General Niazi: Traitor or Hero?

[Beerbal]

Educate kid. I am your father's age, so call me daddy.

I know what I am talking about.

I was talking about mental age.. .

like said by fellow member, many of u would not have born if Niyazi wouldn't have surrendered..

 

[OrionHunter]

Even after we surrendered, our forces were murdered.

Huh? By whom? For your info, it was the Indian Army which saved the lives of the thousands of surrendered Pakistanis by protecting them from the violent mobs who had sworn to kill them all for the so called atrocities they had committed.

Had it not been for the IA, the troops of the PA would have been massacred by the people. RazPak bhai, I suggest you do some research yourself before spouting nonsense.

 

[haviZsultan]

There is nothing heroic about general niazi. He killed his own people and caused the partition of Pakistan. He should have struggled on in the 1971 war not give up. Because of him Pakistan is only half of what it was supposed to be.

 

[baajey]

the war crimes were primarily committed by muktis and indian army [and BSF] masquerading as mutkis...pakaistan was responsible for maybe 10-20% of the incidents....

@Aeronaut was rite when he called u a high schooler.....
for ur benefit (so that u cud get out of ur school asap), i have provided two links, which are quite impartial. and yes , please dont insult the findings of others, because for u , its easy to rubbish them off, but the ppl who researched and looked for facts , did so with great pain n sacrifice, quite opposite of what u r doing right now.....nothing.
Bangladesh Genocide Archive
The other side of history – The Express Tribune

let me add something more (again for ur own benefit, not mine), history is history, u cant label it as propaganda just because u don't like it.

 

[Kompromat]

There is nothing heroic about general niazi. He killed his own people and caused the partition of Pakistan. He should have struggled on in the 1971 war not give up. Because of him Pakistan is only half of what it was supposed to be.

Looks like you are out of touch with the history my friend. Pakistan was divided the moment the West Pakistan,namely Bhutto refused to accept the people's mandate and allow the Eastern party to form the government. Bhutto saw himself as the most fit to rule and refused the election results which lead to an insurgency,this is where a scapegoat was sent.

 

[MilSpec]

there is no point in me commenting on the surrender, but I have always found the niazi corridor pretty funny.

 

[Koovie]

I think that he had a chance to to stop the Indian advance into East Pakistan.

Even though there was no way to win due to the naval blockade, the total air superiority, the rapid advance of Indian ground forces and of course the hostile attitude of the local population he maybe could have held out for a little bit more time, which would have put so much diplomatic pressure on India by the west that even the Soviet veto in the UN could not have done much help to India anymore.

The Indian advance and the effect of the total blockade and the air strikes on the governors residence itself were probably too much for him.

 

[Bratva]

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.

In your research, did you care to read hammod ur rehman report and general niazi non military activities as battle was at it's peak?

A womanizer (read screwer),drunkard morally corrupt general who didn't knew what was happening around him, whoever calls him a hero is out of touch with reality

 

[Thirdfront]

I think his was wise decision. Otherwise today there would be no pakistan as even west pakistan was also in danger of being overrun by Indian forces.... Pakistanis should treat him as a hero (it wouldn't make a difference to others though..)

 

[Kompromat]

In your research, did you care to read hammod ur rehman report and general niazi non military activities as battle was at it's peak?

A womanizer (read screwer),drunkard morally corrupt general who didn't knew what was happening around him, whoever calls him a hero is out of touch with reality

*International sanctions,dating from 1965 with no arms supply from the US [the sole supplier]
*US was bound to intervene in E.Pakistan by SEATO/CENTO , they refused.
*There was no air cover, 14 squadron was destroyed.
*PNS Ghazi sank,ending any naval hopes of lifting the blockade
*Westen Pakistan was unable to render ANY reinforcements.
*China was weary of the US and didn't intervene
*Western Pakistan was under a naval blockade
*There was a popular uprising in the East with people against the Army
*Stockpiles had run out,including fuel and ammo
*Soldiers were outnumbered by 1-25
*They were facing air strikes at will by IAF.

Any General would have lost under these conditions. I don't care if he slept with babes and drank booze. I'll play devils advocate here and defend the man. We have squarely placed the blame for our national failures on one man's shoulders. We need to get out and do some soul searching,learn our lessons from the war in 1971, so we can have a closure.

This war was our Stalingrad, we must learn our lessons so that our enemy cannot repeat this again.

@RescueRanger @Luftwaffe

 

[Kompromat]

I think his was wise decision. Otherwise today there would be no pakistan as even west pakistan was also in danger of being overrun by Indian forces.... Pakistanis should treat him as a hero (it wouldn't make a difference to others though..)

You need to work on your wishful thinking. West Pakistan didn't engage in full scale ground assault, nor did India had capability to wage a two front war.

 

[BATMAN]

Is it a fashion to call army men traitor?
Niazi was not a product of rigging, he was a serving officer, fighting a war, which was gifted to us by our traitor politicians.
Still we want foreign made leaders to rule us!
Guess what... they all are assigned with common task.. i.e. weaken and malign Pak army.

There is a reason, why we are ashamed to call Hussein Haqqani a traitor or Zardari a traitor or Jamat ALi shah a traitor?

 

[MilSpec]

You need to work on your wishful thinking. West Pakistan didn't engage in full scale ground assault, nor did India had capability to wage a two front war.

there was never a situation of two front war, because of the ridiculous "safety of east is in the west" policy. The truth is pakistan was not equipped to fight in the east there were no bengali divisions raised in east bengal. If entire pakistani military and civil service was divided equally, there would have been no bangladesh to begin with.

 

[W.11]

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.

niazi was a pawn, the major culprit was that drunkard yahya khan, we needed to have hung him when there was a chance

 

[Thirdfront]

You need to work on your wishful thinking. West Pakistan didn't engage in full scale ground assault, nor did India had capability to wage a two front war.

Why would WP not wage full scale war? If India did not have the capability for 2-front war, what prevented WP into occupying Delhi? All declassified document show that the war was hopless for pakistan, hence the deal was stuck to save west and give-up east.. no wishful thinking there....