What's new

This War Guaranteed That India Would Dominate South Asia

American Pakistani

ELITE MEMBER
May 30, 2010
14,976
10
21,763
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
You indians should take such propaganda items written by Indian websites and shove it up your back sides. Shameless creatures.
It is not Indian wedsite but it is an American site lobbying for bhart. Improving their image and stature for local American consumption.

National Interest is the Buzzfeed of warfare blogs. Their whole shtick is click-baity "journalism" with shoddy reporting and hefty exaggerations. They have not had a single positive thing to say regarding Pakistan, reminiscent of the views of many an arrogant American Congressman. If India did indeed dominate South Asia, Pakistan would not have dared to resist Indian misadventures in the region to this day, never mind increasing their nuclear capacity to exceed that of India. The day India truly dominates South Asia is the day it ceases to see Pakistan as an existential threat. And that has not happened to date. So I implore our Indian members to stop looking from validation from their Western overlords, and see agenda driven "journalism" for what it is. But then again, expecting an Indian to be objective in his research is like making a horse dance in a strip-club: neither make any sense.
National interest is one of the Indian lobby group.

Didn't know "National Interest" is an Indian website and the writer "Michael Peck" is Indian :hitwall:
or is it that you see the world through your back side?
They are your lobbyist in United States.
 

Zapper

BANNED
May 9, 2019
2,269
-28
2,342
Country
India
Location
United States
it is a properganda..

the author refers to Pakistan acquisition of nuke as "unfortunate" and india nothing?

clearly a biased an unfair writer.

93K soldiers?.. again indian non sense, 43K were soldiers the rest were civilians.
yeah, whatever doesn't suit your narrative is propaganda for you lot or directed by Indian lobbyists/RAW

It is not Indian wedsite but it is an American site lobbying for bhart. Improving their image and stature for local American consumption.


National interest is one of the Indian lobby group.


They are your lobbyist in United States.
 

jaibi

SENIOR MODERATOR
Nov 15, 2012
3,426
108
6,987
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Nice sensationalism. Let's see how it goes, shall we? Our boys in white are ready; just please, do something instead of writing about it. We'll see you on the field or the seas.
Here's What You Need To Remember: Pakistan’s humiliation in 1971 spurred it into developing an atomic bomb. With India also armed with atomic weapons, South Asia now lives under the shadow of nuclear war.

This is what happens when you chop a nation in half.

Before December 3, 1971, Pakistan was a country suffering from a split personality disorder. When British India became independent in 1947, the country was divided into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan. The problem was that East Pakistan and West Pakistan were almost a thousand miles apart, and wedged in between them was archenemy India. Imagine if the United States only consisted of the East Coast and West Coast, and Russia controlled all of North America in between.


Thirteen days later, Pakistan had been amputated. Indian troops had conquered East Pakistan, which became the new nation of Bangladesh. More than ninety thousand Pakistani soldiers were taken prisoner, half the Pakistani Navy had been sunk and the Indian Air Force came out on top. It was total humiliation, and not just for Pakistan. The United States and Britain sent aircraft carriers in a futile attempt to intimidate India, and ended up facing off against Soviet warships. Pakistan’s defeat also spurred its rulers to begin the development of nuclear weapons.

The 1971 India-Pakistan War, the third major conflict between the two nations in twenty-five years, was sparked by unrest in East Pakistan. The Bengalis of East Pakistan, who constituted 54 percent of Pakistan’s population at the time, chafed under the rule of West Pakistan. The two Pakistans belonged to different ethnic groups and spoke different languages.

Bengali demands for autonomy were rebuffed. By mid-1971, an East Pakistan guerrilla movement had emerged, supported by India. Pakistan’s military-controlled government cracked down hard, killing up to three million Bengalis in what has been described as a genocide. By November, both India and Pakistan were preparing for war.

On December 3, Pakistan launched a preemptive air strike against Indian airfields, ironically trying to emulate how the Israeli Air Force had destroyed Egyptian airpower in 1967. The difference was that the Israelis committed two hundred aircraft and wiped out nearly five hundred Egyptian aircraft in a few hours; Pakistan committed fifty aircraft and inflicted little damage. The air war featured the full panoply of Cold War jets, pitting Pakistani F-104 Starfighters, F-86 Sabres, MiG-19s and B-57 Canberras against Indian MiG-21s, Sukhoi-7s, Hawker Hunters and Folland Gnats, as well as Hawker Sea Hawks flying from the Indian carrier Vikrant.

Both sides claimed victory in the air war. Chuck Yeager, who was in Pakistan advising their air force, claimed the Pakistanis “whipped their asses.” The Indians claim Yeager was crazy. However, it does appear that India had the upper hand in the air, controlling the skies over East Pakistan and losing about forty-five aircraft to Pakistan’s seventy-five. The maneuverable little Indian Gnat, a British-made lightweight fighter (its predecessor was called the Midge), proved so successful against Pakistani F-86s that the Indians dubbed it the “Sabre Slayer.”

At sea, there is no question that India won. The Indian Navy dispatched missile boats, armed with Soviet-made Styx missiles, to strike the western port of Karachi, sinking or badly damaging two Pakistani destroyers and three merchant ships, as well as fuel tanks. Indian ships blockaded East Pakistan from reinforcements and supplies. Notable was India’s use of the carrier Vikrant to conduct air strikes on coastal targets, as well as conducting an amphibious landing on Pakistani territory.

Pakistan retaliated by dispatching the submarine Ghazi to mine Indian ports. While stalked by an Indian destroyer, the Ghazi mysteriously blew up.

As for the ground war, the best that can be said is that if Napoleon himself had faced Pakistan’s strategic dilemma, he would have sulked off to St. Helena. Isolated by land and blockaded by sea, no army could have defended East Pakistan against even a moderately competent foe, let alone the nine Indian divisions that quickly captured the East Pakistan capital of Dhaka. East Pakistani forces surrendered on December 16.

To add insult to the defeat of Pakistan and its proudly Muslim rulers, the Indian campaign was planned by Maj. Gen. J. F. R. Jacob—an Indian Jew descended from a family that fled Baghdad in the eighteenth century.

One issue that hampered Pakistan’s war effort would soon become familiar in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and other ethnically divided nations. In 1971, Bengalis comprised a significant part of the Pakistani military, especially in technical jobs.

Meanwhile, the superpowers were flexing their muscles. Despite its cruelty toward the Bengalis, and the opposition of U.S. diplomats, President Richard Nixon and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger backed Pakistan against pro-Soviet India (see the Nixon-Kissinger transcripts here). Task Force 74, centered on the aircraft carrier Enterprise, steamed into the Bay of Bengal, as did the British carrier Eagle. Why India would have been intimidated into a cease-fire, even as its tanks were rolling into Dhaka, is a mystery. America’s attempt to deter India from defeating Pakistan became a case study of the limitations of relying on the threat of force to compel other nations to change their behavior.

In fact, what the U.S. Navy accomplished was to chill U.S.-Indian relations for years. Even more disturbing were the Soviet cruisers, destroyers and submarines shadowing Task Force 74. A war between two Southwest Asian nations could have triggered a superpower showdown at sea, and perhaps World War III.

In the end, India had demonstrated its military superiority. Pakistan lost half its territory and population. Perhaps more important, Pakistani illusions that an Islamic army could rout the “weak” Hindus had been disproved. Following the 1947 and 1965 wars, the 1971 war was the third major conflict between India and Pakistan. It was also the last. Despite some hostilities in Kargil and other spots on the border, India and Pakistan have not fought a major war in forty-five years.

Unfortunately, Pakistan’s humiliation in 1971 spurred it into developing an atomic bomb. With India also armed with atomic weapons, South Asia now lives under the shadow of nuclear war. The next major India-Pakistan clash could be the last.

- - - - - - - - - -
Michael Peck is a frequent contributor to the National Interest and is a regular writer for many outlets like WarIsBoring. He can be found on Twitter and Facebook. This article first appeared several years ago.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-guaranteed-india-would-dominate-south-asia-145092
 

Yankee-stani

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 22, 2018
8,123
1
12,242
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Why do Indians harp on 1971 so much I mean Pakistan does not have any territorial gripes towards the Bengal normalized ties with them once the war was over a couple years later who f..ck cares its 2020 and India isnt even a juggernaut that much in the region when China practically has India surrounded
 

PAKISTANFOREVER

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 15, 2015
15,777
-3
25,664
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Pakistan
So where'd it say "National Interest" is among them or did you simply assumed anything that doesn't fit your narrative is a fake or Indian propaganda site?



"National Interest" is an american organisation that lobbies for indian interests. That's all. Also, the author of the article in the OP, Michael Peck is NOT a military analyst, expert or even an amateur when it comes to military issues. Michael Peck is a graduate of Political Studies. He does not have the technical expertise to comment on military related issues.
 

Mrc

ELITE MEMBER
Dec 19, 2013
10,268
0
11,954
Country
Pakistan
Location
Qatar
World poorest military history is that of indian hindus.
They were ruled by foreign powers and religion for 1000 years without much effort or resistance

So they have every reason to celebrate 71

One war they won with million plus against 90k ratio.

Article is wrong. India cannot even dominate srilanka or Nepal let alone pak or bangladesh

1000 plus year of slavery has effectively destroyed their psyche.

A low income country home to largest poor population in world and keep dreaming of military domine'ce that they cannot possibly achieve
 

Yankee-stani

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 22, 2018
8,123
1
12,242
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
World poorest military history is that of indian hindus.
They were ruled by foreign powers and religion for 1000 years without much effort or resistance

So they have every reason to celebrate 71

One war they won with million plus against 90k ratio.

Article is wrong. India cannot even dominate srilanka or Nepal let alone pak or bangladesh

1000 plus year of slavery has effectively destroyed their psyche.

A low income country home to largest poor population in world and keep dreaming of military domine'ce that they cannot possibly achieve
They won because of geo politics they were allies with the Soviets in fact I think the war went the way thanks to Moscow backing them all the credit should not go to Indira Gandhi but Leonid Brezhnev and Yuri Andropov
 

TexasJohn

SENIOR MEMBER
May 13, 2006
1,417
0
669
Country
United States
Location
United States
"National Interest" is an american organisation that lobbies for indian interests. That's all. Also, the author of the article in the OP, Michael Peck is NOT a military analyst, expert or even an amateur when it comes to military issues. Michael Peck is a graduate of Political Studies. He does not have the technical expertise to comment on military related issues.
Just to clear the air, National Interest is owned by these guys:
https://cftni.org/
Henry Kissinger is one of their honorary Chairmen...
They have several contributors with a military background
 

AUz

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 14, 2010
8,547
-12
14,767
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

"India will dominate S.Asia"

Where is that domination? :lol: India shares the region and influence in South Asia with Pakistan. Domination is what US has in North America etc.

Partition of India not only deprived India of its most strategic lands...it also costed India the opportunity to be the undisputed super power of the region. Now, india is a mere regional power alongside Pakistan and it hurts them to no end
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom