Well facts speak for themselves, after making so much hoopla and noises your Armed Forces didnt dare engage Pakistan because they knew that a victory that is politically acceptable cannot be achieved. Dont get me wrong, India will succeed in a prolonged war due to its superior resources but looking at the Indian strategy and the statements of its war planners, its clear that India is not looking to fight a prolong war. I can understand your frustration, with all these billions spent the balance of forces is roughly the same for a small intense war. Indians are good at TALK TALK, not WALKING the TALK. If victory was so easy to achieve against Pakistan, trust me the T90's would have crossed the borders after the Mumbai attacks.
Please, do not talk as if you know anything about Indian foreign policy....
We will make the necessary moves when the opportunity arises. If we acted rashly like Pakistan, we too would be considered a "failed state", with few allies in the world.
2002 and 2008 were not opportune moments to start a conflict. If you believe that India did not attack due to military incompetency, you are free to believe so. But history shows us that India prefers to keep a low profile and use aggressive diplomacy, and use force only when the moment is right (ex.1971 and 1984). That is how we have avoided humilating military adventures, unlike Pakistan in 1965 and 1999.
2002: It was not the Chinese weapons, its the combination of weapons and the tactics that we possess which prevented India from starting a war. The Indians couldnt mobilize fast enough to beat Pakistan to the race to the border. While your Army was still in the process of mobilizing, divisions from as far away as KP and Balochistan were at our Eastern borders. I know its bitter news but it is the truth
.
I agree with this. As I have already stated, in 2002 we were not ready from a strategic standpoint. Our mobilization took too long, and by the time we finished the diplomatic pressure was too great, and we had lost the strategic advantage. The experiences of 2002 caused Cold Start to be implemented.
We could has still gone to war, and won, but it would have been a bloody and pointless war. Our political objectives would not have been achieved.
2008: Starting a war is never in your interest, but the Indian domestic audience wanted revenge and the Indian leadership realized that they couldnt deliver the victory that was politically acceptable. Sure the Indian Government and your commanders made huge noises about teaching Pakistan a lesson by giving it a slap on the face, GUESS WHAT Pakistan called your bluff and started to mobilize. Realizing the Indian Government couldnt do much, they backed off and rightfully so. Again Actions spoke louder than words, Indians need to put their money where their mouth is.
India has NEVER gone to war because of public opinion. There may have been a few hawkish grumblers among the Indian population and the Indian Army, but the GoI was clearly never keen on starting the war in the first place. It was not in our interests
at that time.
The American Government is the representative of the American people
, indeed these Think Tanks are highly reputed and they have been coming with lots of predictions for the demise of Pakistan since our birth, i guess they have been proven wrong for the past 60 years
.
Yes, the U.S. govt is the representative of the American people just as Zardari is the representative of the Pakistani people
Use better logic next time...
The fact is, Pakistan hasn't learned anything in the past 40 years. The debacle of 1971 was caused because Pakistan, as a nation, chose to shun democracy and ignore the people. Today, Pakistan is doing the same thing. If you think the present instability is bad, just wait and see. Pakistan has a long and difficult road in front of it, and it all starts from people like you, who prefer to ridicule foreign reports and turn a blind eye on chronic problems.
Oh come on buddy, just because i trashed your arguments regarding China not being there for Pakistan and Cold Start Doctrine being a serious threat does not mean that you have to act like a soore looser. Just because you dont have the rebuttal for these arguments does not mean you have to act like this
.
You have not proved a single thing in your posts. In order to show that China's support actually matters, you need to:
a) Show that Chinese weapons or Chinese pressure has resulted in a Pakistani military victory in the past.
or b) Show that Chinese weapons or Chinese pressure was the decisive factor behind India choosing not to go to war in 2002 or 2008.
You have not proved either point, nor is it possible to prove either point, so your whole argument is meaningless
Cheers
