1965 War Documentary Fath-e-Mobin

[Hamza913]

The correct answers:

1. Not one. Your sureness is misplaced. Not a single one, not even an exchange of shots, after 1948. Go check with your knowledgeable seniors.
2. No skirmishes. Not a single one. And as for oppressing the Kashmiri people, it was their local information which led to every one of the commandos being captured.
3. I asked a specific question, and you evaded it. Your pre-emptive strike is a start of hostilities, isn't it? Or was that a non-violent demonstration by disarmed soldiers.

Now do you get it?

1. I doubt it, common logic would tell anyone otherwise.
2. Yes there were. And the Kashmiri who reported it was in a minority who likes India.
3. I did no such thing.

The correct answers:

1. Not one. Your sureness is misplaced. Not a single one, not even an exchange of shots, after 1948. Go check with your knowledgeable seniors.
2. No skirmishes. Not a single one. And as for oppressing the Kashmiri people, it was their local information which led to every one of the commandos being captured.
3. I asked a specific question, and you evaded it. Your pre-emptive strike is a start of hostilities, isn't it? Or was that a non-violent demonstration by disarmed soldiers.

Now do you get it?

@dsr478

Still no answer to whether or not I am justified in being condescending?

Your totally not justified in being condescending, because it shows your lack of an ability to have a rational conversation.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1. I doubt it, common logic would tell anyone otherwise.
2. Yes there were. And the Kashmiri who reported it was in a minority who likes India.
3. I did no such thing.

1. No, no, we are not asking for you to demonstrate your logical reasoning. Just the facts.
2. No skirmishes either. Just the facts please. And the majority Kashmiris were content with India until 1984, did anyone tell you that?
3. Oh, you didn't? OK, is a pre-emptive strike an act of war or not? Simple question.

Are you Kashmiri or Mirpuri? Do you speak Kashur? May I test it?

1. I doubt it, common logic would tell anyone otherwise.
2. Yes there were. And the Kashmiri who reported it was in a minority who likes India.
3. I did no such thing.



Your totally not justified in being condescending, because it shows your lack of an ability to have a rational conversation.

Why? What was irrational about the questions I asked and the information I gave? Was any of it irrational? Please point out which bit you think was irrational?

 

[Delnavaz B]

Not all the Kashmirs speak Kashur specially who migrated to Pakistani Punjab.

 

[Jackdaws]

Every few months there is some major thread on 1965 and people going nuts. I am surprised 1971, Kargil and the Mughal era have still not been thrown into the mix after 16 pages.

 

[Delnavaz B]

Every few months there is some major thread on 1965 and people going nuts. I am surprised 1971, Kargil and the Mughal era have still not been thrown into the mix after 16 pages.

You are wrong troll from your country already posted Gen AA Khan surrender pictures plus many others.

 

[Hamza913]

1. No, no, we are not asking for you to demonstrate your logical reasoning. Just the facts.
2. No skirmishes either. Just the facts please. And the majority Kashmiris were content with India until 1984, did anyone tell you that?
3. Oh, you didn't? OK, is a pre-emptive strike an act of war or not? Simple question.

Are you Kashmiri or Mirpuri? Do you speak Kashur? May I test it?



Why? What was irrational about the questions I asked and the information I gave? Was any of it irrational? Please point out which bit you think was irrational?

1. I gave the likely facts, not certain but highly probable.
2. Even if there were not any skirmishes, India still oppressed Kashmiri's. Me and my family from Kashmir have never, EVER liked India and we have never met a Kashmiri who does.
3. An act of war is marching into Pakistani Kashmir, which you did.

I don't even speak Urdu right, only English.

It was irrational as we were having a good argument, but then you act all superior, you have done this not only to me, but to other members as well.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Not all the Kashmirs speak Kashur specially who migrated to Pakistani Punjab.

//Deleted//

Every few months there is some major thread on 1965 and people going nuts. I am surprised 1971, Kargil and the Mughal era have still not been thrown into the mix after 16 pages.

It's coming, don't worry. Plus ca change, plus c'est meme chose.

 

[Delnavaz B]

Didn't ask you. You wanted to be ignored. If you do, stay out of a conversation where you cannot handle the facts and the questions. If not, welcome back, and I will get to you in a second. Remember, you asked for it.



It's coming, don't worry. Plus ca change, plus c'est meme chose.

I didn't replied to your post Uncle just wanted to state some facts being a Kashmiri.

 

[Hamza913]

Didn't ask you. You wanted to be ignored. If you do, stay out of a conversation where you cannot handle the facts and the questions. If not, welcome back, and I will get to you in a second. Remember, you asked for it./QUOTE]

Pretty rude for someone who claims to be 65.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1. I gave the likely facts, not certain but highly probable.
2. Even if there were not any skirmishes, India still oppressed Kashmiri's. Me and my family from Kashmir have never, EVER liked India and we have never met a Kashmiri who does.
3. An act of war is marching into Pakistani Kashmir, which you did.

I don't even speak Urdu right, only English.

It was irrational as we were having a good argument, but then you act all superior, you have done this not only to me, but to other members as well.

1. Likely facts are not facts, they are likelihoods. And I am telling you categorically that your surmise is wrong. Disprove it, if you wish.
2. You are not a Kashmiri. What you like or dislike doesn't count.
3. Er, beg your pardon? With several hundred Pakistani soldiers already in combat in Indian Kashmir, we are the attackers and we committed an act of war? Could you think about what you said?

OK, but my essential point is that you are not from the Valley, you are from what the Pakistanis refer to as Azad Kashmir.

And now, coming to the irrational, what do you want me to do when you have no facts, no 'information', as another genius has put it, but keep coming up and saying entirely mistaken things? Tell me a practical way out and I will try it.

I do it not to you alone, as you have correctly put it, but to other members as well, and the key is in the way they handle discussions. Those who come with facts and with authentic information, or a good analysis, I welcome. Those who flourish jargon, use rhetoric and irritate me with silly statements which cannot ever have been true (700,000 Indian troops in Kashmir? Armoured divisions in Kashmir?) get the condescension.

So what do I do? Ignore you? It's your call. It's your choice. If I pay attention, I will deal with good and with bad bits on merit.


24th August 1950. Do the math.

And never suggest that I lied. You will immediately catch it in the neck.

I didn't replied to your post Uncle just wanted to state some facts being a Kashmiri.

Sorry. I take that back. My apologies.

I don't think we should celebrate. I think we should remember our martyrs, and our wounded, in a solemn spirit.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-33815204

 

[Hamza913]

1. Likely facts are not facts, they are likelihoods. And I am telling you categorically that your surmise is wrong. Disprove it, if you wish.
2. You are not a Kashmiri. What you like or dislike doesn't count.
3. Er, beg your pardon? With several hundred Pakistani soldiers already in combat in Indian Kashmir, we are the attackers and we committed an act of war? Could you think about what you said?

OK, but my essential point is that you are not from the Valley, you are from what the Pakistanis refer to as Azad Kashmir.

And now, coming to the irrational, what do you want me to do when you have no facts, no 'information', as another genius has put it, but keep coming up and saying entirely mistaken things? Tell me a practical way out and I will try it.

I do it not to you alone, as you have correctly put it, but to other members as well, and the key is in the way they handle discussions. Those who come with facts and with authentic information, or a good analysis, I welcome. Those who flourish jargon, use rhetoric and irritate me with silly statements which cannot ever have been true (700,000 Indian troops in Kashmir? Armoured divisions in Kashmir?) get the condescension.

So what do I do? Ignore you? It's your call. It's your choice. If I pay attention, I will deal with good and with bad bits on merit.



24th August 1950. Do the math.

And never suggest that I lied. You will immediately catch it in the neck.

1. Very hard to proof/disprove minor incidents from so long ago.

2. I am Kashmiri, it's not your decision where I am from.

3. They were helping locals, making it justified. You weren't, making it immoral.

The practical way out is for you to stop replying. I always do that. If you cannot handle a conversation (which you clearly can't) then back out. Simple.

Go ahead and negatively rate my post, that's what you always do when someone points out how incorrect you are.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The sting is in the tail.

https://in.rbth.com/blogs/stranger_...war-why-india-quit-when-it-was-winning_394095

 

[.]

@Joe Shearer What are you trying to prove here?I don't understand a single word you're trying to say.
I bet your head wobbles a hundred times before you type what you are trying to type here?Very typical indian I have had the pleasure of reading your posts the first time I came to this thread Last Mid June Very typical Indian I must say.Blinded..
Take your stupid mentally disturbed Incredible India Delusional posts and post them elsewhere.
The reason for opening this thread was the objective of highlighting Pakistan armies contribution,Do you see anywhere that who won this war ? Does the title anywhere reads as "Who won the war in 1965"?
More to add to this , stupidity continues like this every good thread is ruined by going totally off-track off-topic ,It is the job of Moderation to stop Guys like you from starting smelly nationalist posts.
Pakistan was successful in what it wanted to achieve Air superiority It did.
Attack and defend against a 3x larger army with better tanks.
I'm shocked to see people like @Delnavaz B trying to argue to People like Joe.
I opened a thread about the Indian air-craft carrier then the Indian JAi hind brigade came like mongols and ruined it,With their highly biased and Nationalist Propaganda.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1. Very hard to proof/disprove minor incidents from so long ago.

2. I am Kashmiri, it's not your decision where I am from.

3. They were helping locals, making it justified. You weren't, making it immoral.

The practical way out is for you to stop replying. I always do that. If you cannot handle a conversation (which you clearly can't) then back out. Simple.

Go ahead and negatively rate my post, that's what you always do when someone points out how incorrect you are.

Incorrect? About my age? Is there no limit to your insolence?

1. There is nothing to prove or disprove. Nothing happened. Ask anyone who served in your own Army. He will laugh at you and your idle speculation.
2. Only Kashmiris are Kashmiri. Only Kashur-speakers are Kashmiri. Some random Uzbek or Tajik can't drop in for tea and claim that he is Kashmiri. Gilgiti, yes, Balti, yes, Ladakhi, yes, Mirpuri, yes, but not Kashmiri. Jammu and Kashmir was the name given to the realm ruled by the Maharaja of Kashmir, whose ancestors put together the state piece by piece. Before them, under the Sikhs, the Afghans or the Mughals, there was never any question of the areas ruled by the Dogras being Kashmir.
3. Nobody helped the locals. That is a blatant falsehood. So there is no question of immorality. The immorality is in your manufacturing a situation that never existed.

As for not replying, when you mis-state facts, why should you not be pulled up for it? Do you expect to make any and every kind of wild claim and have everyone remain quiet about it?

@Joe Shearer What are you trying to prove here?I don't understand a single word you're trying to say.
I bet your head wobbles a hundred times before you type what you are trying to type here?Very typical indian I have had the pleasure of reading your posts the first time I came to this thread Last Mid June Very typical Indian I must say.Blinded..
Take your stupid mentally disturbed Incredible India Delusional posts and post them elsewhere.
The reason for opening this thread was the objective of highlighting Pakistan armies contribution,Do you see anywhere that who won this war ? Does the title anywhere reads as "Who won the war in 1965"?
More to add to this , stupidity continues like this every good thread is ruined by going totally off-track off-topic ,It is the job of Moderation to stop Guys like you from starting smelly nationalist posts.
Pakistan was successful in what it wanted to achieve Air superiority It did.
Attack and defend against a 3x larger army with better tanks.
I'm shocked to see people like @Delnavaz B trying to argue to People like Joe.
I opened a thread about the Indian air-craft carrier then the Indian JAi hind brigade came like mongols and ruined it,With their highly biased and Nationalist Propaganda.

<YAWN!>

Next.

 

[.]

I request the @WebMaster to close this thread and prevent Indian propaganda like they always do.
The reason to do so.
The purpose of the thread was to share the documentary