Talk:Pakistan Army

WikiProject Military history

(Rated Start-Class)

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information... This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please the following to the template call: | B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> = y/n | B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> = y/n | B3 <!-- Structure --> = y/n | B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> = y/n | B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> = y/n Associated task forces (general topics): National militaries task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): South Asian military history task force

Ranks of Commissioned Officers

Do not add the rank of Field Marshal in the Ranks section as this rank existed before but ended with Ayub Khan and now the highest rank within the army is General. There is no rank called the Field Marshal now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paksoldier (talk • contribs) 15:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Request to create a page for Corps of Engineers

I am humbly requesting to create a page for Corps of Engineers with the with the names of Corps of Engineers, Pakistan Army or Pakistan Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers is one the important Corps of Pakistan Army. It has credited to build, constructed and contributed in numerous civil and military engineering projects in Pakistan. I am also adding the Corps of Engineer's Link:

• Corps of Engineers

So, please, to any Wikipedia administrator, read my request to create a page for Corps of Engineers. I would really appreciated it, Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.49.198.147 (talk) 06:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Nishan-I-Haider

It should not be translated as "Sign of Lion", should be translated as "Sign of Haider". Haider was a title given to Ali, who was known for his bravery.

Pakistan Army to Pakistani Army

Doesn't it make more sense if it were "Pakistani" Army than Pakistan Army. Its not France Army it is French Army.

The material is biased. Pakistan was attacked in 1965 by India; India crossed line of control, and not vice versa. The indian army has always been three times the army of Pakistan. ~~

Very biased indeed...probably written by some Pakistan hating Indian.

well i seems it the person written the above statments probably has seen the indian side of the picture. In the 1965 and 1971 both, India was first to launch offence. In the 1999 Kargil's war, it seems, was initiated by both conntries equally. and among the two out of three wars (1965, 1999), india was also the first to involve UN for ceasefire as well. In 1971 war, Pakistan was not prepared for the war, as it was not declared and did sustain damages.

wow pakistanis r civilsed too jk we all see the war at different view points if we haggle with the data of our old wars there wont be the initiative to prevent the new ones.every war fought damages india and pakistan irreconcilably it smashes our economy annd kills our brothers i wd advocate peaceful settlement rather than wars but there is testosterone......... leo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.144.28.15 (talk • contribs)

Umm.. why isn't there a history section?

Note : For my Indian friends, Please concentrate over your state and your army, don't get indulge with the affairs of Pakistan. You won't like if we jump to your section and start criticising your Army. Please show some maturity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atheistbyfaith (talk • contribs) 13:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC) Dear Pakistani friends, Nobody is here to criticise. you are free to jump over to our section and state your views. The problem arises only when a foreign army jumps over to our territory. No pun intended. Thank you. Burkat —Preceding comment was added at 07:19, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Pakistani friends, Nobody is here to criticise. you are free to jump over to our section and state your views. The problem arises only when a foreign army jumps over to our territory. No pun intended. Thank you. Burkat —Preceding comment was added at 07:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

guys i have just one problem!!! the history of pakistan army... please look at it and look at the other army histories... the biggest artical is in between 70'z where we lost,,,, not a single thing about 65 achievements!!! and please do check it out again!! and why is all the things about army so negative!!! when i read it,, it sounds depressing!!! there is a lot of loser approach followed in this artical!!! and this is not for every one!!! those who have written it can better understand!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JANJ (talk • contribs) 12:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Almost done with this Article

I spend a couple of days and really fixing up this article and brought it with parity like the Israeli Army and Indian Army or British Army articles. Indepth details about troop formations, women and minorities, etc. have been added. There is still a few missing info in regards to the Corps Commanders. I have looked all over the net but can't find who are the commanders for the missing Corps. But aside from this, the article is throughly complete. Let me know, if there is anything else that needs to be added

Good work on expanding it. But there is an issue with the images uploaded by you. A sizeable portion of them are untagged (and may be listed for deletion). The tagged ones say copyrighted, but free to use. Can you please provide the exact email or correspondence from the original author/copyright holders agreeing to its use for any purpose? Thanx. Idleguy 06:25, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Fixed the pictures

Hi,

Actually I forgot to select the lisence types for the pictures. The pictures are free to use, as long as proper citations is given to the authors. I made the appropriate changes Also, a lot of the images that I uploaded, I got them from wikipedia. For example, the G3, Al-Khalid Tank, Al-Talha, and the Shaheen II pics are all pics previously posted on wikipedia. I created the image files using the same filenames. As for the rest, SSG picture, anza mk2 came from pakistan defence website. They have allowed pictures to be posted from their site on wikipedia, so I saw no harm in posting more pics from their site on wikipedia. I am new to wikipedia, so I forgot to choose the type of license. The remaining 2 pics, the one of the female major-general, the american artillery and the chinese mortar are all from newspapers.

Let me know, if this is ok.

Asked Permission

Ok,

I have e-mailed www.pakistanidefence.com

for their permission to use the images on this site.

If I get a positive response, I will let you know.

Thanx

Research and inputs required

Dear all interested to improve this article, as for the present controvercial involvement of Pakistani army in some operations carried out within pakistani borders, can someone help in listing out all those with references? I think it will be good to add a section listing armed operations done be pakistan army, with dates and minor details, this list will also complement the raised concern about adding History of Pakistan Army to this article.

The list can then be sub divided into two parts, one being the list of successful operations and the other being the list of failures.

I am sure the list with successful operations will have all those carried out within pakistani borders, or perhaps those carriedout under the flag of UN. The other list though will be longer, Any Contributions please? Mkashifafzal 10:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Wars?

No one has mentioned anything about the war's or anything which happens to have fighting in it..can someone mention someithing about wars??Tere naam 00:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.pakforces.tk
  • In Pakistan Army on Mon Jul 17 15:33:55 2006, HTTP Error: HTTP/1.0 bad gateway

• • In Pakistan Army on Thu Jul 27 00:50:11 2006, HTTP Error: HTTP/1.0 bad gateway

---

maru (talk) contribs 04:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Where is the Military history of the army?

Pak navy and pak air force have separate sections in the respective articles discussing about their histories. Yet pak army doens't have a history section. Instead the link "main article" under History leads to Military history of Pakistan which is a related but a different article about the entire military history. So did the specific history of pakistan army fall somewhere into the crevice? Idleguy 07:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the military history of pakistan was originally designed to be history of the pakistan army. but i kept modifying it and decided to make into a military history of pakistan. I am gonna have to write up a new section about the history of the pakistan army Mercenary2k 19:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice work u guys

nice work, i wrote to dawn when i checked this document the last time urging it to encourage ppl with the neccesary skills to correct this document and the many others that are biased, 203.128.255.4 00:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

No need for Major Generals' name list

I just deleted the list of major general's (which was old and incomplete), because I feel it puts too much useless info for Pakistan Army. Only lieutenant generals (which number to THIRTY!) are worthy enough to put up in the article. BTW, I updated the list as of April 2007. Razzsic 17:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Does it make any difference when this is already available in market on net.--203.81.202.116 07:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)andy

No need for "other commanders" name list either

Why do we have an entire section for the "other commanders" in the article? Completely unnecessary in my opinion; it should be removed to streamline the article. People that are interested in the other commanders will visit their article page themselves, no need to include it in the main PAK Army page.

Zaindy87 22:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

ofcourse there is no need to display the names of other commanders.this is due to security reasons mainly.one has got nothing to do with it. KINDLY REMOVE THE PAKISTAN FLAG FROM THIS SITE. A QUESTION AP SE PAKISTANI NATION KI JAN KAB CHHOOTAY GI? AB MOAF BHI KR DO. AND LAST ONE

AP LOGE( YE COMMANDERS, GENERALS ETC, NOT SOLDIERS) MUNAQAT KA SRAY AAM MUZAHIRAY KR K CONFIDANT NAZR AANAY KI KOSHISH KIUN KARTAY HAN. SUB KO PTA HA K TUM LOGE PERLAY DARJAY K BUD DIANAT HO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.45.13.163 (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

copyright problem

This article is in large part identical to the article found at http://www.defence.pk/Pakistan_Army/. This could be a copyright violation (unless it turns out that the copyrighted source actually copied material from Wikipedia). If indeed the majority of this article has been copied from http://www.defence.pk/Pakistan_Army/ than the copied material must be removed, as keeping it would be a violation of the Wikipedia copyright policy. I informed the Wikipedia:Copyright problems board about this and invite- whoever uploaded the material in question- to participate in the discussion there. --noclador 21:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I find this similarity puzzling. The intro to the article has been roughly the same, and VERY similar to the referenced page, since at least April 2006 [1]. And the history shows that the article has morphed in a natural fashion from the reasonably-different version of February 2006 [2], with no clear dividing line where chunks of content were copied into the article. The defence.pk article was written by "WebMaster", and last updated May 25; the Internet Archive knows nothing about it.

Unless the webmaster complains about the article, I'll assume that no copying of his content into Wikipedia has occured. This article has a LONG history. --Alvestrand 20:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Format of article

I have moved some of the sections around in this article based on the US Army article. The Army motto/combat doctrine/command structure should be at the top of the article because this articles main focus is the Army of today. There is a separate article for the military history of Pakistan.

Like the US Army article, the command structure and organization of the army should be at the top.Zaindy87 11:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Deployment to Arab countries

I notice there's a reference in the header to the Pakistani army deploying to Arab countries, but the only reference I can find is to the 1979 Mecca crisis. Perhaps somebody could come up with some more information on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughteg (talk • contribs) 00:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Number of Helicopters in Pakistan army aviation

I believe the number of Ah-1's you have listed is incorrect. There are only 39 (approx) in service and not 72. There is no reference in the DSCA website for the this number of acquisitions. Also in the April 2007 issue of AFM the following was printed.

Ex-US Army Cobras delivered to Pakistan Army: A formal ceremony was held at Qasim AA Base, near Islamabad on Feb 2 to mark the handover of 8 re-furbished former US Army Bell AH-1F Cobra attack helicopters to the Pakistan Army. These helicopters are the 1st batch of a TOTAL of 20 refurbished AH-1Fs that are being supplied under a $50 mill FMS programme. All previously were held in storage at Fort Drum, New York awaiting re-sale. they comprise: 79-23228,79-23239,80-23516,80-23519,80-23521,81-23526,81-22527,81-23537,82-24065,82-24066,82-24067,82-24069,82-24071,82-24072,82-24073,82-24074,83-24190,83-24196,83-24198 and 83-24199. Apart of the same FMS contract, a further 20 AH-1Fs from Fort Drum were also acquired by Pakistan PURELY FOR SPARES USE. During late 2004, all 20 of the helicopters that were to be made air-worthy were moved by road from Fort Drum to Jacksonville, Florida. they were then transported by ship to San Juan, Puerto Rico, before going on to the local DynCorp international facility at Aguadilla for re-furbishment. Eight of the AH-1Fs that are to be used purely as spares ships (79-23221,79-23229,79-23231,79-232248,80-23514,81-23528,81-23530 and 83-24195) were also delivered to DynCrop in Puerto-Rico to be stripped by the company for component recovery. the remaining 12 spares donors (identities un-confirmed) are thought to have been shipped direct to Pakistan. DynCorp is also incorporating several upgrades into the 20 helicopters that are being made air-worthy. this modernisation includes fitting C-NITE (Cobra Night Imaging Thermal Equipment) target designation system for use in bad weather or at night, radar warning receivers and replacement UHF/VHF radios. Pakistan has previously taken delivery of 20 AH-1S Cobras which entered service from late 1984. Nineteen are reported to be still operational - one having presumably been lost through attrition. the type is operated by 31 and 32 squadrons, both based at Multan.

So the correct number ois 20 + the original number of ah-1's Keysersoze25 10:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Number of Helicopters in Pakistan army aviation

I believe the number of Ah-1's you have listed is incorrect. There are only 39 (approx) in service and not 72. There is no reference in the DSCA website for the this number of acquisitions. Also in the April 2007 issue of AFM the following was printed.

Ex-US Army Cobras delivered to Pakistan Army: A formal ceremony was held at Qasim AA Base, near Islamabad on Feb 2 to mark the handover of 8 re-furbished former US Army Bell AH-1F Cobra attack helicopters to the Pakistan Army. These helicopters are the 1st batch of a TOTAL of 20 refurbished AH-1Fs that are being supplied under a $50 mill FMS programme. All previously were held in storage at Fort Drum, New York awaiting re-sale. they comprise: 79-23228,79-23239,80-23516,80-23519,80-23521,81-23526,81-22527,81-23537,82-24065,82-24066,82-24067,82-24069,82-24071,82-24072,82-24073,82-24074,83-24190,83-24196,83-24198 and 83-24199. Apart of the same FMS contract, a further 20 AH-1Fs from Fort Drum were also acquired by Pakistan PURELY FOR SPARES USE. During late 2004, all 20 of the helicopters that were to be made air-worthy were moved by road from Fort Drum to Jacksonville, Florida. they were then transported by ship to San Juan, Puerto Rico, before going on to the local DynCorp international facility at Aguadilla for re-furbishment. Eight of the AH-1Fs that are to be used purely as spares ships (79-23221,79-23229,79-23231,79-232248,80-23514,81-23528,81-23530 and 83-24195) were also delivered to DynCrop in Puerto-Rico to be stripped by the company for component recovery. the remaining 12 spares donors (identities un-confirmed) are thought to have been shipped direct to Pakistan. DynCorp is also incorporating several upgrades into the 20 helicopters that are being made air-worthy. this modernisation includes fitting C-NITE (Cobra Night Imaging Thermal Equipment) target designation system for use in bad weather or at night, radar warning receivers and replacement UHF/VHF radios. Pakistan has previously taken delivery of 20 AH-1S Cobras which entered service from late 1984. Nineteen are reported to be still operational - one having presumably been lost through attrition. the type is operated by 31 and 32 squadrons, both based at Multan.

So the correct number is 20 + the original number of ah-1's (39/40 total) Keysersoze25 10:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The helicopter inventory is wrong, very big numbers of helicopters are given. Also the same at tanks and artillery inventory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.7.50 (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Milan ATGM

There have never been Milan ATGM's Pakistani service. I believe this to be a carryover from a error on another website.Keysersoze25 18:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Mistral and other missile errors

The Mistral missile was acquired by the navy and not the army. The same is true of the Crotale which is in use by the PAF and not the army.

The army has acquired the RBS23 BAMSE system which is not mentioned, and the air force, the SPADA 2000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keysersoze25 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Khemkarancaptured.jpg

Image:Khemkarancaptured.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Horribly Written!

Frankly, this article is so horribly written with comments like "That war was a comic war" and "that war was funny" and stuff like that.. Hello, this is supposed to be an encyclopedia!!!!! 59.92.0.181 (talk) 18:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

History

I'm sorry people but the history section needs either re-writing or deleting with a link to the main history article. It is not fit for an encyclopaedic entry. If no-one objects, I will delete it. AJKGORDON«» 12:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see Mercenary2k has done both. Excellent work. AJKGORDON«» 10:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fauji Foundation

Please forgive my ignorance and naivete. What does "Fauji Foundation" have to do with the "Political Power of the Pakistani Army"? I have certain conjectures but the article does not "connect the dots" to make the linkage clear. Can someone clarify the relationship if there is indeed one? --Richard (talk) 07:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I am deleting the section until such time as relevance is demonstrated - with supporting, reliable references).

The deleted material is appended here, below:

=== Fauji Foundation ===

Fauji Foundation (established in 1954) is a charitable trust, operating on a completely self sustaining basis, channeling approximately 80% of the profits from commercial ventures into social protection programmes that serve a beneficiary population representing approximately 7% of the country’s population.

Spending more than Rs. 21 billion since inception on welfare, the Foundation provides services in the areas of healthcare, education, educational stipends, technical and vocational training.

• Over 2.1 million patients treated per year through the FF Healthcare System
• Approximately 38,000 students enrolled in the FF Education System
• Approximately 70,000 educational stipends dispersed each year
• Over 6,000 individuals trained annually through the Vocational & Technical Training Centres

Considered the most sustainable social protection mechanism in the country, Fauji Foundation provides welfare services to approximately 10 million individuals on a completely sustainable basis. Running autonomously for over 50 years, the foundation has been providing healthcare, education, vocational and technical training to over 7% of the country’s population through 294 welfare projects.

JTGILLICK (talk) 01:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Nit-pick re Article Title

I know this isn't very important. Anyhow: Should this article not be called 'Army of Pakistan' like all of the other nation's military's articles? Contralya (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't think there is a need for that but it should be in its correct adjective form (i.e Pakistani Army).--Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 18:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ghost divisions

Over the last few weeks two new divisions seem to have appeared on the ORBAT of this page, vi 25th and 26th mechanised divison in V and XXXI Corps. I have never heard of them, they certainly were not there last year, and until someone shows me evidence for their raising I am deleting those.

58.65.163.248 (talk) 14:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk to Razzsic before you do. I think he primarily takes care of this article. --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 00:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

26th Mechanized Division is stationed in Bahawalpur as part of XXXI Corps. I have added the reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by StarChaser (talk • contribs) 12:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani Army in Somalia in TANKS saving Americans in WHEELED CARS

I miss a paragraph about the actions of the Pakistanis in Somalia, where they rescued a lot of US troops who couldn't defend themselves with their shitty Humvee wheeled cars. The Pakistanis came to rescue the dumb Americans with their well-armored and tracked M113 and M48 light tanks. Otherwise, there would have been a lot more dead Americans there. This occurred on October 3, 1993, as far as I know. Anybody who got more info on this subject please integrate it to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.185.141.18 (talk) 09:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

OT-64

Does anybody know if the Pakistani Army used the OT-64 SKOT APC? Mieciu K (talk) 14:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)..............."YOU ALSO MISSED THE INFORMATION ABOUT AIRCRAFTS & MISSILE WHICH PAKISTAN HAS"

Level of competency and loyalty among soldiers

In an article in Asia Times Online[3] it is stated that only Pashtun soldiers are deployed to the north-eastern tribal areas because the Punjabi soldiers don't understand the language and area there. Furthermore, the article states, and attests this with the existence of video footage, that Pashtun soldiers are disinclined to fight against local Pashtun tribesmen: "There is detailed footage of how easily the Pakistani armed forces laid down their arms. After surrender, once their commanders had been removed, they mingled with the militants." I wonder if there is some place for this perspective in the present article? __meco (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

you can try to mention that in war against terrorism the article covers overall history and operation of Pakistan Army and not just a few battle fields. One cannot speculate so called "Level of competency and loyalty among soldiers" by just few politically motivated articles, one has to view the big picture. As an example, if Norwegian Army cannot secure even a small base at Afghanistan in war against terrorism, they cannot be bashed with incompetency or loyalty or professionalism. Sarmadhassan (talk) 09:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Air Defense Command

Is Air Defense Command considered a CORPS in Pakistan Army?

I think Pak Army consists of Ten Corps including the Strategic Forces Corps.

Please comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by StarChaser (talk • contribs) 08:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Why not find a source and determine it, rather than mere speculation? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

False reporting

"During the rule of General Yahya Khan, the Bengalis of East Pakistan protested against various political and economic expooitations by West Pakistan and massive civil unrest broke out in East Pakistan. In an attempt to quell the uprisings, Pakistan Army carried out Genocide and human rights abuses in East Pakistan"

          This article mentions that Pakistani Army Carried Out Atrocities and genocide against East Pakistanis which is not according to the reality.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.68.97.17 (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC) 

Non-neutral content under "political and corporate interests" section

"Political interests" section:

• Pakistani "defence journal" source cited but none of it's content reflected in the article.
• Rediff source used to back claims, written by Indian author and published by Indian source.
• Second two paragraphs cite no source, so can be deleted.

"Commercial interests" section:

• Footnote 19 cites a forum post - not allowed, first 14 lines can be deleted.
• Footnote 20 cites a book but gives no page numbers. The book is written by notoriously anti-military author "Ayesha Siddiqa" yet this is not reflected in the article text.
• Footnote 21 is a dead link to a Washington Post article that could no be found by myself after a brief search on the washington post website.

--Hj108 (talk) 14:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

"Non-neutral" content under political and corporate interests section

"Political interests" section:

• Pakistani "defence journal" source cited but none of it's content reflected in the article.

-Agreed (I did not contribute that statement)

• Rediff source used to back claims, written by Indian author and published by Indian source.

- Please try to be objective and counter the claims made in the "Indian source" with facts and figures. The source has cited allegations made by the ruling party. The GHQ has never tried to clarify or contradict these in any press conf/press release (quite unlike the prompt response to Kerry-Lugar bill) The facts also supported by the following links: http://antisystemic.org/satribune/www.satribune.com/archives/200504/P1_ss3.htm http://www.satribune.com/archives/Aug17_23_02/P1_landgrabbing.htm#top http://www.satribune.com/archives/jul06_12_03/opinion_amin.htm

• Second two paragraphs cite no source, so can be deleted.

The second paragraph is well nown fact in the history of Pakistan. The General did defy the Quaid-e-Azam and the fact has been cited in the parliment of Pakistan by several members |(Aitzaz Ahsan, Khwaja Asif) and never countered by the GHQ/ISPR. The third paragraph is also well known history. Please rad any Pakistan Studies text book and verify the facts if in doubt.

Commercial interests section:

• Footnote 19 cites a forum post - not allowed, first 14 lines can be deleted.

-The source may be a forum post but cites facts and figures.

• Footnote 20 cites a book but gives no page numbers. The book is written by notoriously anti-military author "Ayesha Siddiqa" yet this is not reflected in the article text.

- Please try to counter the claims made by the "notoriously anti-army" author. Also the description "notoriously anti-military" is a personal opinion-not enough reason to dismiss contents without counter arguments. The author is a well known researcher and the source cited is a well researched book published by the Oxford Uni. Press.

• Footnote 21 is a dead link to a Washington Post article that could no be found by myself after a brief search on the washington post website.

-The article has been published in Washington Post and its hard copy is available with their archives. There may be problems in the link for a while. Also, the facts presented in the artile have not been contested by the army/ISPR/GHQ

Please try to appriciate that this is an objective article and not an advertisment for Pakistan Army. Objective facts, even those not going in the organization's favor should be reported to give the readers a complet picture —Preceding unsigned comment added by Midnighthawk (talk • contribs) 08:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Please try to appreciate that I want this to be an objective article, that's why I want to remove all the UNCITED text and give the section a neutral tone.

• Removed uncited text from "political interests" section.
• Tweaked lines on accusations by political parties to give a neutral tone. Mentioned that they are accusations.
• Commented out text RE Musharraf "making off" with state gifts worth "millions". What does this have to do with political interests of the army?
• Removed 14 lines of text in "commercial interests" section which uses a link to a forum (http://www.paklinks.com/gs/military-strategic-issues/249384-who-ruling-poor-nation-pakistan-army-genrals.html) - this is NOT an acceptable source as per Wikipedia policy.
• Removed text whose cited source is a dead link. Could not find it in the Washington Post archives after a brief search.
• Added a line and a source representing what real Pakistanis, who live in Pakistan, think about the political system, rather than just what Midnighthawk thinks.

--Hj108 (talk) 13:16, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Edited the line on the "source representing what real Pakistanis think" to attribute the statement to the "source" and not present it as a sweeping statement. The statement is not supported by facts and figures in the original article by Pamela Constable and Kamran Khan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Midnighthawk (talk • contribs) 07:59, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Pakistan Army Size

Pakistan's Army Size is 550,000 men with 528,000 in reserve. Your reference of Zardari stating Pakistan has 700,000 troops is misleading because in Pakistan Army and Military are used interchangeably. All reputable sources state that Pakistan's Army is 550,000 men with 528,000 in reserve. Please find another source besides Zardari and then we can incorporate it. An off hand comment cannot carry more weight than reputable defense and strategic organizations. By the way, I am Pakistani. So there is no bias. And I pretty much created this article. Thanks for understanding. Mercenary2k (talk) 08:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Isn't the PA is always referred to as a ~500,000 man army? I agree with Mercenary2k.

--Hj108 (talk) 17:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

drones

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hcljwrNIKXck1_9cUZAIRHNXumJA

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/world/asia/22gates.html

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_14241547Mughalnz (talk) 03:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Waseem.Azhar, 21 April 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information. The qualification badges may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-badges.htm while decoration and awards conferred are given at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-awards.htm and finally his rank is judged from shoulder epaulet as may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-rank.htm.

The interservice equivalence of Pakistan Defence forces ranks is available at http://www.paf.gov.pk/ranks.html.

Waseem.Azhar (talk) 10:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Great information, but how would you propose we work it into the article?

N Not done till we know what to change. ^Avicenna_sis @ 02:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Waseem.Azhar (talk) 10:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC) The information at "Organization + Rank Structure" or alternatively "Personnel + Personnel Training + Officer Ranks" may also contain "The interservice equivalence of Pakistan Defence forces ranks is available at http://www.paf.gov.pk/ranks.html." before coresspondingly describing the structure of "Organization + Army Units" or "Personnel + Personnel Training + Uniforms".

Whereas under the headings "Personnel + Personnel Training + Uniform" more information may be provided as "The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information. The qualification badges may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-badges.htm while decoration and awards conferred are given at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-awards.htm and finally his rank is judged from shoulder epaulet as may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-rank.htm. before proceeding to the next section i.e. "Personnel + Personnel Training + Ethnic Composition". 175.107.3.134 (talk) 10:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC) Following two additions are suggested: 1- At the end of section on "Officer ranks" please add "The Pakistani defence service officers usually wear badges of rank on the shoulder epaulettes." 2- At the end of section on "Uniforms" please add "The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information i.e. The qualification badges, the decorations & awards conferred and finally the rank.".

Edit request from 203.99.178.52, 30 April 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

remove the Akbar Bugtis interview lines those are biased statements

203.99.178.52 (talk) 08:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

N Not done Get consensus for the change on this talk page first. Algebraist 12:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information. The qualification badges may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-badges.htm while decoration and awards conferred are given at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-awards.htm and finally his rank is judged from shoulder epaulet as may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-rank.htm. The interservice equivalence of Pakistan Defence forces ranks is available at http://www.paf.gov.pk/ranks.html. Waseem.Azhar (talk) 10:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Great information, but how would you propose we work it into the article?

Not done till we know what to change. ^Avicenna_sis @ 02:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Waseem.Azhar (talk) 10:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC) The information at "Organization + Rank Structure" or alternatively "Personnel + Personnel Training + Officer Ranks" may also contain "The interservice equivalence of Pakistan Defence forces ranks is available at http://www.paf.gov.pk/ranks.html." before coresspondingly describing the structure of "Organization + Army Units" or "Personnel + Personnel Training + Uniforms". Whereas under the headings "Personnel + Personnel Training + Uniform" more information may be provided as "The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information. The qualification badges may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-badges.htm while decoration and awards conferred are given at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-awards.htm and finally his rank is judged from shoulder epaulet as may be seen at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/army-rank.htm. before proceeding to the next section i.e. "Personnel + Personnel Training + Ethnic Composition".

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. This template may only be used when followed by a specific description of the request, that is, specific text that should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". As is, I am not able to understand what you would like to change. ^Avicenna_sis @ 06:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Waseem.Azhar (talk) 10:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC) Following two additions are suggested: 1- At the end of section on "Officer ranks" please add "The Pakistani defence service officers usually wear badges of rank on the shoulder epaulettes." 2- At the end of section on "Uniforms" please add "The uniform of a Pakistan army soldier exhibits much information i.e. The qualification badges, the decorations & awards conferred and finally the rank.".

Havildar Major

I find it extremely unlikely that the Pakistania Army uses E-9's as squad leaders. LUKE 84.23.155.84 (talk) 20:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

File:ChawindaBattel.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:ChawindaBattel.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

File:PakArmy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:PakArmy.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:56, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Capturing of Rajput Fort.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Capturing of Rajput Fort.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 26 November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:35, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

plagiarism issues

Material introduced into this article by User:Paksoldier appears to be copied directly from several other wikipedia articles. (relevant diff)

"But no matter what road an officer takes, the insignia are the same." - copied from United States Army

"Senior NCOs are considered the primary link between enlisted personnel and the commissioned officers." - copied from Non-commissioned officer

""Senior non-commissioned officers are promoted to JCO rank on the basis of merit and seniority, restricted by the number of vacancies." - copied from Junior Commissioned Officer

Technically, this is not a copyright violation because wikipedia's license allows material to be copied in this manner. However, it is intellectually lazy and very bad practice. Editors should be very careful to rewrite text in their own words and to cite a source. GabrielF (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

correction.

in 1965 war losses were heavy on the indian side.india lost 9500 killed 11200 injured 475 tanks and 110 warplanes destroyed. if losses were heavy on pakistani side y didnt the indians acheive even a single objectiv in the whole war despite overwhelming number of men and material? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.185.6.244 (talk) 09:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Please provide and source, then we can see about correcting the article. Cheers.Talk^Woe90i 10:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)