General Niazi: Traitor or Hero?

[Kompromat]

Everything that you stated.... what that post is just excuses disguised as facts (debatable ones) as to why the otherwise almight Pak Army lost the war to India.

What i stated are facts, no war can be fought without resources, supply lines and reinforcement.

-------------------------

If your purpose is to troll, it will will cost you.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well, we all know the negative side of the story in 1971 war and how cowardly Niazi was to surrender to the Indians.

During the WWII Americans,Brits,Germans,Italians,Polish,Russians and others did surrender at times,with hundreds of thousands of men,to save their lives when the mission was lost. General Niazi was outnumbered by 1-25 both Mukti Bahinis and the Indian military.

Was his decision to surrender after the cause was lost correct which saved 90000 lives, and if or not he deserves credit for it?

Please participate in the poll.

Best regards.

With respect, I won't personally vote, because the poll is unfair.

Niazi was a plain soldier given a situation to handle far more complex than far better officers than he could have handled. He inherited a situation which had been inflamed by a muscle-headed murderer, who went on to other muscle-headed murders and to creating a situation the miniature of Bangladesh. Niazi might have done very well two levels down. He was asked to cope with an increasingly degenerating situation, information coming in about enemy troops pouring in from every direction, no land, sea or air links, and everybody, including the US, cheering him on, encouraging him from the safety of several thousand kilometers away. No reinforcements, his static defences hip-hopped over by heli-borne light infantry, the enemy air force hitting his command centers at will, and an enemy general who dropped in and asked for total surrender so that his paltry troops, isolated in penny packets, according to the approved plan of not allowing a millimeter of space for the Muktis to declare a provisional government, now exposed to a raging Mukti Bahini intent on retaliation.

Sorry, only the brain-deficient hyper-patriots of the keyboard who are always willing to fight to the last uniformed resident Pakistani can vote for him to be traitor.

This poll is another nail in the cross - I chose the hostile analogy deliberately - of a plain GI Joe who did his best and failed, like many of us did in our own ways. Nil nisi mortuis bonum.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hi,

Why don't you and RAZPAK go fight the taliban right to the last member of your family and lets see how it goes.

How I hoped some Pakistani would say this!

Many thanks.

 

[Joe Shearer]

A huge army with so much arsenal airforce etc c could have done a lot more than surrendering also silly example i guess here or may be you are confusing two different things Gaddafi was a dictator where as Bangladeshis choose to be a part of Pakistan their were grievances however and we had support on the other hand.

You should have done your homework. There was no air force. Not after the first few days. Bangladeshis didn't have grievances, they had broken away mentally, and there was no possibility of reconciliation then. You may be mistaking the present lot of disgruntled posters as representative of Bangladesh sentiment now, and that as representative of Bangladesh underlying sentiment then. That would be a major mistake. Neither proposition is true.

Let go does not mean unaccounted.. it means giving them up for torture.. And yes.. there were a significant number of men who were left for torture.

@Oscar

Your data sources are usually impeccable, as I have learnt to my cost. Where did you get this from?

 

[Coltsfan]

What i stated are facts, no war can be fought without resources, supply lines and reinforcement.

That's stating the obvious.....

-------------------------

If your purpose is to troll, it will will cost you.

That wasn't the purpose, but if it comes across like that to the mods, then you should do what's required!....

 

[MastanKhan]

I can think of five. You know, I suppose, that most of the stories of "rapes by u s servicemen of iraqi girls boys and women" are mere inventions.

You're forgetting who you're talking to. My neighbors in 1971 were Pakistani diplomats. They knew what the orders were. They knew the deaths of unarmed non-aggressive civilians numbered in the tens of thousands at the very least.

How many u s soldiers executed---hanged for murder and rape----none.

I did not forget about the guy who wept on your shoulders---. Look at the u s military---goes to afghanistan to kill al qaeda and OBL----then lets him escape conveniently---and has ended up murdering over a million afghans and nobody has a spilt half a tear over it---atrocities and war crimes---tell us about it.

 

[MastanKhan]

Joe Shearer,

For me---west and east pakistan were two brothers where one did not want to stay tied to the other and wanted to have his own destiny.

Pakistan---that is west pakistan---should have accepted the facts and moved ahead with their lives----but the problem with my countrymen---is the strange FETISH of islamic brotherhood----forcing someone to stay attached---someone who does not want to.

If my pakistani brethrens had any brains---they would have taken it as such---we joined hands and achieved the goal for freedom---let's part like friends---I mean to say---look at these kids arguing here---two generations have gone by and these young morons are as stupid as they can be---rather offering apology and moving ahead---they want to unbury the skeletons---they don't understand the price that bosnia and kosovo paid.

 

[Anubis]

LOL, Niazi must have felt its a 100 - 1, In reality I doubt the 25 times number, Mukti bahani was a small guerilla force - the pro Pakistani razakars and Jamatis were in lakhs and easily outnumbered the freedom fighters.

But even if they were outnumbered and outflanked - wasn't it the same what had happened in 1965 Operation "gibraltar" and "grand slam" - In Kashmir, India was outnumbered, out flanked and its logistics routes cut off -but then "bang", we opened a whole new front and changed the whole course and the objective of the war.

Blaming incompetent Niazi alone is not right, Pakistan buckled all over.

Ummm.....NO!

You can't expect to win a war fighting on enemy territory and facing an insurgency and a military at the same time.

 

[notorious_eagle]

You're forgetting who you're talking to. My neighbors in 1971 were Pakistani diplomats. They knew what the orders were. They knew the deaths of unarmed non-aggressive civilians numbered in the tens of thousands at the very least.

We know exactly we are talking to, maybe you need to know who you are talking to. This board is full of members with family members who served in East Pakistan, so we know what we are talking about.

So what is the final count, couple of thousands or 3 million? Your arithmetic seems to be going a bit foggy. Your accusations have certainly changed with time as logic clearly dictates that PA simply did not have enough bullets and men to carry out a slaughter of 3 million people.

 

[RuheTag]

this poll needs one more option.. And that is was Gen. a Niazi Traitor, Hero or just an army officer who did what he was supposed to do ?


Such kind of poll would be make more :-

Did Bhutto's rhetoric after 1970's election helped creating Bangladesh?

Or

Who were the biggest culprits of breaking Pak in 1971 (India played a decisive role but we are talking reasons on Pak side) :-

1- Bhutto
3. Yahya Khan
2- Pak Army
3- Entire West Pakistani political elite
4- All of above
5- None of above

 

[Solomon2]

This board is full of members with family members who served in East Pakistan, so we know what we are talking about. So what is the final count, couple of thousands or 3 million? Your arithmetic seems to be going a bit foggy. Your accusations have certainly changed with time as logic clearly dictates that PA simply did not have enough bullets and men to carry out a slaughter of 3 million people.

Oh, by all means don't take my word for it and do your own research - if you dare.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Oh, by all means don't take my word for it and do your own research - if you dare.

I have, and i haven't found a single piece of worthwhile evidence that supports this ludicrous number of 3 million. We are yet to find the bones of those killed and the seeds of those raped. Simply put, there weren't enough bullets and there was not enough time to kill 3 million people for Pakistan Army. But it appears, there are some who cling to these fallacies to support their biases and try and spread their malicious propaganda.

 

[Solomon2]

I have, and i haven't found a single piece of worthwhile evidence that supports this ludicrous number of 3 million.

Red herring. What you should be investigating aren't numbers, but what the Pakistani Army acutally did and what it's orders were. Otherwise what you are arguing is that because I can't count the number of molecules in the atmosphere, that means atomic theory itself is flawed.

We are yet to find the bones of those killed and the seeds of those raped.

Seek and ye shall find.

 

[truthseer]

Niazi was a scapegoat, he had no option but to surrender. It was Yahya and Mujib's fault for not agreeing with Bhutto, that patriotic man!


And we raped woman in Bangla land. Fine, but Jews raped people throughout history.

 

[Slav Defence]

@Aeronaut..
I want to complain to you that you have labelled him as 'traitor' in your second option.
a/c to my personal opinion that he should have fought along with his 'men' till last bullet,till their last breath.
But he preferred to save 9000 men due to various reasons such as lack of support from regime.
Anyways he did what he thought right,and this does not makes him a traitor.

Niazi was a scapegoat, he had no option but to surrender. It was Yahya and Mujib's fault for not agreeing with Bhutto, that patriotic man!


And we raped woman in Bangla land. Fine, but Jews raped people throughout history.

We didn't raped women in Bangal.