of India's tank fleet were older M4 Sherman tanks; some were up-gunned with the French high velocity CN 75 50 guns and could hold their own, whilst some older models were still equipped with the inferior 75 mm M3 L/40 gun. Besides the M4 tanks, India fielded the British-made Centurion Tank Mk 7, with the 105 mm Royal Ordnance L7 gun, and the AMX-13, PT-76, and M3 Stuart light tanks.
This should be changed to
At the beginning of the war, the Pakistani Army had both a numerical advantage in tanks, as well as better equipment overall.[92] Pakistani armour was American-madeand consisted mainly of M-47 and M-48 Patton tanks, but also many M4A1 Sherman tanks, re-armed with 76 mm guns, M24 Chaffee light tanks and M36 Jackson tank destroyers, equipped with 90 mm guns. The bulk of India's tank fleet were older M4 Sherman tanks, mainly M4A4's armed with the original 75 mm gun or French CN 75/50 guns or M4A3 tanks re-armed with 76 mm guns, delivered as American aid. Besides the M4 tanks, India fielded the British-made Centurion Tank Mk 7, with the 20-pounder gun, and the French AMX-13.
(The Centurion Mk 7 had a 20-pounder gun, not a 105 mm L7 gun. I have not seen any references to India's PT76 tanks taking any part in the 1965 war or that Stuart tanks were part of the Indian army inventory in 1965.) 83.191.174.166 ( talk) 13:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
This article fails to showcase the Pakistani view and conclusion of the war. Pakistan claims its victory in this war, and the day of the 1965 war is sometimes even celebrated as a national holiday in Pakistan. It should be noted that the some of the references from Indian sites contain bias information on this war. Keep in your mind that in many situations Indian and even Pakistani media become bias, especially when it comes to Pakistan and India rivalry. Pakieditor ( talk) 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Result Indian victory" to "Result Pakistani victory on international borders, Indian victory in disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir" Reason: Given that Jammu and Kashmir was (and is) an independent disputed territory, Pakistan's attack in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be considered as an attack on Indian sovereignty (as per international laws), because it was (and is) not an international border. However, Indian attack on Lahore, Sialkot and Sargodha was an attack on international borders and thus an act of war (as per international laws). Indian armed forces declared full-scale war on Pakistan's sovereignty following Operation Gibraltar in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian attack was repulsed and India had to retreat. Whereas, Pakistani attack in Jammu and Kashmir was repulsed by the Indian armed forces and Pakistan had to retreat from Jammu and Kashmir.
Or
Change "Result Indian victory" to "Result Both India and Pakistan retreated to their pre-war positions" Reason: In actuality, both Pakistan and India failed in their respective belligerent attempts, and genuinely neither were the victors. The losses could be debated but there were enough on both sides to sign a ceasefire. While Pakistan exhausted most of its ammunition, India has trouble mobilizing. However, it is neither an Indian victory only, nor a Pakistani victory only. Therefore, the current "Result" totally misrepresents facts and misleads the readers. History should present facts, not subjective opinions.
References: 1. https://www.quora.com/Who-won-the-1965-Indo-Pak-war 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALNt01aCehg ZafarGilani ( talk) 15:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. The references that you have provided are not
reliable. See the section titled
Change in result in the infobox for the existing consensus. —
Gazoth (
talk) 16:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi @ Sdmarathe:, if you wish to change the result section, please gain consensus here first. This is change which needs to be discussed and deliberated upon before it is updated. Also, IMO, multiple sources (not a single source) would be required to change this. Thanks. Adamgerber80 ( talk) 13:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
and on page 111:Events soon drew Indian attention away from the quest for security guarantees and technical assistance from the United States. Military tensions between Pakistan and India mounted in the spring of 1965, leading to war. Before the implications of India's military victory in this conflict could be assimilated...
Paradoxically, the victory over Pakistan triggered renewed demands in India for nuclear weapons. The day before the cease-fire took effect, nearly one hundred members of Parliament from multiple parties...
This article itself contains an ample number of reliable sources that provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the 1965 war. Some of them are very reliable and authoritative sources indeed. Sdmarathe ( talk) 00:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
India won the war. It held on to the Vale of Kashmir, the prize Pakistan vainly sought. It gained 1,840 km2 (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2 (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2 (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2 (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2 (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.
Satisfied that it had secured a strategic and psychological victory over Pakistan by frustrating its attempt to seize Kashmir by force, when the UN resolution was passed, India accepted its terms. In Pakistan, Ayub Khan confided to Iran's ambassador that he feared being lynched by his fellow countrymen for accepting a UN resolution that made no mention of a plebiscite in Kashmir, much less guarantee one. But, with Pakistan's stocks of ammunition and other essential supplies all but exhausted, and with the military balance tipping steadily in India's favour, Ayub Khan's hands were tied.
the war itself was a disaster for Pakistan, from the first failed attempts by Pakistani troops to precipitate an insurgency in Kashmir to the appearance of Indian artillery within range of Lahore International Airport.
In late September, India and Pakistan ceased hostilities in the Kashmir region following pressure from the United Nations Security Council. While neither state achieved a territorial success, India was perceived as the victor due to its success in halting the Pakistan-backed insurgency in Kashmir.
p. 26: The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat. p. 239: Following a drubbing at the hands of the Indian military in an ill-considered 1965 war over Kashmir, Ayub fired his foreign minister...
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.
The conflict was short, but nasty. After seventeen days, both sides accepted a UN Security Council call for a cease-fire. Although the two militaries fought to a standoff, India won by not losing.
The bottom line is that the preponderance of reliable sources support the fact that India registered a clear if not decisive victory. Sdmarathe ( talk) 01:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
-- DBig Xray 21:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)Following China's successful 1962 military seizure of Aksai, Chin, Pakistan sought to annex Kashmir. Pakistani forces crossed the line of control expecting to trigger a revolt by Kashmiri Muslims. The anticipated uprising received minimal support. India seized Pakistani territory en route to military victory in 1965.
References
-- DBig Xray 21:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
The information is totally wrong and Based on one sided opinions only. Please read a few book written by indian ex army officers to get knowledge about this war. India attacked on pakistan and Pakistan killed thousands of Indian officers on that war. India was totally in loss. Zulkaifriaz ( talk) 18:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Not only did we (Pakistan) lose militarily in 1965 – state propaganda aside – but we also lost our national unity in the process.[1]
Pakistan observing Defence Day and marking the 50th anniversary of the 1965 war, historian and political economist Dr S. Akbar Zaidi dispelled ‘the victory myth’, saying that there can be no a bigger lie, as Pakistan lost terribly. he said: “With the celebration of the victory in the 1965 war round the corner, there can be no bigger lie that Pakistan won the war. We lost terribly in the 1965 war.”[2]
Pakistan won the war in the same way that you finish third in a two-team tournament.[3]
The Pakistani military has propagated a false narrative about the 1965 war that justifies its oversized role in society.[4]-- DBig Xrayᗙ 10:41, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
India won.. Editor Mofor ( talk) 14:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Air Marshal (retired) Nur Khan, who headed the Pakistan Air Force in 1965, said in an interview with Dawn newspaper that the army "misled the nation with a big lie" - that India rather than Pakistan provoked the war - and that Pakistan won a "great victory". And since the "lie" was never rectified, the Pakistani "army came to believe its own fiction, (and) has continued to fight unwanted wars," he said.BBC Operation Gibraltar: The Pakistani troops who infiltrated Kashmir to start a rebellion-- DBig Xrayᗙ 21:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Oppose, because neither India won the war when there are sources that show neither countries won [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27], while there are some international sources that claim Pakistan's victory [28]. Pakieditor ( talk) 07:36, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
There is a Typo in the first sentence of the fifth paragraph in section 7.2 of this article:
"The Pakistan airforce on the other hand gained a lot of credibility and reliability among Pakistan military and international war writers for successful defence of [lahore]..."
Lahore should be capitalised as it is a city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FernandoAguado ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Nyttend backup, what is still unclear? After my edit, it should be clear that the "it" refers to his chance of returning. — Gazoth ( talk) 04:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
— Gazoth ( talk) 18:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC)An IAF Gnat, piloted by Squadron Leader Brij Pal Singh Sikand, landed at an abandoned Pakistani airstrip at Pasrur as he was running short on fuel and was captured by the Pakistan Army. According to the pilot, he got separated from his formation due to a malfunctioning compass and radio.
O' Nordeen, Lon (1985). Air Warfare in the Missile Age. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Does not sound very "Indian" to me. Is this a mistake? --- Trickipaedia ( talk) 09:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
The air losses section is maligned with misleading information claiming that independent sources are being used when clearly Indian writers have created this information and presented it as "neutral" I propose using legitimate neutral sources not Indian pov sources painted as "neutral" 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Chowk a blog with hardly any credibility is being used as a legitimate source to portray India having won the air war
Singh, Pushpindar (clearly and indian writer and an indian perspective on the war
D. R. Mankekar again and Indian writer with a title of "Twentytwo fateful days: Pakistan cut to size"
How on earth people get away with portraying this one sided sources as "neutral" is beyond me 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Praagh, David. The greater game: India's race with destiny and China. the synopsis of this book states "indias struggle with china and pakistan" doesnt sound very neutral to me depicting India as a victim from 2 nations 86.182.221.213 ( talk) 09:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm totally surprised because 2 months ago when I visited the article, pakistan was the winner of 1965 war but now the results are completely changed and the changes are totally out of course... Please, it is not a forum so put the relevant information on site... Ali khan dhudi ( talk) 15:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
India is a brave country pak lost all wars against her Indian army has no match in world for her braveness.this is what all Indian Pakistan war related articles at wiki says.-- Balti sahib ( talk) 05:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The casualties and losses are extremely biased and unacceptable Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
As we all know that pakistan lost atleast 300 tanks(US was ally of pakistan in 1965 and its desperation to lower its casualty is well know further its support in 1971 is out in the world). We displayed 100 tanks in khemkaran , 58 in phillora in short INDIANS DISPLAYED 158 tanks of pakistan on display then how is it possible that only 200 pakistani tanks was destroyed on the other hand pakistan dont show a single INDIAN TANK(it has shown folland jet but no tank this raises suspicion) on display.
I think we need to have discussion that "CAN WE ACCEPT US SOURCES AS NEUTRAL SPECIALLY WHEN WE KNOW THAT US WAS A HARDCORE PAKISTANI ALLY AND ITS OPEN HEARTED SUPPORT TO PAKISTAN IN 1971 IS EXPOSED BY MANY WRITERS INCLUDING US AUTHORS".
We must remove US from NEUTRAL sources reason this contradicts the fact that they openly supported pakistan throughout 1965 and 1971 and it was only in 1990s that when INDIAN ECONOMY boomed then US started supporting INDIA over Pakistan(Kashmir issue is a point where US maintains that no foreign country has anything to do with it hence supporting INDIA's stand). ABDEVILLIERS0007 ( talk) 07:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Indian tank losses were higher according to many sources.Indian tanks are also displayed by Pakistan but many Indian tanks were so badly destroyed especially the ones in Chawinda they were not displayed. Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
this article is not neutral and writen by indian point of view King2k ( talk) 22:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
this article is not neutral and writen by indian point of view and is biased Ahsan szabist ( talk) 17:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
this article is mostly based on the indian version of war.it does not contains the sufficent point of view of pakistan about the war its results and consequences .hence it should be eddited to represent the point of view of both countries Ahsan szabist ( talk) 19:21, 15 August 2013 (UTC) the author of the page is requested to edit the page to remove one sided point of view.it has been previously requested but no action is done on previous posts Ahsan szabist ( talk) 19:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
It's true that much of the information is biased especially the casualties and losses.It was even accepted by some Indian high ranking officers that their infantry losses were much higher due to poor planning and execution. Hassan Ayub ( talk) 06:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to add following references from international news papers on the indo pak war 1965 that will increase the credibility of the artile — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammadkhaliq ( talk • contribs) 11:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I am suggesting adding the following in article Pakistan did not gain anything from the war and it was disastrous for Pakistan based on two books below
There are two publications by Oxford scholars who have stated that " The war proved disastrous for Pakistan "
The following are the author quotes In Page 142 " India could have sustained the conflict and turned it into a outright victory In page 143 " Pakisthan made no gains in the war" C. Christine Fair
This book mentions
In page 130 "The operation ended in a stalemate and proved disastrous for Pakisthan"
Peter Lyon — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Janwar jibba (
talk •
contribs) 01:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
India attacked on pakistan and as a result pakistan army defeated india. Thousands of Indian officers were killed by pakistan Army. Zulkaifriaz ( talk) 18:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Malaiya I have not reverted but your edits do look WP:UNDUE and are better suited on Defence Day (Pakistan). Accesscrawl ( talk) 03:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Indian victory is false. Actually it was Pakistani victory. So Kindly check action against this. Riyasenluvurself ( talk) 16:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
References
What did India gain? They wanted to have noon tea at lahore gymkhana but couldn't cross the border Huzaifa 18 ( talk) 09:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
References
See the map at Operation Grand Slam. The Pakistanis advanced from aroud the Dawara stream (which is where the 1947 cease-fire line was) till about Jourian. How the Indians managed to stop them there is a mystery. They appear to have positioned themselves on the heights at Kaleeth, where they had a strategic vantage point. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Ahmad Sajid ( talk) 11:21, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello there could u change the article. it say it was an indian victory but it actually was a Pakistani victory and i have reliable sources to back this up.
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please make the following changes: Change-1: Change the insert a higher level heading named "Awards" above "Military awards" in such a way that the "Military awards" become a sub-heading, then add another subheading "Civilian awards" at same level as "Military awards". Under the "Civilian awards" create a sub-heading "India" and insert the following bullet point:
Thanks. 222.164.212.168 ( talk) 13:41, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the result of the war to ""Pakistani victory"" The result of the war was the Victory of Pakistan as one Australian Newspapers Headlines on their Front Page "Biggest tank battle since world war II. Pakistani victory" Hammadhassansheikh ( talk) 18:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
In the Tank battles section there is this passage:
At the beginning of the war, the Pakistani Army had both a numerical advantage in tanks, as well as better equipment overall.[92] Pakistani armour was largely American-made; it consisted mainly of Patton M-47 and M-48 tanks, but also included many M4 Sherman tanks, some M24 Chaffee light tanks and M36 Jackson tank destroyers, equipped with 90 mm guns. The bulk of India's tank fleet were older M4 Sherman tanks; some were up-gunned with the French high velocity CN 75 50 guns and could hold their own, whilst some older models were still equipped with the inferior 75 mm M3 L/40 gun. Besides the M4 tanks, India fielded the British-made Centurion Tank Mk 7, with the 105 mm Royal Ordnance L7 gun, and the AMX-13, PT-76, and M3 Stuart light tanks.
This should be changed to
At the beginning of the war, the Pakistani Army had both a numerical advantage in tanks, as well as better equipment overall.[92] Pakistani armour was American-madeand consisted mainly of M-47 and M-48 Patton tanks, but also many M4A1 Sherman tanks, re-armed with 76 mm guns, M24 Chaffee light tanks and M36 Jackson tank destroyers, equipped with 90 mm guns. The bulk of India's tank fleet were older M4 Sherman tanks, mainly M4A4's armed with the original 75 mm gun or French CN 75/50 guns or M4A3 tanks re-armed with 76 mm guns, delivered as American aid. Besides the M4 tanks, India fielded the British-made Centurion Tank Mk 7, with the 20-pounder gun, and the French AMX-13.
(The Centurion Mk 7 had a 20-pounder gun, not a 105 mm L7 gun. I have not seen any references to India's PT76 tanks taking any part in the 1965 war or that Stuart tanks were part of the Indian army inventory in 1965.) 83.191.174.166 ( talk) 13:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
This article fails to showcase the Pakistani view and conclusion of the war. Pakistan claims its victory in this war, and the day of the 1965 war is sometimes even celebrated as a national holiday in Pakistan. It should be noted that the some of the references from Indian sites contain bias information on this war. Keep in your mind that in many situations Indian and even Pakistani media become bias, especially when it comes to Pakistan and India rivalry. Pakieditor ( talk) 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Result Indian victory" to "Result Pakistani victory on international borders, Indian victory in disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir" Reason: Given that Jammu and Kashmir was (and is) an independent disputed territory, Pakistan's attack in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be considered as an attack on Indian sovereignty (as per international laws), because it was (and is) not an international border. However, Indian attack on Lahore, Sialkot and Sargodha was an attack on international borders and thus an act of war (as per international laws). Indian armed forces declared full-scale war on Pakistan's sovereignty following Operation Gibraltar in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian attack was repulsed and India had to retreat. Whereas, Pakistani attack in Jammu and Kashmir was repulsed by the Indian armed forces and Pakistan had to retreat from Jammu and Kashmir.
Or
Change "Result Indian victory" to "Result Both India and Pakistan retreated to their pre-war positions" Reason: In actuality, both Pakistan and India failed in their respective belligerent attempts, and genuinely neither were the victors. The losses could be debated but there were enough on both sides to sign a ceasefire. While Pakistan exhausted most of its ammunition, India has trouble mobilizing. However, it is neither an Indian victory only, nor a Pakistani victory only. Therefore, the current "Result" totally misrepresents facts and misleads the readers. History should present facts, not subjective opinions.
References: 1. https://www.quora.com/Who-won-the-1965-Indo-Pak-war 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALNt01aCehg ZafarGilani ( talk) 15:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. The references that you have provided are not
reliable. See the section titled
Change in result in the infobox for the existing consensus. —
Gazoth (
talk) 16:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi @ Sdmarathe:, if you wish to change the result section, please gain consensus here first. This is change which needs to be discussed and deliberated upon before it is updated. Also, IMO, multiple sources (not a single source) would be required to change this. Thanks. Adamgerber80 ( talk) 13:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
and on page 111:Events soon drew Indian attention away from the quest for security guarantees and technical assistance from the United States. Military tensions between Pakistan and India mounted in the spring of 1965, leading to war. Before the implications of India's military victory in this conflict could be assimilated...
Paradoxically, the victory over Pakistan triggered renewed demands in India for nuclear weapons. The day before the cease-fire took effect, nearly one hundred members of Parliament from multiple parties...
This article itself contains an ample number of reliable sources that provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the 1965 war. Some of them are very reliable and authoritative sources indeed. Sdmarathe ( talk) 00:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
India won the war. It held on to the Vale of Kashmir, the prize Pakistan vainly sought. It gained 1,840 km2 (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2 (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2 (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2 (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2 (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.
Satisfied that it had secured a strategic and psychological victory over Pakistan by frustrating its attempt to seize Kashmir by force, when the UN resolution was passed, India accepted its terms. In Pakistan, Ayub Khan confided to Iran's ambassador that he feared being lynched by his fellow countrymen for accepting a UN resolution that made no mention of a plebiscite in Kashmir, much less guarantee one. But, with Pakistan's stocks of ammunition and other essential supplies all but exhausted, and with the military balance tipping steadily in India's favour, Ayub Khan's hands were tied.
the war itself was a disaster for Pakistan, from the first failed attempts by Pakistani troops to precipitate an insurgency in Kashmir to the appearance of Indian artillery within range of Lahore International Airport.
In late September, India and Pakistan ceased hostilities in the Kashmir region following pressure from the United Nations Security Council. While neither state achieved a territorial success, India was perceived as the victor due to its success in halting the Pakistan-backed insurgency in Kashmir.
p. 26: The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat. p. 239: Following a drubbing at the hands of the Indian military in an ill-considered 1965 war over Kashmir, Ayub fired his foreign minister...
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.
The conflict was short, but nasty. After seventeen days, both sides accepted a UN Security Council call for a cease-fire. Although the two militaries fought to a standoff, India won by not losing.
The bottom line is that the preponderance of reliable sources support the fact that India registered a clear if not decisive victory. Sdmarathe ( talk) 01:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
-- DBig Xray 21:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)Following China's successful 1962 military seizure of Aksai, Chin, Pakistan sought to annex Kashmir. Pakistani forces crossed the line of control expecting to trigger a revolt by Kashmiri Muslims. The anticipated uprising received minimal support. India seized Pakistani territory en route to military victory in 1965.
References
-- DBig Xray 21:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
The information is totally wrong and Based on one sided opinions only. Please read a few book written by indian ex army officers to get knowledge about this war. India attacked on pakistan and Pakistan killed thousands of Indian officers on that war. India was totally in loss. Zulkaifriaz ( talk) 18:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Not only did we (Pakistan) lose militarily in 1965 – state propaganda aside – but we also lost our national unity in the process.[1]
Pakistan observing Defence Day and marking the 50th anniversary of the 1965 war, historian and political economist Dr S. Akbar Zaidi dispelled ‘the victory myth’, saying that there can be no a bigger lie, as Pakistan lost terribly. he said: “With the celebration of the victory in the 1965 war round the corner, there can be no bigger lie that Pakistan won the war. We lost terribly in the 1965 war.”[2]
Pakistan won the war in the same way that you finish third in a two-team tournament.[3]
The Pakistani military has propagated a false narrative about the 1965 war that justifies its oversized role in society.[4]-- DBig Xrayᗙ 10:41, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
India won.. Editor Mofor ( talk) 14:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Air Marshal (retired) Nur Khan, who headed the Pakistan Air Force in 1965, said in an interview with Dawn newspaper that the army "misled the nation with a big lie" - that India rather than Pakistan provoked the war - and that Pakistan won a "great victory". And since the "lie" was never rectified, the Pakistani "army came to believe its own fiction, (and) has continued to fight unwanted wars," he said.BBC Operation Gibraltar: The Pakistani troops who infiltrated Kashmir to start a rebellion-- DBig Xrayᗙ 21:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Oppose, because neither India won the war when there are sources that show neither countries won [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27], while there are some international sources that claim Pakistan's victory [28]. Pakieditor ( talk) 07:36, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
There is a Typo in the first sentence of the fifth paragraph in section 7.2 of this article:
"The Pakistan airforce on the other hand gained a lot of credibility and reliability among Pakistan military and international war writers for successful defence of [lahore]..."
Lahore should be capitalised as it is a city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FernandoAguado ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Nyttend backup, what is still unclear? After my edit, it should be clear that the "it" refers to his chance of returning. — Gazoth ( talk) 04:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
— Gazoth ( talk) 18:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC)An IAF Gnat, piloted by Squadron Leader Brij Pal Singh Sikand, landed at an abandoned Pakistani airstrip at Pasrur as he was running short on fuel and was captured by the Pakistan Army. According to the pilot, he got separated from his formation due to a malfunctioning compass and radio.
O' Nordeen, Lon (1985). Air Warfare in the Missile Age. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Does not sound very "Indian" to me. Is this a mistake? --- Trickipaedia ( talk) 09:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)