Avalanche traps 10 Indian army soldiers in Siachen

[SarthakGanguly]

Indian Army is Paying Price for illegal Occupation....

Quoting for posterity. Just wait.

 

[Osiris]

What's 'false' is your attempt at comparing 'apples and oranges'. The Tribal Lashkar was not 'Pakistani forces entering J&K' just as India's blockade and stoking of rebellion and unrest inside Junagadh (that occurred long before October 1947) was technically not 'Indian forces entering Junagadh'.

India's illegal intervention in Junagadh (legally a part of Pakistan with the accession) with the deliberate intent (as per historical archives from Indian sources noting the content of Indian government deliberations on the issue) pre-dated the Tribal Lashkar's intervention in J&K.

The Maharajah hadn't acceded to India or Pakistan, whereas Junagadh had officially acceded to Pakistan, and India officially recognized the act of accession.

Pakistani intervention of Kashmir and Indian intervention of Junagadh have become apples and oranges now.

Jab tum karo to Chamatkaar, jab hum karein toh balatkaar.

Your tribal lashkars were lead by serving officers of Pakistani army ..followed by full fledged invasion of Pakistani army.

And the only reason tribal lashkars had to sent in the first place was because Pakistani army Chief General Douglas Gracey.. refused to obey Jinnah's orders.

On one hand Jinnah professed Kashmir should be a part of Pakistan, since it is Muslim majority and on other hand he accepts accession of Junagadh. A massively Hindu majority disctrict, surrounded on all sides by India.

Such duplicity and political treachery by Jinnah forced India to deal with Pakistan on it own terms.

And thereby not only seize Junagadh but Kashmir too.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Let me clear it out.

Pakistan is the only state to consider India's police actions as invasions.

India has to be one of the few States to consider her armed invasions and occupations of sovereign States and/or territories (by regular or irregular forces) as 'police actions'.

Pakistan is the only state to consider itself as the possible liberator of Kashmir. Namely Azad Kashmir. Which is not recognized by ANY country in the world. Not even by Pakistan.

This is precisely the kind of bald faced lying and distortion of history by India that needs to be countered - Pakistan's position remains that the UNSC Resolutions on J&K need to be implemented.

With every passing day Pakistan will see itself more cornered. Compare your positions vis a vis India from the 50s, to 60s, 70s to 80s to 90s to today. You will know the trend.

Internal instability has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Pakistan's positions on various disputes.

Plus India's growing economic strength will force many unwilling foreign partners to turn away from Pakistan. We are building lobbies to have a greater presence elsewhere. We have capability to cry much more to the world when we are attacked by terrorists. Though it may sound as ridiculous and cowardly, that is just us adjusting to the current situations. The world sympathizes with us. You have gained a reputation on the other hand. We have played our part. Proudly. And will continue to do so. In fact, with Ajit Doval in position - we will look to explore the fissures in Pakistani society. Some of your compatriots say we already do that.

If we do - I will not mind. This is what enemy states are supposed to do to each other. If we are weak - be sure - the Pakistan Armed forces will make a mincemeat out of us. The status quo is due to the respect for each other's nukes. Nothing else.

In the end...what will Pakistan do? Short of funding terror modules in India and other places all around the world? I genuinely wish to know.

Quite verbose, but absolutely nothing related to the subject at hand. You're intent on focusing on the 'concern of the international community', which as I pointed out has little to do with the legitimacy of Pakistan's positions on issues, and more to do with the impact of events on global stability.

Your decision to focus on 'the concern, or lack of, of the international community for Pakistan's position' reflects on your inability to offer counter-arguments to the arguments in favor of Pakistan's position.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

India has to be one of the few States to consider her armed invasions and occupations of sovereign States and/or territories (by regular or irregular forces) as 'police actions'.

This is precisely the kind of bald faced lying and distortion of history by India that needs to be countered - Pakistan's position remains that the UNSC Resolutions on J&K need to be implemented.

Internal instability has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Pakistan's positions on various disputes.

Quite verbose, but absolutely nothing related to the subject at hand. You're intent on focusing on the 'concern of the international community', which as I pointed out has little to do with the legitimacy of Pakistan's positions on issues, and more to do with the impact of events on global stability.

Your decision to focus on 'the concern, or lack of, of the international community for Pakistan's position' reflects on your inability to offer counter-arguments to the arguments in favor of Pakistan's position.

You see - I don't need to provide counter arguments.

I would need if India's position was weak. We don't talk about it. Our people in our country are fine. We are happy with the Status quo. Junagad, Delhi, Hyderabad, Lucknow, Jammu/Kashmir etc.

It's the loser in the arena that is always crying on the streets looking for attention. Actually to be fair, Pakistan had dropped the Kashmir issue now almost entirely. May be in a couple of generations Pakistan will accept the reality.

We don't mind. But unlike the older times, we don't care anymore. Unless it hurts us.

Most importantly, why do you expect your enemy state to act for your benefit? It is absurd. No need to dwell on an idealistic world view.

 

[The Eagle]

remember the same logic next time when a bunch of BLA folks take out a few of your finest in Balochistan or elsewhere....

is that an admission?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Oh did you think I'd flinch?

You did flinch - your 'justifications' are an admission of outright, unprovoked and deliberate military aggression and support for terrorism in other nations and sovereign territories - that's what I was pointing out all along.

In each of these actions we take responsibility for our decisions.

If you wish to take pride in unprovoked military aggression against sovereign States/territories and take similar pride in India's support for terrorism and terrorists, go ahead, shout it from the roof-tops.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

shout it from the roof-tops.

We are Hindus. We have two faces.

is that an admission?

Your military leaders say that India is involved. Don't you trust them?

 

[The Eagle]

We are Hindus. We have two faces.


Your military leaders say that India is involved. Don't you trust them?

An obsessed one was shouting in revenge while accepted. Our military has been giving more evidence as well will you believe.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

An obsessed one was shouting in revenge while accepted. Our military has been giving more evidence as well will you believe.

I don't know man. Horus promised us that Pakistan now has clinching evidence and is about to declare war. One week has gone by. Still waiting.

 

[The Eagle]

I don't know man. Horus promised us that Pakistan now has clinching evidence and is about to declare war. One week has gone by. Still waiting.

The war is always fought firstly in minds then the same create an idea about enemy to encounter. It will be remain a war for always with our enemies. You have so much taken on heart quoted by @Horus or is it you are wishing to have one.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

You did flinch - your 'justifications' are an admission of outright, unprovoked and deliberate military aggression and support for terrorism in other nations and sovereign territories - that's what I was pointing out all along.

If you wish to take pride in unprovoked military aggression against sovereign States/territories and take similar pride in India's support for terrorism and terrorists, go ahead, shout it from the roof-tops.

You know, forget all this. I have a question for you. Now imagine you are in 1970. all the events of 1971 have not happened. So none of those things matter and you're in a united Pakistan.

Mujib has just won the election.

I ask you a simple question- who is the Prime Minister of Pakistan?

What's your answer?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistani intervention of Kashmir and Indian intervention of Junagadh have become apples and oranges now.

Of course:

1. Indian government deliberations on blockading and stoking unrest in Junagadh and her principalities as a prelude to a military invasion and annexation occurred after the official accession of Junagadh to Pakistan. The blockades and stoking/support of unrest/terrorism inside Junagadh preceded the Tribal lashkar in J&K.

2. J&K had not acceded to either State at the time of the Tribal invasion, unlike Junagadh which had acceded to Pakistan

You know, forget all this. I have a question for you. Now imagine you are in 1970. all the events of 1971 have not happened. So none of those things matter and you're in a united Pakistan.

Mujib has just won the election.

I ask you a simple question- who is the Prime Minister of Pakistan?

What's your answer?

My answer is that it is none of India's 'bijness', and is an internal Pakistani matter.

You see - I don't need to provide counter arguments.

You have every right to not engage and walk away without responding, but instead what you're choosing to do is obfuscate and talk about 'Indians are happy and prosperous and building economic bridges with the world' - that's all fine and wonderful, but it's not a substitute for arguments validating the Indian claims on disputes with Pakistan.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Of course:

1. Indian government deliberations on blockading and stoking unrest in Junagadh and her principalities as a prelude to a military invasion and annexation occurred after the official accession of Junagadh to Pakistan. The blockades and stoking/support of unrest/terrorism inside Junagadh preceded the Tribal lashkar in J&K.

2. J&K had not acceded to either State at the time of the Tribal invasion, unlike Junagadh which had acceded to Pakistan


My answer is that it is none of India's 'bijness', and is an internal Pakistani matter.

It's not a question of India's 'business'. India has no say in this. I want to understand your thinking. Assume nothing happened and that we're in 1970. - who's your PM Man? Do you accept that Mujib is the legitimately elected PM of Pakistan?

You can always change your opinion later. But as of today in 1970 what is your call?

Of course:

1. Indian government deliberations on blockading and stoking unrest in Junagadh and her principalities as a prelude to a military invasion and annexation occurred after the official accession of Junagadh to Pakistan. The blockades and stoking/support of unrest/terrorism inside Junagadh preceded the Tribal lashkar in J&K.

2. J&K had not acceded to either State at the time of the Tribal invasion, unlike Junagadh which had acceded to Pakistan


My answer is that it is none of India's 'bijness', and is an internal Pakistani matter.


You have every right to not engage and walk away without responding, but instead what you're choosing to do is obfuscate and talk about 'Indians are happy and prosperous and building economic bridges with the world' - that's all fine and wonderful, but it's not a substitute for arguments validating the Indian claims on disputes with Pakistan.

You seen the size of Junagarh? The damn 'kingom' was the size of Banglore or maybe Yelahanka to Bangalore Airport. And you excpect that we keep this little hole open on our side? An average person can wake up in Junagarh, take a dump across the strat in Pakistan and read his newspaper after crossing back. Yeah, that's gonna work.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

We are Hindus. We have two faces.

How fascinating!

Part of the highly complex plastic surgery techniques developed by Ancient Hindus no doubt - if they were transplanting elephant heads onto humans, adding a second face would be a piece of cake I imagine

Your military leaders say that India is involved. Don't you trust them?

Technically India admitted involvement in terrorism in Pakistan with IK Gujral's 'deactivation of ops' - you can't deactivate something that isn't active, and while 'deactivating terrorist support inside Pakistan' could be talked about openly because it brought international and regional political dividends, a subsequent reactivation would, for obvious reasons, not be mentioned.

 

[ni8mare]

If you wish to take pride in unprovoked military aggression against sovereign States/territories and take similar pride in India's support for terrorism and terrorists, go ahead, shout it from the roof-tops.

Why should we?...have we ever caught like pakistanis ........

The war is always fought firstly in minds then the same create an idea about enemy to encounter. It will be remain a war for always with our enemies. You have so much taken on heart quoted by @Horus or is it you are wishing to have one.

Please bring war upon us the inferior hindus.....

My answer is that it is none of India's 'bijness', and is an internal Pakistani matter

And we will interfere in internal Pakistani matter...........because that is what an enemy state do