Had Operation Chengiz Khan not happened,could Bangladesh been created?

[Mav3rick]

no it is not. pakistan before 71 was more aggressive towards india.. in 71 they learned a lesson that india is much more powerfull than pakistan. after 71 war pakistan never dare to attacked india in conventional war.

Pakistan had learnt that India was no pushover as early as 1965. But make a note of the fact that Pakistan never crossed the IB, LoC on the other hand is another matter. Even in 1965 it was India that crossed the border and same happened in 1971 even though Pakistan did carry out Air Strikes, it was never meant to start a war. It was most likely meant to render IAF useless to avert any threat incase the freedom movement in Bangladesh gained momentum.

However, as for the daring part.......it was not Pakistan that amassed over 700,000 troops at the border and almost all her Air Force at the forward airbases only to unilaterally & unconditionally retreat in 2001/02. I guess India too had learned her lesson in 1965 and hence could not dare cross into Pakistan!

 

[SRP]

In what way is this post connected to the topic at hand ?

i.e Pakistani way of posting something.

A Pakistani talking about distorted history.

 

[Contrarian]

Pakistan had learnt that India was no pushover as early as 1965. But make a note of the fact that Pakistan never crossed the IB, LoC on the other hand is another matter. Even in 1965 it was India that crossed the border and same happened in 1971 even though Pakistan did carry out Air Strikes, it was never meant to start a war. It was most likely meant to render IAF useless to avert any threat incase the freedom movement in Bangladesh gained momentum.

However, as for the daring part.......it was not Pakistan that amassed over 700,000 troops at the border and almost all her Air Force at the forward airbases only to unilaterally & unconditionally retreat in 2001/02. I guess India too had learned her lesson in 1965 and hence could not dare cross into Pakistan!

India makes no difference between the LoC and IB.
If Pakistan crosses the LoC, it is as good as crossing the IB. India reserves the right to retaliate anywhere in that scenario.

 

[hkdas]

Pakistan had learnt that India was no pushover as early as 1965. But make a note of the fact that Pakistan never crossed the IB, LoC on the other hand is another matter. Even in 1965 it was India that crossed the border and same happened in 1971 even though Pakistan did carry out Air Strikes, it was never meant to start a war. It was most likely meant to render IAF useless to avert any threat incase the freedom movement in Bangladesh gained momentum.

However, as for the daring part.......it was not Pakistan that amassed over 700,000 troops at the border and almost all her Air Force at the forward airbases only to unilaterally & unconditionally retreat in 2001/02. I guess India too had learned her lesson in 1965 and hence could not dare cross into Pakistan!

in 71 india has no plan for offensive attack in the west. india's objective was to liberate east pakistan so india done offensive in east. india never attack pakistan first. always pakistan fire the bullet but laast fire would be from indian military.

 

[Rajput_Pakistani]

In what way is this post connected to the topic at hand ?

Mr. Buddhi-Maan !

Your countryman created the thread portraying Pakistan as the aggressor in 1971 thus employing that all fault lies on the part of Pakistan. I answered that matter. Got it?

 

[livingdead]

Indian forces had been actively supporting the Mukhti Bahini and carrying out covert operations way before the operation gengis khan. India already had been in a state of war with Pakistan. Operation gengis khan was a consequence of the Indian aggression not the cause, as the Indian propaganda would have you believe.

They want to agress, aggravate AND look innocent [taking us for fools of course] at the same time.

most bangladeshis here say pakistan attacked India to save face as it could not affod to lose to muktis.
But yeah, I think its by and large known that India was plotting to attack long before pakistan attacked. The muktis were training pushed opening in eastern border.
Innocent look was not for pakistanis but for Indians as Indians like to be known as defender not agressor, a govt wont attack another country with Indians not backing them.
However pakistan could have agreed to bengali demand for separate state without attacking India, right? That would have avoided war but some loss of face for martial race (losing to fish eating bengalis)

 

[janon]

Pakistan had learnt that India was no pushover as early as 1965. But make a note of the fact that Pakistan never crossed the IB, LoC on the other hand is another matter. Even in 1965 it was India that crossed the border and same happened in 1971 even though Pakistan did carry out Air Strikes, it was never meant to start a war. It was most likely meant to render IAF useless to avert any threat incase the freedom movement in Bangladesh gained momentum.

However, as for the daring part.......it was not Pakistan that amassed over 700,000 troops at the border and almost all her Air Force at the forward airbases only to unilaterally & unconditionally retreat in 2001/02. I guess India too had learned her lesson in 1965 and hence could not dare cross into Pakistan!

That would have been a fine theory, except for what happened in '71.

Anyway, India got what it wanted with operation parakram in 2001. It was not done to invade or occupy pakistan, but to signal our will to escalate matters should pakistan not take action against terror groups on its soil. As you may know, it was a response to LeT and JeM terrorists attacking our parliament. We gave a clear message that unless this nonsense of "bleeding" India with non state actors was not stopped, we are prepared to use our state actors.

And pakistan got the message. JeM an LeT were banned by Musharaff, and several training camps were shut down. That would never have happened if we had simply sent dossiers, with no military mobilization. With the way things panned out, Mushy had no choice but to accept India's demands to shut down these terror groups, or have India shut them down for him.

The result was there for all to see. Both those terror groups were outlawed, funding became difficult for them, they had to operate underground, state support for terror groups became scarce. A ceasefire was declared between India and pak on the LoC, making India's long standing demand of making the LoC the defacto border accepted in practice, though not admitted.

The terror groups previously patronized by the pakistani state turned againt Mushy for "betraying the kashmir cause", and turned against him. Strategic assets like Ilyas Kashmiri who previously used to behead and mutilate Indian soldiers, started assasination attempts on Musharaff instead. Infiltration into Indian kashmir slowed into a trickle, and Indian kashmir became much more peaceful than the 90s, when pakistan used to funnel punjabi and Uzbek and afghan terrorists to die there.

Operation parakram was a strategic victory for India. After that, in the next ten years, the only audacious attack by pakistani terrorists was the mumbai massacre, for which they had to travel by sea, because land based infiltration was too dangerous. Attacks like the Kashmir assembly attack or the parliament attack never happened again. Make no mistake, we got all our demands accepted by pakistan by that show of force, although pakistanis would not like to admit that.

 

[arp2041]

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle!!

 

[baajey]

PA didn't have resources to fight under these circumstances.

• Military sanctions from its sole supplier for over 6 years.
• Outnumbered by 1-25 - Indians + Mukhti Bahini
• Naval Blockade
• Non existent supply route
• Non existent air force
• Non existent air lift capability
• Non existent reinforcement for men and ammo.
• Little support among the population as it was a civil war
• No hope of any help from the west or from the US
• No naval support

Our men fought bravely under these conditions, overall the war was lost by the politicians and the greed of Mr - Bhutto. General Niazi was used as a scapegoat.

This was the year when Pakistan and India became enemies and that is not likely to change, not at least in this century.

saab ji, u r very right....but wont u think your generals were fools to overlook your points before their misadventure in BD and then operation chenghiz khan ?
i m not nearly as learned as u sir, but i guess u know the difference between braveness/courage and idiotism shown by pak gernails n karnails.

 

[OrionHunter]

India only accelerated the process. The only way Pakistan could have continued to hold on to Bangladesh would have been by extreme force, like India does to Kashmir.

Really? Stop talking through your hat! India doesn't use 'extreme force' in Kashmir as you so passionately contend.

But yes, we do use extreme force to screw the terrorists that are infiltrated from across the border! And that, my friend, is par for the course!

 

[The_Sidewinder]

One thing is called "A Lie" but in case of India, the amount of lies and distorted history is so much that dictionary should add a new word for it like "Indo-lies"

Apart from active proxy war fully supported by men and material in East Pakistan, Indian Army invaded East Pakistan (Garibpur Sector) on 21st November, 1971 (Eid Day).
If it is not called an open attack on a sovereign country (without mandate of UNO) then what defines an aggression?

And one more thing when an Indian has nothing to say he tell all the lies of the world to justify. Same on this forum and all around the world. You committed an aggression then, even your countrymen now admit, so what is the shame in accepting the facts?

Yesterday read an article related to history books of class 10 students( in both Bangladesh & Pakistaam) about 1971 war. In history books of Bangladesh, its clearly written about the causes of struggle to liberate bangladesh from west pakistani forces. It is as per international standerd.
The mass killing of 3 million bengali population as a response to BNP winning general elections, raps commited by Pakistani forces etc were cleary brought into the chapters.
On the contrary, In history books of Pakistan, class 10 students are taught that bengalis of east Pakistan went to war with west Pakistan because Hindu teachers polluted their mind to do so, Pakistani army never took any action against any bengali, It was all done by evil Indian who wanted to destroy the muslim unity etc etc.
At the end of the article, the author who was a well known journalist from Dawn, stated that no country can progress with harmony unless the youth of that country are educated with true history. It is needed so that lessons that are learned from past can be used for better future. By teaching hoax and lies to upcoming citizens of Pakistan, the nation is heading for doom.
I couldn't post the link as am operating from a celphone, so please any member who have time please google and post the link by searching "history lessons taught to bangladeshi and pakistani school students about 1971" war. The time period of article was around 2010.
Link is
dawn.com/news/591514/
journalist were Huma Imtiaz from karachi & Misha hussain from dhaka.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Indians

 

[Sergi]

If anybody remember the definition of the history
"History is a chain of events , struggle between have and have not's "

Pakistani members love to blame India for everything and vice versa.

1971 was the result of 1965.

 

[Janmejay]

Yesterday read an article related to history books of class 10 students( in both Bangladesh & Pakistaam) about 1971 war. In history books of Bangladesh, its clearly written about the causes of struggle to liberate bangladesh from west pakistani forces. It is as per international standerd.
The mass killing of 3 million bengali population as a response to BNP winning general elections, raps commited by Pakistani forces etc were cleary brought into the chapters.
On the contrary, In history books of Pakistan, class 10 students are taught that bengalis of east Pakistan went to war with west Pakistan because Hindu teachers polluted their mind to do so, Pakistani army never took any action against any bengali, It was all done by evil Indian who wanted to destroy the muslim unity etc etc.
At the end of the article, the author who was a well known journalist from Dawn, stated that no country can progress with harmony unless the youth of that country are educated with true history. It is needed so that lessons that are learned from past can be used for better future. By teaching hoax and lies to upcoming citizens of Pakistan, the nation is heading for doom.
I couldn't post the link as am operating from a celphone, so please any member who have time please google and post the link by searching "history lessons taught to bangladeshi and pakistani school students about 1971" war. The time period of article was around 2010.
Link is
dawn.com/news/591514/
journalist were Huma Imtiaz from karachi & Misha hussain from dhaka.

In-depth: What students are being taught about the separation of East Pakistan
DAWN.COM
Share
Email
12 Comment(s)
Print
Published 2010-12-16 06:09:03


View from Bangladesh | View from Pakistan

“Besides, when has a fight for independence not been bloody? Is there really any need to teach such hatred to our children?” - Photo: Dawn Library
“Besides, when has a fight for independence not been bloody? Is there really any need to teach such hatred to our children?” - Photo: Dawn Library
History is written by… the teachers?
By Misha Hussain, in Dhaka


DHAKA: Few would argue with the sequence of events that lead to the liberation of Bangladesh as described in the textbooks being taught to tenth grade students in Bangladesh. Continue reading...

Fall of East Pakistan
By Huma Imtiaz, in Karachi


KARACHI: Thirty-nine years after a bloody and cruel war led to the creation of Bangladesh, it is shocking that the findings made by the Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission on the 1971 war, was never made public. Continue reading...



View from Bangladesh | View from Pakistan

- Photo credit: Dawn Library
History is written by… the teachers?
By Misha Hussain, in Dhaka

DHAKA: Few would argue with the sequence of events that lead to the liberation of Bangladesh as described in the textbooks being taught to tenth grade students in Bangladesh.

However, despite the clarity of the national curriculum, students interviewed by Dawn.com seemed confused as to the reasons behind the 1971 war as well as many of the facts associated with it.


According to the school textbooks, the need for self-autonomy was crystallised by Ayub Khan’s apathy towards East Pakistan during the 1965 Indo-Pak War and the discrimination towards Bengalis in every sphere of the region’s administration: economical, political and military.

His self-proclaimed ‘Decade of Improvement’ left Bengalis impoverished, unprotected and voiceless.

‘Two-thirds of Pakistan’s foreign currency was earned by exporting East Pakistan’s jute for which the Bengali growers never received a fair price and West Pakistanis made up 95 per cent of the military of which the upper echelons were forbidden to Bengalis’ reads the text.

After years of subjugation, it was the rejection of the six-point plan, the incarceration of 35 prominent leaders for the Agartala Conspiracy and finally the refusal of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (backed by Yahya Khan) to form the opposition party, that finally sparked the armed conflict.

The lack of relief provided to East Pakistan after the 1970 Bhola cyclone, which killed an estimated 500,000 people, further highlighted the helplessness of this then overlooked region of South Asia and catalysed the Bengalis struggle for self-autonomy into something much more tangible, independence.

However, despite this clear (if somewhat one-sided) account of what happened, almost all the students of class 10 interviewed by Dawn.com said that Bangladesh went to war ‘for our mother tongue,’ a major frustration, but never a part of Mujibur Rahman’s six-point plan. Somehow, the 1952 Bangla Language Movement seems to have been directly connected with the fight for independence.

Similarly, there is an equal amount of confusion on the numbers killed. All the students without fail stated that three million people died in the nine-month struggle. Another ‘fact’ that is not mentioned in the text books.

“My teacher told me that almost three million people died,” said 15-year-old Surzi.

“I heard on TV that three million died,” said 16-year-old Priti.

While the government is teaching one thing, it would appear that the teachers, parents and the media are teaching another.

Could resolving this difference in historical understanding be key to ensuring that future generations grow up in a cooperative environment helping both Pakistan and Bangladesh move forward as a region?

For 17-year-old Shebab the answer is clear. “I am proud of my country and the people that fought for its liberation. However, I feel this hatred towards the Pakistanis.”

“I don’t think we should forgive them. Other reputable sources concur to the rape, the murder and the destruction of Bangladesh,” he said.

You can understand why the Bengalis might feel aggrieved.

‘We have earned our freedom [from Pakistan] through nine months of bloody struggle’ begins the concluding chapter Losses of the 1971 Liberation War of a class ten history book being taught in classrooms across Bangladesh.

‘They [the Pakistan Army] destroyed educational institutes, industries and public property. Bridges, roads and railways were also destroyed as were the sea ports at Chittagong and Mongla. The federal reserves were empty and all military and non-military aircraft were taken to West Pakistan.’

• Prev
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next

Share
12 Comment(s)
Print
RELATED STORIES
Police arrest five suspects over Kohat violence

Gunmen kill senior Gujrat university official

ECP announces new LG polls schedule for Sindh
DONT FORGET TO READ PAGE 2 AND 3 FOR FULL ARTICLE AND ALSO FOR COMMENTS SECTION.

 

[Mav3rick]

India makes no difference between the LoC and IB.
If Pakistan crosses the LoC, it is as good as crossing the IB. India reserves the right to retaliate anywhere in that scenario.

Apparently it doesn't. However a Border is internationally recognized while LoC is not. 

That would have been a fine theory, except for what happened in '71.

The theory has been tested in 1998, Kargil and again in 2001. You could not cross the IB on any of those occasions. But ofcourse, we were not at war with our other half during any of those periods which explains the conditions of '71 rather explicitly.

Anyway, India got what it wanted with operation parakram in 2001. It was not done to invade or occupy pakistan, but to signal our will to escalate matters should pakistan not take action against terror groups on its soil. As you may know, it was a response to LeT and JeM terrorists attacking our parliament. We gave a clear message that unless this nonsense of "bleeding" India with non state actors was not stopped, we are prepared to use our state actors.

And pakistan got the message. JeM an LeT were banned by Musharaff, and several training camps were shut down. That would never have happened if we had simply sent dossiers, with no military mobilization. With the way things panned out, Mushy had no choice but to accept India's demands to shut down these terror groups, or have India shut them down for him.

The result was there for all to see. Both those terror groups were outlawed, funding became difficult for them, they had to operate underground, state support for terror groups became scarce. A ceasefire was declared between India and pak on the LoC, making India's long standing demand of making the LoC the defacto border accepted in practice, though not admitted.

The terror groups previously patronized by the pakistani state turned againt Mushy for "betraying the kashmir cause", and turned against him. Strategic assets like Ilyas Kashmiri who previously used to behead and mutilate Indian soldiers, started assasination attempts on Musharaff instead. Infiltration into Indian kashmir slowed into a trickle, and Indian kashmir became much more peaceful than the 90s, when pakistan used to funnel punjabi and Uzbek and afghan terrorists to die there.

Operation parakram was a strategic victory for India. After that, in the next ten years, the only audacious attack by pakistani terrorists was the mumbai massacre, for which they had to travel by sea, because land based infiltration was too dangerous. Attacks like the Kashmir assembly attack or the parliament attack never happened again. Make no mistake, we got all our demands accepted by pakistan by that show of force, although pakistanis would not like to admit that.

Strategic victory that has failed to achieve desired results even today??? Despite it costing billions of dollars and costing hundreds of lives at your end?? What about Mumbai attacks???? Seriously dude!!

Only the groups that are black listed by the US are banned in Pakistan, have we ever cared what you want? You could not even carry out a single 'surgical strike' mission despite several wet dreams of the same and with almost a million strong military at our border!

That is your reality, that is your limitation and that is the fact that you have to learn to live with.