Enough With The Indian Mig-21 Bison Versus Pakistani F-16 Viper Bullshit

[PradoTLC]

lol indians fought and uprooted invaders rule , you surrendered before every invader .

like indian army in Galwan .... 20 dead 10 surrendered

all hail Surrender Modi

 

[GHALIB]

like indian army in Galwan .... 20 dead 10 surrendered

all hail Surrender Modi

kargil and dhaka two are sufficient .

 

[PradoTLC]

kargil and dhaka two are sufficient .

Kargil?..- you had 2000+ casulties and thanks to Bill Clinton we withdrew.

 

[GHALIB]

Kargil?..- you had 2000+ casulties and thanks to Bill Clinton we withdrew.

attackers were sent back home with bloody nose , not an even inch of area ceded .

 

[PradoTLC]

attackers were sent back home with bloody nose , not an even inch of area ceded .

the liberators were attacked after a cease fire was brokered by US.... this is indian army for you. a unprofessional hateful gang losers.

 

[PradoTLC]

, not an even inch of area ceded .

Just like in Galwan.... like your PM said so...

 

[TacOps]

You are aware, of course, when asking this penetrating question, that the bombs in question supply video feeds, and that they were launched at targets under cloud cover?

Which part of the flight would you have accepted as proof, the flight towards impenetrable cloud, or the final impact, showing, in a panning shot, every surprised and about to be extinguished perpetrator?

Yes they were launched in cloud cover. The target itself wasn't in cloud cover. Would have helped justify the claims.

Thank Heavens for one sensible part of the post.

Even the second point is an extension of a hypothesis, and needs to be taken at that level. It does not become significantly irrelevant, the probabilities shift. 'Less vulnerable' is not quite 'invulnerable'; please recall that.

I didn't say it makes it invulnerable. However, to say a hypothesis is predicated on primarily on A, B and C and by the way A and B didn't really apply in the situation makes the entire hypothesis quite irrelevant in my opinion.

 

[Reichsmarschall]

i said alien rule was uprooted by us indians .
my dna is pure indian , so i am patriotic indian first , religion comes second for me .

You're nothing but brown uncle Tom. Count your days green bakht, the baghwa is coming

 

[Rafi]

lol indians fought and uprooted invaders rule , you surrendered before every invader .

Yeah that is why everyone from the Aryans, white huns, Mongols, Persians, Pashtun, Mughals and British and many others ruled your lands from time to time.

 

[Arsalan 345]

Credible evidence as in a foreign media report, perhaps?

I will trust you if you give credible evidence. I mean credible. Don't mind but your people said 350 killed but building was safe. I think both parties must show credible evidence. India and Pak both should provide f-16 and su-30 destruction evidence.

 

[Arsalan 345]

A small bladder is a possibility not to be discounted.

I don't think that there is any chance of any more aerial battle because China and India are busy on lac. People will tell the truth about Feb 27 but it will take time. I don't believe in your amateur radar images because I heard that Israeli team visited iaf the next day. Obviously for confirmation of data. We only see mig wreckage and that is credible evidence. Without any evidence,I can't trust both su-30 and f-16 stories.

 

[The Eagle]

Christian C Fair is also ISI Major... just saying for some that doesn't know that too.

 

[Goenitz]

not an even inch of area ceded

though people claim more but point 5353 is again ours now. It was area was captured in 1984 along with Tiger hill and surroundings. Anyway, 5353 was in IA control before 1999.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes they were launched in cloud cover. The target itself wasn't in cloud cover. Would have helped justify the claims.



I didn't say it makes it invulnerable. However, to say a hypothesis is predicated on primarily on A, B and C and by the way A and B didn't really apply in the situation makes the entire hypothesis quite irrelevant in my opinion.

You have a point.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I will trust you if you give credible evidence. I mean credible. Don't mind but your people said 350 killed but building was safe. I think both parties must show credible evidence. India and Pak both should provide f-16 and su-30 destruction evidence.

Let's be quite clear; some dhoti-clad idiots bent on cashing in on the deeds of the military made that claim. Please go through the records; no responsible serviceman would have made unverified claims like 350 persons were killed, without verification, and no responsible serviceman did. Yes, there were reports that mobile traffic indicated a large number of people present at the site, more or less in the precise location, although being too very precise is impossible. It was always the party hacks who made wild and unjustified brags.

Where the IAF did have something to say that the Pakistani observer finds objectionable, or about which the Pakistani observer might feel sceptical, is about the radar images that showed one plot suddenly disappear from the screen; that is so circumstantial that most of us - not the fanboys - wish that nothing had been said about it at all. Without wreckage, without a pilot in spirit or in flesh, even hinting at the possibility was quite uncalled for.

This thread is not about that; it was not about that. It was not about what happened; it was about the probability of the IAF having done some competent war-fighting, going on the basis of their behaviour during the exercises with the USAF.

We are getting bogged down in other side issues.