What's new

Fierce gun fight rages in Kashmir

Not sure whats the reference....but I guess you need to look the way our DF work...They are surely not Proactive...but they have very good learner....insurgency in Kashmir and else where are good material for understanding this....In past for ex we have seen Terrorist taking refuge in Mosque and this becoming emotional issue...Army devised ways to deal such situations so later not only they can neutralize the terrorist hidding in Mosque religious feeling of local people are not hurt....similar case with terroris taking refuge in buildings, what happened in Mumbai was not new from Kashmir insurgency...there were many incidence where terrorist took control of the building and gunfight went on for days.....If you have seen that that last few encounters are in forest near the border area....this clearly means that army is able to keep tab on infiltration....but they are ill prepared for neutralizing them quickly and efficiently ....they will fill this gap...its looks bad...but then we don't know the ground zero...and as past has shown they learn from their mistake.....

tx

I am saying out military is not strong enough to hold these infiltrators and we have casualties. because of lack of training equipment weapons and will by top officials. Juat giving a bloody rifel dont make you a soldier .
It takes years of hard work - speifically not just by soldier ( which our soldier are very much cpapable of) but by their think tank to.
Stratagie planning training moduls everythign have to designed and well thought of.
This is where we lack. so much budget on anti terrorism machanism and national security. This is the weakest point of our defence and security. which is just going unnoticed!
Its not enugh to give petrol pump and medels and flowers on their coffin. We need to respect their life and there something has to be done - so we dont loose as many soldiers in the hands of these terrorists.
 
.
Yes that is exactly what happened- Hari Singh Massacred entire villages and civilians.

Your statement above is an indication of the sort of distorted history Indian s are taught - Kashmir was ruled by a Mahrajah, a tyrant and a despot, who happened to be Hindu. You obviously cannot understand even this simple fact going by your statement above.
And you tell me that people of minority killed people from majority...hard to believe...
As for intervention against despots massacring their people, justification for intervention was given in Kosovo by NATO, in Somalia, in Rwanda, and people have been arguing for intervention in Sudan (Darfur genocide).
yes...its group of nation deciding something for common good.....From your argument Saddam was despot and US did no wrong in attacking Iraq....
This shows Hypocrisy Mr AM....
In any case, I have supported my arguments and provided the chronology of Indian policies and actions that led to the Pakistani support for the freedom Movement in disputed territory in the 1990's. You have offered nothing except poor and inaccurate opinions. What you think of the UN does not change the facts around the commitments made there, nor do your opinions change the reality of Indian transgressions or the Maharajah's atrocities.

Facts are facts, and it is clear that India has been on the wrong side, on the side of despots, occupation, atrocities and violations of commitments made to the people of Kashmir and the world community, all for the sake of greedy territorial expansionism.

Good day to you.

You want to ignore root and want to select what suits you...your call.....History clearly shows that Pakistan policies and govt forced Kashmirs ppl's future in blind alley......

Poor and inaccurate opinions...just blanket statement nothing more....seems you find hard to counter points....

As i said, I dont live in dream world...I live in todays world where there is no free lunch...every country is pursuing path that suits there goals..nobody is bothered about what india or pakistan think or do in Kashmir....ppl pay lip service and move on....
For UN and world community...they are not able to stop genocide in Sudan......what they can do about 60 yr old issue....

either you move on and solve the issue in todays context and be rooted at your place and become irrelevant to the world its your choice.....Its the result of latter that youth like Kasab has wasted his life...he also had future...and its just not Kasab....its whole generation is losing its future.....

tx
 
.
I am saying out military is not strong enough to hold these infiltrators and we have casualties. because of lack of training equipment weapons and will by top officials. Juat giving a bloody rifel dont make you a soldier .
It takes years of hard work - speifically not just by soldier ( which our soldier are very much cpapable of) but by their think tank to.
Stratagie planning training moduls everythign have to designed and well thought of.
This is where we lack. so much budget on anti terrorism machanism and national security. This is the weakest point of our defence and security. which is just going unnoticed!
Its not enugh to give petrol pump and medels and flowers on their coffin. We need to respect their life and there something has to be done - so we dont loose as many soldiers in the hands of these terrorists.

Guess be both are saying the same thing regarding the planning, training etc....If you mean sply Kashmir ...then you have to ack that we cannt predict how adversary is goingto react and you change your strategy accordingly...we are able to intercept them at border means something...but again if we now about the movement beforehand than why we are not able to neutralize them efficiently need to be looked into ...


tx
 
.
P2I,

Either refute my arguments with proper facts or end this discussion. What you 'think' or 'feel' is irrelevant, facts are facts. Perhaps you should go pick up some independent books and read, obviously the education system in Indian has only succeeded in brainwashing you. Owen Bennet Jones book, Pakistan, would be a good start.

On Iraq, the US should have acted to prevent Saddam when he was gassing the Kurds and massacring the Shia. Saddam was allowed to commit those atrocities, perhaps even with US supplied resources. When the US did invade he posed no major threat, hence the criticism.

Hari Singh on the other hand was committing atrocities and massacres in order to suppress the revolt against his rule by the local Kashmiris causing thousands of refugees to flood into Pakistan, combined with the Skikhs massacring Muslim immigrants into Pakistan. The danger was clear and present.
 
.
I am talking of 1947-48 and not 1971....I going at the root...when all this began...but sending Razakars in Kashmir which started all this.....and No I not emotional.....Thats between India and Kashmir ...why you are getting excited....


tx

you dont have to go to 1947-48. look at the infiltration stat and you ll find that there was no such thing back then and we were relyin to diplomacy. it was after 1971 we had to change our way of dealing with you guys. you guys also took advantage of the situation in 1980s and climbed on to siachen. it was after that when you started seein some serious problem in kashmir.
and btw when its bw indian and kashmir then its also bw indian and pakistan.
 
.
What happened??? You went to 2 diff US administration ...what was response...Zilch...well that speaks volume about the proof you are talking about....

For ISI.....whoever is planting these stories...there is enough noise in Western media abt ISI helping terrorism.....

tx

zilch???? no my friend now they atleast know wat our concerns are and some of their officials have stood up and asked their gov to answer our concerns. this war will never be a success without pakistan's cooperation and pakistan will never fully cooperates unless US looks after our concers. that is also the reason why they have brought up kashmir issue in recent days. solving kashmir issue will put an end to proxy war bw india and paksitan and they know that if you dont

and lets not go into ISI helping terrorism in afghanistan. tell me y did US attacked afghanistan when the then talibans were willing to hand over those ppl to a third party given US provides evidence?????? and if US didnt provide evidence and simply attacked and killed atleast one million ppl then dont you think US is also terrorist???
 
Last edited:
.
My reference to non-violent help was actually meant for everybody. I don't support countries like US trying to help other countries with violent approach either. Historically, they too, had only been able to ruin the people that they were supposedly helping.

You are probably right about the mixture of armed struggle and diplomacy bit. Especially in todays context, when everyone else is ready to deal a deadly blow with minimum of provocation. However, in view of the weapons that the world possess today, we must try and maximize the diplomatic option.

i totally agree with you. but all the powers need to realise this and not just one country.
 
.
you dont have to go to 1947-48. look at the infiltration stat and you ll find that there was no such thing back then and we were relyin to diplomacy. it was after 1971 we had to change our way of dealing with you guys. you guys also took advantage of the situation in 1980s and climbed on to siachen. it was after that when you started seein some serious problem in kashmir.
and btw when its bw indian and kashmir then its also bw indian and pakistan.

And why should I don't go back to '47 pray tell me....why you want to have selective dicussion.....I ask again....why Kashmir was forced...who forced the hand the king of HS to sign the accession to India....If Paksitan has respected the soverignity of state this would not have happened....welll as for problem in Kashmir who attacked in '65...why that war was fought.....you know what your capabilities are so you tried terrorism...fair enough now don't cry when you are replied in same language...deal with it...India has withstood the terrorism for 25 years....now its your turn...show how strong you are....

tx
 
.
P2I,

Either refute my arguments with proper facts or end this discussion. What you 'think' or 'feel' is irrelevant, facts are facts. Perhaps you should go pick up some independent books and read, obviously the education system in Indian has only succeeded in brainwashing you. Owen Bennet Jones book, Pakistan, would be a good start.

On Iraq, the US should have acted to prevent Saddam when he was gassing the Kurds and massacring the Shia. Saddam was allowed to commit those atrocities, perhaps even with US supplied resources. When the US did invade he posed no major threat, hence the criticism.

Hari Singh on the other hand was committing atrocities and massacres in order to suppress the revolt against his rule by the local Kashmiris causing thousands of refugees to flood into Pakistan, combined with the Skikhs massacring Muslim immigrants into Pakistan. The danger was clear and present.

Facts ...there are facts for you ...sept'47 Kashmir ws free....Indian presence nill...zilch.....
Oct '47 Paksitan sents Razakars to Kashmir......King sign the accession to India.....

For atrocities of HS .....why I have to ans....he was independent King....India kept out of Kashmir till he not signed the accession doc....

Atrocities...CHina is doing that ..with Muslims...why don't you go there....well being very selective now....

Read history from some neutral source.....Its Paksitans past policies which is now haunting you ..with your own youth fighting own army ..FATA\swat\Baluchistan\Lashore......your own ppl not some import....

dont beat around the bush....you support US in Iraq invasion or not....Suddam was angel....so come clean ... dont hide behind arguments...

And for trying to help other...check which country is doing most for world peace....no i am not selling India here...its finland....and without firing a bullet...


tx
 
.
Still no refutation of any of the points I mentioned.

Opinions pulled out of your rear end do not count.

Let me know when you can refute my arguments with any facts, or even try answering them.
 
.
Still no refutation of any of the points I mentioned.

Opinions pulled out of your rear end do not count.

Let me know when you can refute my arguments with any facts, or even try answering them.

Which fact are you talking about....Looks now you have started feeling hot under your collar ....thats why suddenly nosediving quality of your argument....This wont work for me......when senior people like you use these tecnique it shows how uncomfortable you are feeling now.....
I am repeating myself again and again and again.....
Fact reamain that Pakistan interfered in the other states internal matter.....refute the fact that Paksitan was not involved....this is fact that no one can deny ... the root cause of Kashmir's problem....

and you are so blind due to religion that interference of Pakistan in other states affairs is not visible to you....Now you are even supporting the Paksitan interference in Kashmir in '47.......well great thats the same argument we have for Baluchistan and Bangldesh.....happy....

2 wrongs do not make right mr. AM......whatever were the action of HS was...it was internal matter of Kashmir.....from the day 1 of creation Paksitan is busy in interfering with other countries affair....and now the chicken has come home to roost..


tx
 
.
Which fact are you talking about....Looks now you have started feeling hot under your collar ....thats why suddenly nosediving quality of your argument....This wont work for me......when senior people like you use these tecnique it shows how uncomfortable you are feeling now.....
I am repeating myself again and again and again.....
Fact reamain that Pakistan interfered in the other states internal matter.....refute the fact that Paksitan was not involved....this is fact that no one can deny ... the root cause of Kashmir's problem....

and you are so blind due to religion that interference of Pakistan in other states affairs is not visible to you....Now you are even supporting the Paksitan interference in Kashmir in '47.......well great thats the same argument we have for Baluchistan and Bangldesh.....happy....

2 wrongs do not make right mr. AM......whatever were the action of HS was...it was internal matter of Kashmir.....from the day 1 of creation Paksitan is busy in interfering with other countries affair....and now the chicken has come home to roost..


tx
Which facts?

Go through my last few posts and its apparent.

There is nothing more for me to say - I have presented historical arguments and heard inane response such as 'its not possible for a minority to commit atrocities on a majority' Nor have you anything to say about the chronology of events related to Indian transgressions and aggression against Pakistan that led to Pakistan supporting the Freedom movement.

Please, factually refute any of that, I'll wait till you do so.
 
.
you dont have to go to 1947-48. look at the infiltration stat and you ll find that there was no such thing back then and we were relyin to diplomacy. it was after 1971 we had to change our way of dealing with you guys. you guys also took advantage of the situation in 1980s and climbed on to siachen. it was after that when you started seein some serious problem in kashmir.
and btw when its bw indian and kashmir then its also bw indian and pakistan.

sir that means after 1971 and the siachen victory you realized that you could not win a conventional war with india so you started sending terrorists into india . plz correct me if im wrong .
:what:
 
.
P2I,

Either refute my arguments with proper facts or end this discussion. What you 'think' or 'feel' is irrelevant, facts are facts. Perhaps you should go pick up some independent books and read, obviously the education system in Indian has only succeeded in brainwashing you. Owen Bennet Jones book, Pakistan, would be a good start.

On Iraq, the US should have acted to prevent Saddam when he was gassing the Kurds and massacring the Shia. Saddam was allowed to commit those atrocities, perhaps even with US supplied resources. When the US did invade he posed no major threat, hence the criticism.

Hari Singh on the other hand was committing atrocities and massacres in order to suppress the revolt against his rule by the local Kashmiris causing thousands of refugees to flood into Pakistan, combined with the Skikhs massacring Muslim immigrants into Pakistan. The danger was clear and present.


There is a big difference in approach and philosophy. You cannot compare US with Pakistan. Its fact that US invade Iraq, Afghanistan, came to help France and others countries in worlds war II, invaded Germany, defeated Japan etc.... But, USA never declared those pieces of land as part of its territory....

Its highly appreciable that Pakistani army came to support Kashmir people against atrocities (I doubt it has happened) form ruling King. But why did Pakistan send army disguised as tribal people…. Why didn’t they had guts to come out and say to Hari Singh openly that stop or we’ll attack …………. Reason is simple…… motive was not to support and bring justice to people of Kashmir but to capture land. This goes against Pakistan and shows mentality and approach of past and present governing bodies. We cannot blame its citizen because they have been taught to believe what govt. wanted them to believe.

May God give us wisdom to distinguish between good and evil .. ...

Cheers have a nice wk end :cheers:
 
.
zilch???? no my friend now they atleast know wat our concerns are and some of their officials have stood up and asked their gov to answer our concerns. this war will never be a success without pakistan's cooperation and pakistan will never fully cooperates unless US looks after our concers. that is also the reason why they have brought up kashmir issue in recent days. solving kashmir issue will put an end to proxy war bw india and paksitan and they know that if you dont

this proxy war will not end now . even if we solve the kashmir issue nothing's gonna change . these guys want to destabalize india . they wont stop anywhere .
ISI is helping them . everybody knows that , so dont try to correct me but the thing is that you know usa at one time was an ally of osama bil laden . but when their aim got fullfilled ( i.e. driving russians out of afghanistan ) osama turned against usa . this shows that these guys just want to fight . you know that they are also turning towards you . 133 blasts in 90 days in pakistan cant be work of only one terror organization .

and lets not go into ISI helping terrorism in afghanistan. tell me y did US attacked afghanistan when the then talibans were willing to hand over those ppl to a third party given US provides evidence?????? and if US didnt provide evidence and simply attacked and killed atleast one million ppl then dont you think US is also terrorist???

plz dont compare usa with terrorists . for you once upon a time usa was like god and now that it has kept a strict eye on you about the economic aid , you are turning against them .
 
.
Back
Top Bottom