How to beat the "1971Civil War " Psychological Syndrome !

[Raj-Hindustani]

@Raj-Hindustani
Refer to interview in this Link
In the interview, the former COAS also said how he had to face severe problems back in the country following his visit to Pakistan. He added that the bureaucrats, ministers complained against him stating that he treated Pakistani soldiers just like he treated his sons-in-law.
Even, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had called for a cabinet meeting to the issue.
Wow !

Field Marshal Manekshaw said that he explained to Mrs Gandhi, stating that they were soldiers, who ‘fought and fought extremely well and lost’.

Question for you.
1. Does a "victorious" army praise its enemy?
2. Why didn't Manekshaw praise his allied fighting men from Bangladesh the same way ?

Question for you.
1. Does a "victorious" army praise its enemy?

do u understand that it is called 'professionalism'? now days also if india beat to a weak team (Zimbabwe) in a cricket match then still the captain of India needs to appreciate the opposition team and Captain because of the professionalism. nothing wrong...

2. Why didn't Manekshaw praise his allied fighting men from Bangladesh the same way ?

again professionalism, it shows that how much indian army is having professionalism


In a viral clip from 2002, Field Marshal Sam Maneckshaw says how Pakistanis hailed professionalism of Indian Armed Forces: Watch video



5 July, 2020
OpIndia Staff

Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw (Image Source: ET)
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://www.opindia.com/2020/07/sam-maneckshaw-pakistan-banglaesh-1971-war-professionalism-indian-armed-forces-video/
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=In+a+viral+clip+from+2002,+Field+Marshal+Sam+Maneckshaw+says+how+Pakistanis+hailed+professionalism+of+Indian+Armed+Forces:+Watch+video&url=https://www.opindia.com/2020/07/sam-maneckshaw-pakistan-banglaesh-1971-war-professionalism-indian-armed-forces-video/&via=OpIndia_com
https://www.opindia.com/2020/07/sam...r-professionalism-indian-armed-forces-video/#
1924

An old video of Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, one of India’s greatest war heroes, has gone viral on the internet in which he narrates how the Pakistani Prisoner of Wars of the 1971 India-Pakistan war had hailed the professionalism of the Indian Army following Indian victory in the war that liberated Bangladesh from Pakistan.
Speaking at an interview in 2002, Field Marshal Manekshaw revealed how he was royally welcomed in Pakistan after the 1971 India-Pakistan war and treated him with respect for the professionalism Indian Army had displayed during the Bangladesh Liberation war.

Sharing an anecdote, Sam Jamshedji Manekshaw recalled about an incident in Lahore at Governor’s House when the Governor of the Punjab province had asked him for a favour. The former Chief of Indian Army added that the Governor wanted him to meet the staff and shake hands with them, who were all waiting out for the Indian war hero.
“They were all lined up. The 11th man took the turban off and put it at my feet. So I picked it up and gave it to him, asking why did you (Pakistani staffer) do this?” said Field Marshal Manekshaw in his interview.

The Retired General said that a Pakistani staffer revealed how the Indian general had saved his family. The Pakistani staffer at the Governor’s residence said that five of his sons were PoWs of the 1971 war, who were treated with a lot of respect despite being Pakistani soldiers.

According to the staffer, as narrated by Sam Manekshaw, the Pakistan PoWs were given Quran to read, made to sleep on cots in barracks, broke bread with fellow Indian soldiers.
Read- India’s missing 54: The 54 ‘Abhinandans’ who never came home from Pakistan
“We will never believe Hindus are bad,” the Pakistan staffer at the Governor’s house said to Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw in reaction to the professionalism displayed by the Indian Forces in the 1971 India-Pakistan despite fighting a rogue army like Pakistan.

In the interview, the former COAS also said how he had to face severe problems back in the country following his visit to Pakistan. He added that the bureaucrats, ministers complained against him stating that he treated Pakistani soldiers just like he treated his sons-in-law. Even, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had called for a cabinet meeting to the issue.
Field Marshal Manekshaw said that he explained to Mrs Gandhi, stating that they were soldiers, who ‘fought and fought extremely well and lost’.

Sam Maneckshaw had said Pakistan hailed Indian Forces after 1971 war

Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw revealed in 2002 video how he was royally welcomed in Pakistan after 1971 war and treated him with respect

www.opindia.com

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Another Hilarious comment:
Why were you "strong enough" to
resist THIS UN resolution in 1971?

U.N.'S CALL FOR TRUCE IS REJECTED (Published 1971)

Indian UN delegates deride UN Gen Assembly cease-fire resolution, saying they will neither cease fighting nor withdraw troops; Pakistani delegates say it is up to India to stop fighting; Amb Shahi, referring to resolution's call for refugee return, says Pakistan refuses to negotiate with Bengali...

www.nytimes.com

"UNITED NATIONS, N. Y., Dec. 8—
Indian delegates today derided the General Assembly's call for a cease‐fire in the war with Pakistan and indicated India would not obey it. The Pakistani delegation expressed strong reservations about its terms.

One Indian delegate, N. P. Jain, called it “much too vague” and another, Narendra Singh, asked whether India would stop fighting and pull her troops back, said:

“Certiiinly not; we are not foolish.”



Just 13 days later you followed the UN resolution on a ceasefire when the US Task Force 74 was threatening your rear, and you got a drubbing in the Chamb Jhaurian Sector and there was no hope of a breakthrough on the Western Front.
So what changed?
Did Sam Bahadur forget to comb his mustache that day ?
Or is it because you respect the danda ?
You fight only the weak and bend over when faced with odds.

ODS HOME PAGE

Multilingual interface of the UN Official Documents System

documents-dds-ny.un.org

United Nations Security Council Resolution 307 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Who cares what the UN does?. China was not even a member of the UN in 1962 and beat the stuffing out of you.
Your UN is not going to get your Kashmir back or provide you protection in a nuclear war ( no ceasefire there).
You have two permanent enemies on your border that Sam Bahadur has no answer to ( God rest his soul ).
So what DID you get out of your "victory " in 1971 ?

hahahaha.... what are u trying to say?

somtimes mixing with china? we don't need protection from UN anyway.. i always laugh when people talk about nuclear.... before they must think that will be Pakistan exists later at the earth if they use nuclear?

about china, they are paper tiger.. they can maximum will get issues at border level. they will never going to full flash war with nuclear power (India). if anyone thinks that they will fight for them also then definitely he is fool only.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Source? are you out of your mind?

You reply to my statement,
then create your own argument, that has nothing to do with the discussion, and have not justified why what you said is relevant, or important.

And yet, you expect me to follow your fantasies. You need help.

Get a life, and get a brain, then come back and have discussion,
i've come across some BSh.ters, but you top them all.

you are saying that i m lying about 10 millions refugees from Bangladesh and when i provided the proof (UN website as source )... after your custom story of conversation ... i m in the top list.. thats great

 

[peagle]

you are saying that i m lying about 10 millions refugees from Bangladesh and when i provided the proof (UN website as source )... after your custom story of conversation ... i m in the top list.. thats great

Clearly, there are a few wires missing in your head.

I was saying that once you enter a discussion, which you did, you have to stick within the context of that discussion, not create irrelevant points, and go off into tangents, that's childish, silly, and extremely stupid.

Just to put your mind at rest.
Regarding your statement, that has nothing to do with the original discussion.
for one, I do not recognise the factuality of your statement,
BECAUSE, I do not care about how many refugees there were, because it has nothing to do with my statement, to which you had responded.

1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 100 million, the discussion was not about refugees, you fool. Pakistan has hosted the largest refugee population in the world for nearly four decades and counting, only recently, I think Turkey took the top spot.

SO WHAT? do you see Pakistan crying about it to the rest of the world, grow up, and stick with the topic, and make direct relevant arguments.

If you wanted to start a new topic, why not just say so, rather than waste my time with irrelevant replies.

Only when you have no answers, do you go off into tangents, touching irrelevant topics, you need serious help.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Clearly, there are a few wires missing in your head.

I was saying that once you enter a discussion, which you did, you have to stick within the context of that discussion, not create irrelevant points, and go off into tangents, that's childish, silly, and extremely stupid.

Just to put your mind at rest.
Regarding your statement, that has nothing to do with the original discussion.
for one, I do not recognise the factuality of your statement,
BECAUSE, I do not care about how many refugees there were, because it has nothing to do with my statement, to which you had responded.

1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 100 million, the discussion was not about refugees, you fool. Pakistan has hosted the largest refugee population in the world for nearly four decades and counting, only recently, I think Turkey took the top spot.

SO WHAT? do you see Pakistan crying about it to the rest of the world, grow up, and stick with the topic, and make direct relevant arguments.

If you wanted to start a new topic, why not just say so, rather than waste my time with irrelevant replies.

Only when you have no answers, do you go off into tangents, touching irrelevant topics, you need serious help.

i heard that a decent discussion or argument can't be done with a lady or wife or gf.. now, i m rethinking about that because few people even fail to them.

so what are you trying to say? if you are referring to Talibani then you hosted because of US... US gave you everything during the time, they donated military items and paid cash for fighting the war against the USSR...

but, back to 1971.. we were too poor to manage refugees (approx 10 millions) without any respon and support except Pakistan and Bangladeshi issues in east Pakistan.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

I would like to point out

Great post.

1971

The fact is 1971 was about a civil war. It was about Bangla's wanting to leave the federation. That was achieved. But what is plapably untrue is a Pakistan defeat with regards to India. For that to have happened it would require -

• unconditional surrender of PA and he handing over of Azad Kashmir to India.

Nothing of the sort happened. The western theatre ended with almost the same position it was before the war started. The Indian conflate the success of Bangla insurgency later supported by India and the defeat of Eastern Command of PA numbering about 55k men as victory of victories.

 

[Baibars_1260]

Question for you.
1. Does a "victorious" army praise its enemy?

do u understand that it is called 'professionalism'? now days also if india beat to a weak team (Zimbabwe) in a cricket match then still the captain of India needs to appreciate the opposition team and Captain because of the professionalism. nothing wrong...

This one has me in splits...

So Manekshaw was India's cricket captain and the India Pakistan wars are cricket match...
Never knew generals thought of enemy warriors that way
I thought warriors treat captured
prisoners like this.

So what do Chinese think of your Generals and fighting men?

2. Why didn't Manekshaw praise his allied fighting men from Bangladesh the same way ?

again professionalism, it shows that how much indian army is having professionalism

So Manekshaw praises the enemy, but fails to praise his allies!
Mr. Walrus Mustache has not said one word in praise of the fighting abilities of the Bangladeshi forces.
That's professionalism ! Praise the enemy not your ally.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

This one has me in splits...

So Manekshaw was India's cricket captain and the India Pakistan wars are cricket match...
Never knew generals thought of enemy warriors that way
I thought warriors treat captured
prisoners like this.



View attachment 718877

So what do Chinese think of your Generals and fighting men?



So Manekshaw praises the enemy, but fails to praise his allies!
Mr. Walrus Mustache has not said one word in praise of the fighting abilities of the Bangladeshi forces.
That's professionalism ! Praise the enemy not your ally.

hahahaha... this happens when people don't understand the things or accept.

Again it was a great professionalism of indian army against POW (pak army).


again referring to daddy (China), previously was US. ohh man.. when you will standup at your feets? please grow up.. more then 70 years has passed.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Great post.

The fact is 1971 was about a civil war. It was about Bangla's wanting to leave the federation. That was achieved. But what is plapably untrue is a Pakistan defeat with regards to India. For that to have happened it would require -

• unconditional surrender of PA and he handing over of Azad Kashmir to India.

Nothing of the sort happened. The western theatre ended with almost the same position it was before the war started. The Indian conflate the success of Bangla insurgency later supported by India and the defeat of Eastern Command of PA numbering about 55k men as victory of victories.

war was not happened due to j&k...

• unconditional surrender of PA and he handing over of Azad Kashmir to India.

our intention was only to liberate Bangladesh. and, it was successfully liberated..

 

[Baibars_1260]

hahahaha.... what are u trying to say?

Since you read simple English only here is what I am trying to say.

1.Your statement:
- Simla agreement got UN out of the Kashmir dispute.
2. My statement:
The UN involvement in the India Pakistan dispute was non-enforceable. India theoretically limited its military options by signing the Simla Agreement when it was supposedly the "victor" in the war.
3.Your statement:
In 1971 UN was very powerful and could not be ignored
3. My statement:
UN was not powerful and could be ignored. China ignored the UN (of which it was not a member ) and beat the daylights out of India in 1962

Under the protection of daddy the Soviet Union India ignored UN resolution 303 on 8th December 1971.
Every thing looked great till 16th December 1971 when Pakistan capitulated in East Pakistan.
Kashmir still had to be recovered and West Pakistan destroyed.,
Then Big Daddy USA sent in Task Force 74, and India got its rear kicked in Chamb dashing hopes of recovering Azad Kashmir.
The most disappointed of all was daddy Soviet Union who was now trying to save it's stooge from a double whammy from the UN Task force and walloping in Kashmir.
Suddenly the UN was important.
So when daddy Soviet Union abstained from vetoing the second UN resolution ( No. 307) on 21, December 1971, India accepted.

The danda worked.

somtimes mixing with china? we don't need protection from UN anyway.. i always laugh when people talk about nuclear.... before they must think that will be Pakistan exists later at the earth if they use nuclear?

about china, they are paper tiger.. they can maximum will get issues at border level. they will never going to full flash war with nuclear power (India). if anyone thinks that they will fight for them also then definitely he is fool only.

No one thinks China will fight for anybody but itself except your ACM Bhadauria and General Rawat who harp on a "two front" war . Your generals should worry about fighting Pakistan only.

Sam Bahadur:
Remarkable that Mr. General Walrus . Such an egotistical person.
In not a single interview has he ever commented on the current affairs, or given credit to other generals, or other battles like Siachen, Kargil, IPKF operations. It was always "effing" himself, 1971 and Dhaka.
That tin pot "soldier" never even talks about the Western Front . All he talks about is how well he was treated in Pakistan when he went there to sign away Chamb Jhaurian, What his fellow generals think of him is well documented by Major General Sheru Thapliyal right here.

Enduring Mysteries of 1971 War

The lightning campaign launched by the Indian Army in Dec 1971 which resulted in the birth of a new nation — Bangladesh, is surely the greatest feat of arms in our

www.indiandefencereview.com

 

[Paro_Peagus]

war was not happened due to j&k...

• unconditional surrender of PA and he handing over of Azad Kashmir to India.

our intention was only to liberate Bangladesh. and, it was successfully liberated..

That didn’t happen because butto begged gandhi to give him a face saving back at home or he wouldn’t be outed. India knew even if they get Kashmir on paper forcefully signed now the PA would do a coup and nullify the aggrement so it was decided to stick to keeping 3rd parties out of the issue instead so india doesn’t have to face west powers in diplomacy in the future.
Indian establishment knew by just buying enough time to grow they could nullify the whole dispute in its favor.

The results we are looking at the present day. Today they are begging for talks. In a decade the gap would be so wide they would have a hard time to get any attention with regards to Kashmir. That is provided they dont turn into a client state to china.

 

[nahtanbob]

This one has me in splits...

So Manekshaw was India's cricket captain and the India Pakistan wars are cricket match...
Never knew generals thought of enemy warriors that way
I thought warriors treat captured
prisoners like this.



View attachment 718877

That is a German soldier captured in Stalingrad. Are we comparing India-Pakistani skirmishes with the Eastern Front ?

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Since you read simple English only here is what I am trying to say.

1.Your statement:
- Simla agreement got UN out of the Kashmir dispute.
2. My statement:
The UN involvement in the India Pakistan dispute was non-enforceable. India theoretically limited its military options by signing the Simla Agreement when it was supposedly the "victor" in the war.
3.Your statement:
In 1971 UN was very powerful and could not be ignored
3. My statement:
UN was not powerful and could be ignored. China ignored the UN (of which it was not a member ) and beat the daylights out of India in 1962

Under the protection of daddy the Soviet Union India ignored UN resolution 303 on 8th December 1971.
Every thing looked great till 16th December 1971 when Pakistan capitulated in East Pakistan.
Kashmir still had to be recovered and West Pakistan destroyed.,
Then Big Daddy USA sent in Task Force 74, and India got its rear kicked in Chamb dashing hopes of recovering Azad Kashmir.
The most disappointed of all was daddy Soviet Union who was now trying to save it's stooge from a double whammy from the UN Task force and walloping in Kashmir.
Suddenly the UN was important.
So when daddy Soviet Union abstained from vetoing the second UN resolution ( No. 307) on 21, December 1971, India accepted.

The danda worked.



No one thinks China will fight for anybody but itself except your ACM Bhadauria and General Rawat who harp on a "two front" war . Your generals should worry about fighting Pakistan only.

Sam Bahadur:
Remarkable that Mr. General Walrus . Such an egotistical person.
In not a single interview has he ever commented on the current affairs, or given credit to other generals, or other battles like Siachen, Kargil, IPKF operations. It was always "effing" himself, 1971 and Dhaka.
That tin pot "soldier" never even talks about the Western Front . All he talks about is how well he was treated in Pakistan when he went there to sign away Chamb Jhaurian, What his fellow generals think of him is well documented by Major General Sheru Thapliyal right here.

Enduring Mysteries of 1971 War

The lightning campaign launched by the Indian Army in Dec 1971 which resulted in the birth of a new nation — Bangladesh, is surely the greatest feat of arms in our

www.indiandefencereview.com

1.Your statement:
- Simla agreement got UN out of the Kashmir dispute.
2. My statement:
The UN involvement in the India Pakistan dispute was non-enforceable. India theoretically limited its military options by signing the Simla Agreement when it was supposedly the "victor" in the war.

=>
India never attacked on Pakistan for PAK kashmir and GB.... But, Pakistan always a aggressor when comes to kashmir... It is still debatable that "why we did not take advantage after winning the WAR". Criticisms started in India after few days only against Indira Ghandi for missed opportunity.

Still, Only a few people from India talks about getting back PAK Kashmir and Gb from Pakistan...Specially, Political leaders.... But Most of the Indians aware that it is not possible now and these comes during the elections only.

Can you say same about Pakistan?

It is just opposite situation in Pakistan. If any leader will not talk about getting back Kashmir then he will not be elected and will be called "Modi ka yaar"...etc etc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.Your statement:
In 1971 UN was very powerful and could not be ignored
3. My statement:
UN was not powerful and could be ignored. China ignored the UN (of which it was not a member ) and beat the daylights out of India in 1962

Again, India was totally depended on Soviet Union during the time. All other four permanent members of UN were supporting to Pakistan..... Because India was not a important country and actually a poor country in the world....

Now present, Out of 5.... Maximum 1 member (China) could vote for any resolution against India. The world will not take any risk against a nuclear power, India. There is no Military options available now but It was possible in 1970s if Soviet was not there. Also, economy sanctions....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the protection of daddy the Soviet Union India ignored UN resolution 303 on 8th December 1971.
Every thing looked great till 16th December 1971 when Pakistan capitulated in East Pakistan.
Kashmir still had to be recovered and West Pakistan destroyed.,
Then Big Daddy USA sent in Task Force 74, and India got its rear kicked in Chamb dashing hopes of recovering Azad Kashmir.

=>..

US and Britain (daddy's) sent the TASk forces to save east Pakistan but failed. They did not come for saving Pak kashmir and GB.... But for saving only EAST Pakistan. However, soviet shown them submarines and missiles.... They took U-turn...

In 1971, the U.S. Navy Almost Fought the Soviets Over Bangladesh

This story originally appeared on July 19, 2016. In 2016, the United States backed India’s application to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group — but didn’t support Pakistan’s. This marked an extraordinary turning point in the United States’ relationship with these historical adversaries. In 1971...

warisboring.com

And about china, Nixon asked China to mobilize its troops on the Indian border — and even contemplated “lobbing nuclear weapons” at the Soviet Union if the Soviets retaliated by going to war with China.

But, they did not dare to enter into another war with India because of the Soviet Union (India -Soviet Treaty).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No one thinks China will fight for anybody but itself except your ACM Bhadauria and General Rawat who harp on a "two front" war . Your generals should worry about fighting Pakistan only.

=>
What's wrong? We should always prepare for two fronts WAR. Pakistan is not having capability to take back any part from India... It is only possible if Two fronts will happen but again, China will never mess with nuclear Power, India for anyone.... I can not give same guaranty for Pakistan because Military runs the country... Situation can be changed in the future.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remarkable that Mr. General Walrus . Such an egotistical person.
In not a single interview has he ever commented on the current affairs, or given credit to other generals, or other battles like Siachen, Kargil, IPKF operations. It was always "effing" himself, 1971 and Dhaka.
That tin pot "soldier" never even talks about the Western Front . All he talks about is how well he was treated in Pakistan when he went there to sign away Chamb Jhaurian, What his fellow generals think of him is well documented by Major General Sheru Thapliyal right here.

For about above lines... below remarks are enough.

When the prime minister asked Manekshaw to go to Dhaka and accept the surrender of Pakistani forces, he declined, saying that the honour should go to the GOC-in-C Eastern Command, Lt. Gen. Jagjit Singh Aurora.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Baibars_1260]

There must be diplomacy talks between Indian and Pakistani governments. Agreement can't be decide by only one party.... Shimla agreement was a gift for India, India had also compromised on some points...

Doesn't a the party that wins the war decide on the agreement?
Did Japan dictate the terms of the aftermath of the surrender?

war was not happened due to j&k...

• unconditional surrender of PA and he handing over of Azad Kashmir to India.

Then why was there fighting in Jammu and Kashmir from December 02- December 21.

1971 Indo-Pak war: Was the ceasefire in Battle of Chhamb premature?

Author of book on war says India should have negotiated the return of its territory during Simla Agreement

www.hindustantimes.com

That is a German soldier captured in Stalingrad. Are we comparing India-Pakistani skirmishes with the Eastern Front ?

Skirmish ? It is viewed as the next Mahabharat !
Yes, we are comparing the Indo
Pak war to the Eastern Front, because Sam Bahadur compares himself to Marshal Zhukov, Von Paulus and Rossokovsky .
That's all this guy talks about, basically himself and how full of himself he is. He died in 2008
and lived to see :

1. The assassination of the person he "liberated", Sheikh Mujib.(1975)

2. The population and
environmental disaster in
Bangladesh, that flooded India's
sensitive North Eastern states
with illegal immigrants.,
3. The carnage of the Assam
agitation, slaughter of the very
Bangladeshis he liberated at
Nellie. Clashes between the BSF and BDR on Bangladesh's border.

4. The revolt and mutiny of his beloved Sikh regiments and the deaths of hundreds of his soldiers in quelling the revolt.( 1984 )

5. The death of the hero of Bangladesh Major General Subheg Singh.( 1984 )

6. The assassination of his beloved Madam Prime Minister. Te mass slaughter of Sikhs across India.

7. Assassination of his protege and Chief of Army staff Lt. General Vaidya.

8. A humiliating face down of his protege COAS General Krishna Swami Sundarji during Operations Brass Tacks .( 1987 )

9. The humiliation of his army at the hands of the LTTE in Sri Lanka .

10. Operation Meghdoot which permanently positioned Indian troops on an icy wasteland where more troops die of cold than of enemy activity.
The Chinese involvement and successful completion of the Karakoram highway across captured Indian territory.

9. The defeat of the Soviet Union in
Afghanistan and its break up with India loosing a valuable ally. ( 1991 )

10. Assassination of the ex-Prime Minister of India, Rajeev Gandhi by Tamil terrorists (1991 ). The same Tamil militants that had booted his army out of Sri Lanka.

11. A "defeated " Pakistan develop and publicly test nuclear weapons and threaten to use them if attacked .( 1998 , and 2002 ). Did he remind them of the Dhaka surrender?

12. An unbowed Pakistan with little memories of India's 1971 "victory " brazenly attacking Kargil.( 1999 ).

13. A year long face off with Pakistan ( 2002- 2003 ) with artillery duels on the LOC ( an effort to punish Pakistan for the 2002 Parliament terrorist attack ) which ended in a humiliating climb down by India ultimately agreeing to a ceasefire. Instead of riding a tank to Lahore Atal Bihari Vajpayee goes in a bus

14. A "defeated" Pakistan develops a whole suit of missiles, and delivery vehicles compoleting a triad of nuclear capabilities. ( 1998-2008 ) . Nuclear capabilities that threaten New Delhi.

15. Kashmir expelling Hindu Pundits which his million strong army could not stop.

16. The squabbles amongst the generals in his army ( V.K. Singh ) over promotions

Then he praises the enemy in this interview:
Scroll to point 15:47 of the interview .

Then he lived to see his soldiers humiliated as POWs even as he was giving "son in law " treatment to his enemy POWs.

Poor guy , he lived to see all this .

 

[arjunk]

93000 pakistanis surrendered infront of hindu army was biggest humiliation of pakistani army .

Taking unarmed civillians PoW is not humiliating nor is it any military achievement. Bangladesh, who Pakistan surrendered to is a Muslim country, The commander of Bagnladeshi-Indian forces was Sikh.

But what else is there to expect from the weak country that needs 800,000 armed soldiers just to face a few Kashmiri kids throwing stones.