After Himalayan avalanche, many in Pakistan call for patching ties with Ind

[janon]

Things are handled differently for Western and Eastern borders ... What happened last time to the one that strayed across the border ?

That was precisely the point. You cant expect our dhruvs to come to your side and pick them up, can you? That's exactly what I said.

I wonder why people can't understand such a simple point.

 

[Secur]

Well yes, India should and will continue to do what it is doing. That is precisely my point. India can afford to continue this indefinitely, but the strains of this are showing on pak. Which is what this article is saying.

Where exactly did you find any mention of strain put on Pakistan ? ... Am i talking to another deluded person who thinks Pakistan will give up this time ? ... Do you seriously think our boys will want the army to withdraw its claim on the glacier just because we have lost 135+ in an avalanche ? NEVER They will be replaced by another 135 ... What is the problem ? ... Both armies have lost thousands of soldiers in their 3 decades of maintaining presence on the glacier ... This accident is not the first of this sort ! This has been happening since the beginning ... We do not have to airlift men and material to the Siachin ... We provide logistics by roads so it is atleast 3 times cheaper than your cost's ... We are just fine with status quo at this moment ... By controlling Gyong La , we can keep a check at your forces ... Your forces cant come down and fight with NLI ! Nor does your presence in any way threatens the KKH ... We never had any plan to achieve another geographical link up with China at KKP ... Simply impractical ! So no , keep on spending more and more ... Whilst we sit on the down side to keep a check at you

That was precisely the point. You cant expect our dhruvs to come to your side and pick them up, can you? That's exactly what I said.

I wonder why people can't understand such a simple point.

Nah , you said it differently ... You said that possibly we are so fond of foreign heli's entering our country that we want Dhruv to rescue IA soldiers from across the border ... Implies a different meaning ...

 

[janon]

1)Where exactly did you find any mention of strain put on Pakistan ?

... Am i talking to another deluded person who thinks Pakistan will give up this time ? ... Do you seriously think our boys will want the army to withdraw its claim on the glacier just because we have lost 135+ in an avalanche ? NEVER They will be replaced by another 135 ... What is the problem ? ... Both armies have lost thousands of soldiers in their 3 decades of maintaining presence on the glacier ... This incident is not the first of this sort ! This has been happening since the beginning ...


2)We do not have to airlift men and material to the Siachin ...
We provide logistics by roads so it is atleast 3 times cheaper than your cost's ... We are just fine with status quo at this moment ... By controlling Gyong La , we can keep a check at your forces ...

3)Your forces cant come down and fight with NLI ! Nor does your presence in any way threatens the KKH ... We never had any plan to achieve another geographical link up with China at KKP ... Simply impractical ! So no , keep on spending more and more ... Whilst we sit on the down side to keep a check at you

4)Nah , you said it differently ... You said that possibly we are so fond of foreign heli's entering our country that we want Dhruv to rescue IA soldiers from across the border ... Implies a different meaning ...

1) Did you read the title of this thread and the article? That's where I got the idea from.

2)Thats because you dont have any men in siachen. Siachen is fully occupied by India, your forces cant even see it from where they are. Your people are situated to the west of saltoro ridge, coveting siachen. The indian army is proudly occupying it since 1984, when we took it from you in the siachen war.

3) We don't need to. As I said several times in this thread, we are not interested in coming down and fighting you, we are only interested in defending our territory. It is pakistan that harbours ambitions of coming into indian controlled territory and taking indian territory away from india. It is pakistan that covets indian territory, not the other way round. See your own people's responses in this very thread, some of them say that the pakistani flag will be flying all over indian kashmir in their lifetimes. Our forces are present only to ensure that that will never happen. So we dont want to come there or attack you, this status quo is all we need. But your country is not satisfied with that, although YOU may be.

4) I was asking him if thats what he was expecting, because he asked why dhruvs didnt do that. Thats something that cant happen, which is why the dhruvs didnt do it. I dont know how you can misunderstand it.

 

[Secur]

1) Did you read the title of this thread and the article? That's where I got the idea from.

2)Thats because you dont have any men in siachen. Siachen is fully occupied by India, your forces cant even see it from where they are.

3) We don't need to. As I said several times in this thread, we are not interested in coming down and fighting you, we are only interested in defending our territory.

Yes , even the implied message Who are those many in Pakistan first ?

Where exactly where Gyong La and Conway Saddle be then ? Is it that Indians only considers parts they occupy as Siachin ?

Good for you

You tried to deliver your message by giving an example of a bitter accident for Pakistanis ... Shouldn't have expected garlands in return ...

 

[janon]

Yes , even the implied message Who are those many in Pakistan first ?

Where exactly where Gyong La and Conway Saddle be then ? Is it that Indians only considers parts they occupy as Siachin ?

Good for you

You tried to deliver your message by giving an example of a bitter accident for Pakistanis ... Shouldn't have expected garlands in return ...

Excuse me? When did I say anything about the tragic avalanche? I specifically said several times that that is not what I am talking about. Please read the thread properly. I explicitly said this before, in CAPITAL LETTERS that I am not talking about the avalanche, but about the monetary costs across decades. I also said the avalanche is something that could happen to either side.

 

[Alchemy]

Indian media...and the pro Indian Pakistani media milking the situation.
they should be ashamed of doing politics on other peoples tragic death.

Patching up ties with India to avoid unnecessary losses is called shameful?????

 

[Ambitious.Asian]

We will never forget Kashmir or our martyrs. We will never make peace with Indians until we achieve what our martyrs set out to do. We will hold the Indian's back as we have been doing from fulfilling their potential. In due course imo in our lifetime we will see the Pakistani flag flying not just on peoples houses in Kashmir but official buildings of the Pakistan gov.

if u don't want peace with then why such big words from ur leadars????

 

[Mirza Jatt]

I think Pakistan should do what the pakistani members on PDF are saying. they are always right.No patching up with India.

And why the heck are Indians bothered ?

 

[Jackdaws]

Imagine this is an Internet forum where people have never met each other. No one has been to Siachen either. Imagine the animosity between the actual soldiers. If the civvies are so adamant, the army chaps are probably more obtuse.

 

[SQ8]

I think Pakistan should do what the pakistani members on PDF are saying. they are always right.No patching up with India.

And why the heck are Indians bothered ?

If they all did what is said here.. then we would be at war with America, Have a bigoted government that prosecutes minorities,
Imran khan would have to be president and prime minister.. with Musharraf serving as his ADC.
and women would have to wear burkas three days of the week and wear revealing clothes the other four..

 

[Gessler]

@kakgeta

Thanks but our Mi-17s were up to the task

No, dude, thats not what i had in mind. See we have both Mi-17s and super-heavy lift Mi-26 HALO as well, but why did we build the dhruv?? Alright, as it is Mi-26 can be too big and cumbersome in some situations, but the advantage Dhruv (and only a few other such choppers) provide over the Mils is the Mils payload capacity reduces as altitude increases, at high altitudes like Siachen, it will not be able to carry any useful load except a no. paramedics that would be a fraction of the Hip's max load, taking a sling load is difficult.

Dhruv's payload capacity remains roughly constant right up to its max altitude, it perfectly fulfills the role it was built for thus. Sling loads (as i've shown) can also be carried up to a limited capacity though. Its quick and agile as a plus.

The problem wasn't getting troops or supplies there. It was looking for the soldiers in 80 feet of solid ice spread over an area of over 1 kilometre square

Exactly. But the sooner you can get the troops there, the more troops you can get there, the more efficiently you can get there, the more efficiently they can work on the rescue operation. In such situations, every SECOND counts.

Thats what^^i meant to say.

I don't think you've got a sale

I wont mind it anyway, we've already sold Dhruv to >10 countries, its not a problem if one more sale was interrupted.

But lets not forget that to support any such rescue operations in high altitude areas like Siachen, we must remember that every second counts, nothing is more precious than time. There such be readily operational logistical facilities for garrisons which can respond to the required location within 60 minutes roughly to minimize such damage caused by avalanches.

PS - Its funny that so many pakistani members - kakgeta, darkinsky, windjammer, etc. took seriously my leg-pulling post of offering Dhruv sale.

I only wanted to make a few members realise the necessarity for a high-altitude quick reaction utility chopper to support such rescue operations.

 

[jai231179]

I haven't read the thread in full, but I've a pressing question on my mind to ask though. Why can't India and Pakistan both withdraw from Kashmir, relinquish both their claims and allow the Kashmiris to set up an independant state? To be honest, it appears that neither side is really enjoying any benefits by having Kashmir. Its definitely a drain on both economies for sure. Also, if both sides relinquish their claims over Kashmir, it would speed up the peace process won't it?

 

[Awesome]

Siachen is in Himalayas?

 

[jai231179]

People who want patching ties on the cost of 135 shaheeds are traitors. Misshapen is the part of every activity and we don't wish any patch up unless solution of Jammu & Kashmir, Siachen and Sir Creek.

Those people haven't guts to defend their country so need to remove such morons out of government. At this moment i assure that every Pakistani is ready to help their army even in Siachen no matter how many avalanche will come. Numbers of avalanches are not more than number of brave heart Pakistanis.

135 soldiers who became shaheed is still 135 lives wasted, no matter how u look at it. Lives are still lives and not cheap. And you are proposing that more and more people should become shaheed for a bunch of useless mountains than neither side really seems to benefit from. Forget India and Pakistan, those Kashmiris who belong to the land u guys are fighting over are seeing no benefit either. Why not both of u guys let them go on their own and make peace?

 

[Gessler]

I haven't read the thread in full, but I've a pressing question on my mind to ask though. Why can't India and Pakistan both withdraw from Kashmir, relinquish both their claims and allow the Kashmiris to set up an independant state? To be honest, it appears that neither side is really enjoying any benefits by having Kashmir. Its definitely a drain on both economies for sure. Also, if both sides relinquish their claims over Kashmir, it would speed up the peace process won't it?

Correct. But neither side wants to do that it seems. If Kashmir becomes an independent nation, then sooner
or later, both India and Pakistan (or perhaps china too) would want to add the land to their territory. It would
be either that, OR, becoz if one side tries to capture the land, the other side will be angry at it for violating the truce
of letting Kashmir be independent, a war over kashmir will erupt, and we'll all end up seeing yet another Kargil, and thats neither the solution, not the topic here, according to
what the MoDs say.