F-16 And The Indian Nightmare.

[Dawkins]

A reminder is in place for the absent minded that let alone an assertion of the so called Islamic Brotherhood baring down on India, the article doesn't even contain my own POV.

Thanks for clarifying ..

It's an Indian dilemma complemented by jittery nerves that forces it's think tanks to recede into retards mentality of such plausible scenarios. And since you seem oblivious to the reality, let me remind you that Pakistan fought it's wars with it's much larger neighbor while crushed under discriminatory sanctions, hence no such rational for India which enjoyed a free flow from Russia and elsewhere.

Aside from the childish name calling, its the diplomatic failure at your country's end that resulted in sanctions affecting you harder than it affected India. Keeping a neutral stance, India could purchase weapons from the Soviet Union post 1965. U remember who Nixon supported in 1971 right ? An aircraft carrier in the bay of bengal did not arrive from Mars. The assistance from Iran/Jordan has also been documented. Further, Kargil war was self-inflicted by the Pakistan Army.

Your Saviour did feel adventurous in May of 1998 but as midnight oil burned in Beijing, Moscow, Washington and other Western Capitals, the true reality dawned upon the baby killers who suddenly changed their tune to exit earlier than planned from the so called joint exercise with Mother India........ No Joy.

I heard that story of India/Israel joint strike .. Frankly, i am not sure how true that is. FYI its called partner, i explained to you earlier USA and Britain are partners, one isnt savior of the other .. is it so hard to understand ?

And since you keep ranting the Pan-Islamic scenario

Well, isnt that what the thread is about ? I'd be happy if there werent anything like that, its not like i enjoy my country getting bombed, irrespective of who does it.

you should read into Gandhi's prophecy, with such statement, "If all Muslims of Pakistan are killed, there are still plenty of Muslims worldwide, but if all Hindus in India are eliminated, basically that will be the end of the race.

Who said killing everyone .. i thought we were talking about conventional war, hence the F-16s. Are you serious about there being a possibility of turning South Asia into a nuclear ash tray ? I dont think any leader on either side is so dumb as to risk death of hundreds of millions of his people (along with his foes) with permanent damage to the environment, making lives of those who survive impossible ? All the first use limited theater nuclear option is nonsense, no Prime minister/General on either side would even consider the nuclear button.

 

[Windjammer]

Erm.. could you please tell me which conflict between Pakistan and which country are you talking about here? As far as I know, you and the Indians have fought last in 1999 in 'Kargil Conflict'. Who are 'baby killers'.


Now why does religion always come in a defense forum, sir? I don't think we are here to discuss the superiority of any religion. Why is it that most Pakistani members see the non-Pakistani (including me) from religious angle always and not from general perspective?

I am yet to see a religious post made by a non-Pakistani on religion and its relation to how war can be won. May I know the cause of such obsession with religion if you don't mind?

Do you really think it is easy to just press a button and launch nuclear weapons? Do you know that even anyone of you both even accidentally presses nuclear weapons, it is armageddon as all the nuclear powers will fire missiles in every direction, this includes your beloved middle east. Wars if fought between nations will always be strictly conventional even between nuclear powers, because nuclear weapons are to discourage and their usage not just ends the "Hindu race" but every race on this planet as the skies will be clouded with shower of ballistic missiles all around the world.

Have you ever served in the Armed forces? Please answer yes or no.

And about 'Hindu Race', first of all Hinduism is not a race, its a faith just like there is no "Muslim race". I am a Swiss and I am a Hindu. Likewise, there are thousands of non-Indian Hindus in Southeast Asian countries, Eastern Europe, gradually rising in Western Europe, United States, Canada and rest of Americas. Hence, your words here are nothing but religious jingoism.

And apart from it all, please remember that one nuclear button press would mean that EVERY race, religion, caste, section, culture etc would cease to exist.

The reference was in light of events in May 1998, India had conducted it's nuclear tests and while Pakistan prepared to reply in kind, a detachment of Israeli F-16s landed in India apparently in a faint effort to neutralize Pakistan's capability before it could test, the joint Indo/Israeli threat was detected by Pakistan, which alerted all major Capitals of a full scale response should such misadventure materialises. The rest is history.
Let me clarify once again that Islam preaches that you practice your religion and respect others. Bringing religion into context wasn't my initive, The other member has repeatedly mentioned the Pan-Islamic Brotherhood terminology translating to the effect Muslims against Hindus and Jews. Hence a reply was in place alas i only repeated the statement once made by an Indian leader regarding elimination of race or religion.

 

[jha]

i have always suspected this news of israeli f-a6 landing in india...what i have heard that the wanted india of ground support during early 90's.

 

[Windjammer]

Watch the video below where the shortage of laborers is clearly explained and it also talks about how they are trying to get more Indian workers from the middle east. They dont have to be sent packing, India wants them back!!!! watch 3:40..if its too much to digest

YouTube - NYTimes.com - Building Modern India

I doubt India will need to send out too many recall letters.

Sacked by text, the Indian workers who built Dubai - Middle East, World - The Independent

Perhaps it's you who needs to swallow the pride and taste the bitter pill.

Dubai debacle likely to hit workers, remittances - India Business - Biz - The Times of India

 

[Windjammer]

Thanks for clarifying ..



Aside from the childish name calling, its the diplomatic failure at your country's end that resulted in sanctions affecting you harder than it affected India. Keeping a neutral stance, India could purchase weapons from the Soviet Union post 1965. U remember who Nixon supported in 1971 right ? An aircraft carrier in the bay of bengal did not arrive from Mars. The assistance from Iran/Jordan has also been documented. Further, Kargil war was self-inflicted by the Pakistan Army.



I heard that story of India/Israel joint strike .. Frankly, i am not sure how true that is. FYI its called partner, i explained to you earlier USA and Britain are partners, one isnt savior of the other .. is it so hard to understand ?



Well, isnt that what the thread is about ? I'd be happy if there werent anything like that, its not like i enjoy my country getting bombed, irrespective of who does it.



Who said killing everyone .. i thought we were talking about conventional war, hence the F-16s. Are you serious about there being a possibility of turning South Asia into a nuclear ash tray ? I dont think any leader on either side is so dumb as to risk death of hundreds of millions of his people (along with his foes) with permanent damage to the environment, making lives of those who survive impossible ? All the first use limited theater nuclear option is nonsense, no Prime minister/General on either side would even consider the nuclear button.

Pakistan was placed under sanctions after the 1965 war, hence it turned to China and France for armament procurement, however even in 1971 war, most of the equipment was American orientated. The so called US Carrier group did enter Bay of Bengal some 1700 NM from Dacca................. apparently to rescue American citizens stranded in what was East Pakistan.
And since you keep ranting Pan-Islamic verses India/Israel, it only translates into Muslims against Hindus/Jew combination, in context i repeated Gandhi's words of wisdom. No one has an appetite for any nuclear nonsense.
BTW, "partners" is a namer usually used to describe matters on equal terms, not where one seeks security from the other. Here is an old favourite.

 

[REHAN NIAZI FALCON]

Are you sure? you just called innocent Indians who died in India because of Pakistani terrorists as dogs!!! Why make a lame statement and then make an even lamer one?

what about innocent kashmiries..... and what about innocent pakistanies... what about innocent muslims....
whom i should call dogs?

 

[ronny013]

Bring it on....full and final.....lets kill each other....

PS: I don't like Nightmare

 

[REHAN NIAZI FALCON]

Son, how old are you? Nuclear weapons again? Have you faced a war yourself? Have you even served in any security forces? Do you know what the usage of nuclear weapons means? Read my response to Windjammer.

sir i didn,t said for war .... get my point ..what i mentioned at end to refrain india.. cos without nukes india would have attacked us so so long before... come to motive behind the reason why we acquired nukes.. they are for our peace to keep our enemies at safe distance.... hope u will be clear now

 

[ronny013]

cos without nukes india would have attacked us so so long before


Who and when said india want to attack pakistan with or without nukes....Just give link or prove it from any of ur sources otherwise dont talk.

 

[asq]

Are you sure? you just called innocent Indians who died in India because of Pakistani terrorists as dogs!!! Why make a lame statement and then make an even lamer one?

Making assumptions again, he called that to those who are war mongers and wish harm to Pakistan. As they keep talking about all that air power and all that A/C all that other superion weaponary,

time and again it has beem explained to them that it is not the superiority of weapons that wins the war and examples have been given of vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But they continue on the same path of harming Pakistan.

On many occasions I have read Pakistani have offered peace based on true facts and ground realities, but Indian make a mockery of it and continue to talk about thier superior AF, their A/C.

One indian even went that far that he called Pakistanis inability to do business.

Assumptions of not being able to do business when it is known that exports and imports in Pakistan is in billions each year. the link below is the indicative of the business by pakistan.

Pakistan Trade, Pakistan Export, Pakistan Import, Pakistan Exports, Pakistani Trade, Pakistan Imports

So My friends we have the right to defend ouselves from inuendos and assumptions and have the right to tell the truth.

 

[REHAN NIAZI FALCON]

cos without nukes india would have attacked us so so long before


Who and when said india want to attack pakistan with or without nukes....Just give link or prove it from any of ur sources otherwise dont talk.

DEAR SON READ COLD WAR DOCTRINE.....

 

[leon]

DEAR SON READ COLD WAR DOCTRINE.....

so how many times we attacked u before u acquire nukes
and indian pakistan case is slightly different from the cold war doctrine

we have a official no first use policy that was missing in the cold war

 

[Parashuram1]

sir i didn,t said for war .... get my point ..what i mentioned at end to refrain india.. cos without nukes india would have attacked us so so long before... come to motive behind the reason why we acquired nukes.. they are for our peace to keep our enemies at safe distance.... hope u will be clear now

Well you said it yourself. Nuclear weapons are for deterring an opponent from complete invasion. However, conventional wars especially in conflict scenarios can ensue for sometime till a ceasefire is forced upon the belligerents.

Nuclear weapons are to avoid a capture, but since they are more of a strategic deterrent, the whole point is to show of using it which in the case of Pakistan and India, both can show each other. If you use it, its purpose is lost and also it brings an end to the entire world.

Besides, nuclear weapons aren't the end of all conflicts. Every invention leads to its counter and all the nuclear powers are developing tactics to overcome even their enemies'nuclear capabilities again resorting to conventional tactics. Now I cannot exactly say how, but just as the warfare doctrine has been evolving over millenia, this is also one of the evolving forms of warfare. Nuclear threat as an absolute stop was valid 30 years back, but not today.

Though I am in favor of global nuclear disarmament, it is very unlikely that the Pakistan-India-China-Russia-North Korea-(Iran)-Israel-USA chain is going to break up anytime sooner.

 

[Parashuram1]

Making assumptions again, he called that to those who are war mongers and wish harm to Pakistan. As they keep talking about all that air power and all that A/C all that other superion weaponary,

time and again it has beem explained to them that it is not the superiority of weapons that wins the war and examples have been given of vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But they continue on the same path of harming Pakistan.

On many occasions I have read Pakistani have offered peace based on true facts and ground realities, but Indian make a mockery of it and continue to talk about thier superior AF, their A/C.

One indian even went that far that he called Pakistanis inability to do business.

Assumptions of not being able to do business when it is known that exports and imports in Pakistan is in billions each year. the link below is the indicative of the business by pakistan.

Pakistan Trade, Pakistan Export, Pakistan Import, Pakistan Exports, Pakistani Trade, Pakistan Imports

So My friends we have the right to defend ouselves from inuendos and assumptions and have the right to tell the truth.

time and again it has beem explained to them that it is not the superiority of weapons that wins the war and examples have been given of vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But they continue on the same path of harming Pakistan.

I would like to differ. Your statement regarding the highlighted part isn't entirely valid. It has some validity because the Mujahideen fought the Soviets, but in those days, these mercenaries had the support of 30 NATO countries and United States' full financial, tactical and logistic support. Today this is not the case. The entire world barring a few rogue elements are against the Taliban including the much estranged countries United States, Russia and even China which is considered a rising counter-balance of future against United States. All these three plus European Union and the other two BRIC countries Brazil and India form the world's bulk of political, financial and military might, which stand united against Taliban and other terrorist organizations. Taliban might fight on, but won't last long in today's context.

Taliban might be a tough opponent but they are hiding behind innocent people without any regard for their own people's lives and don't fight head on against even the infantry foot soldiers on ground. If the NATO wanted a total war and destruction, they won't have even bothered sending in foot soldiers to differentiate the innocent from Taliban and just flatten the entire country with some of the most destructive aerial ordinance. But they didn't do that.

The reason why ground troops have been sent is to neutralize targets that are actually rogue and a threat and to avoid civilians as much as possible. The Soviet doctrine wanted to include Afghanistan as a Soviet Socialist Republic and annex the territory while neither the NATO nor the United States has these intentions, contrary to the silly conspiracy theories on this forum.


While Vietnam and Iraq are different case and don't really relate to your context. About your conflict with the Indians, I rest my case.

 

[Trisonics]

Making assumptions again, he called that to those who are war mongers and wish harm to Pakistan. As they keep talking about all that air power and all that A/C all that other superion weaponary,

true but he also said this, you judge what the intension was

nice indian jokes again..... if even a dog dies in india they piont their fingers towards pakistan...
so much jokes of terrorists camps and surgical attacks , this and that...
but there is very common saying barking dogs seldom bite....
and other thing we are sovereign atomic power with high tech missile delivery system and indians know that very well ....

There was no need to bring in any comparisons to "dogs"..you call it assumed, I call it intended!