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

[Baibars_1260]

Please point to the credible source for such a law where it says that if attacked on a disputed territory, a nation cannot respond to it on the non-disputed one.
By your own logic, if today, India decides to attack on your side of Kashmir to try and annex it, you would limit your defence to Kashmir area and not open any other front, correct? And obviously not think of dropping any A-bombs on India.

Look up the UN Charter of Self Defense, and pre-emption.

In 2014, Russia confined it annexation to only Crimea because it was disputed ( although technically that claim is dubious) .
Russia did not strike Ukraine even when it launched military action against ethnic Russian origin separatists in the East Donbass.

I am surprised you haven't made a "quid pro quo " argument about Pakistan's actions on the Western Front in 1971. Indian Special Forces had been operating in East Pakistan since April 1971 and there was full fledged penetration by India by 22 November 1971.
Pakistan struck India with multiple air strikes on the night of December 2-3 1971 on the Western Front. Technically that was aggression but East Pakistan was sovereign Pakistan territory till then. So Pakistan's actions had more justification. In any case India did not complain much on what happened on the Western front and the Simla Agreement makes no mention of any apology by Pakistan for its "aggression" or even the mention of East Pakistan far less Bangladesh.

Yes, Kashmir was peaceful till the Jihadis free from defeating Soviets were pushed into Kashmir to wreak havoc. So Pakistan is to blame for all of Kashmir's pain since 1990.

Disagree. Check your facts.
There is no evidence of Afghan Mujahideen fighting in Kashmir. All militants captured or killed are Potohari or Pahadi speaking Kashmiris either from Azad Kashmir or Kashmiri speaking militants from within the valley. India would have officially blamed Afghanistan for pushing militants into Kashmir and in any case there is no border between Indian occupied Kashmir and Afghanistan.
How is Pakistan to blame for lynching of Kashmiri vendors in the rest of India or harassment of Kashmiri students. If Kashmiris are your own people then should this happen?
Your Shehla Rashid, Mehbooba Mufti are not Pakistanis . If they are why are they not deported out.

We had the same mentality in East Pakistan where we put the blame for every problem there on India and every Bengali speaking politician was an "Indian agent" . Is it that simplistic?
Having said that I do wish to put on record that Hindu Pundits of the Valley have their right to live there being of that land . They deserve to go back to their homes in honor and safety and it is a shame that India with its 1 million strong security forces in the province cannot ensure that.

 

[peagle]

Please point to the credible source for such a law where it says that if attacked on a disputed territory, a nation cannot respond to it on the non-disputed one.

What @Baibars_1260 had mentioned is according to international law, because the nature of the boundary determines the obligations on the states where that separation lays. I read it somewhere also, it has been a while, so sorry I wont be able to provide a reference, except for the clip below.

He is a senior Indian army officer, admitting to the same thing baibars had mentioned, this in 2019. in 1965 the sanctity of LOC was different, it has changed over time due to various written and unwritten agreements and understandings, even so in 2019, he is still saying it is grabbers keepers, if you can.

Initially, it was called the ceasefire line for many years, then it became something else, and the present classification is the Line Of Control, not a border. If it was an international border, it would be called a border. In essence, the 1965 war had two parts, one started by Pakistan, the other by India, and both need to be looked at differently because both have different values, and both parties failed to meet their objectives.

I don't really have time to research and provide a reference as like everyone much of my reading is purely for personal pleasure, Baibars has said it, I am seconding it, and your general is repeating it, it is your choice whether you believe it not.

The part relating to this discussion starts from 05:40

I am just replying for information purposes, I do not plan to join this discussion for the time being.

 

[Baibars_1260]

If that is the case, then the claim by your fellow Pakistani that India wanted to disturb Pakistan's economy and hence started the war is false. Dont you agree?

On the contrary, post the 1965 war, it was India that went into a famine mode with a near bankrupt economy having to beg the USA for PL-480 wheat.

It wasn't because of economy but because India was afraid of loosing Kashmir. India's investment in bolstering Kashmiri and rest of India ties paid off.
Recognition of sensitivities count psychologically amongst masses . Indian Premier Shastri had become popular in Indian held Kashmir because of the way he handled and recovered the Mue-Mubarak from the Hazrat Bal Shrine..

 

[magra]

Look up the UN Charter of Self Defense, and pre-emption.

Please give me the relevant link. What is your response on Pak attack on undisputed princely state of J&K thus making it disputed? Was it not naked aggression?
And the video you sent me shows that Pakistan attacked in Rann of Kutch area before Operation Gibraltor, was it not attack on international border, if such a fight happened?

I am surprised you haven't made a "quid pro quo " argument about Pakistan's actions on the Western Front in 1971. Indian Special Forces had been operating in East Pakistan since April 1971 and there was full fledged penetration by India by 22 November 1971.
Pakistan struck India with multiple air strikes on the night of December 2-3 1971 on the Western Front.

Facts we know from our side was India only aided Mukti Bahini and did small covert operations in East Pak and was waiting for Pakistan to initiate attack, as India did not want western powers to brand it as aggressor. India only entered full scale after Pak's air strikes on Dec 3rd.

There is no evidence of Afghan Mujahideen fighting in Kashmir.

I said Jihadi fighters free from Soviet, not Afghan fighters. As everyone knows, Zia trained Pak nationals using US money to attack Soviets in Afghanistan.

How is Pakistan to blame for lynching of Kashmiri vendors in the rest of India or harassment of Kashmiri students. If Kashmiris are your own people then should this happen?
Your Shehla Rashid, Mehbooba Mufti are not Pakistanis . If they are why are they not deported out.

When did I blame the lynching incidents on Pakistan or claimed Mehbooba Mufti etc are Pakistanis. Why these out-of-context statements?

We had the same mentality in East Pakistan where we put the blame for every problem there on India and every Bengali speaking politician was an "Indian agent" . Is it that simplistic?

So, you are disputing your fellow Pakistani's claim of Mujib-ur-Rehman being Indian agent, right?

Having said that I do wish to put on record that Hindu Pundits of the Valley have their right to live there being of that land . They deserve to go back to their homes in honor and safety and it is a shame that India with its 1 million strong security forces in the province cannot ensure that.

Thank you. You are one of very few Pakistanis having any sympathy for non-Muslim Kashmiris.
Indian army can ensure their return but cannot ensure their safety. Constant insurgency makes them soft targets for terrorists. VIP security for few is possible, but not for hundreds of thousands.

 

[Baibars_1260]

If that is the case, then I am truly impressed by Indian propaganda machinery. Thank you. We planted stories of only a few hundred and Bangladeshis have blown up the figure to 3 million. How sweet of them

In fact officially India has not acknowledged rapes or war crimes .
This would have been mentioned in
the Simla Agreement or the two tripartite agreements in Delhi in 1973 and 1974. India did not extradite a single West Pakistani soldier or civilian back to Bangladesh for war crimes and repatriated them back to Pakistan with honor.
Indian historians like Sarmila Bose do not cite figures of rape in that quantity and emphasize that atrocities were committed on both sides.

For releasing flood waters, one needs large dams to hold that water first. Were there any big dams of note in West Bengal or Assam prior to 1971? I doubt.

No, there were no dams at that time. Both India and Pakistan were working towards a Farrakka Waters treaty similar to the Indus water treaty. Environmental warfare was not threatened then as is commonly threatened by India now.

US & UK did come with their nuclear ships in Bay of Bengal lekin Russian nuclear subs dekhke phat li unki. They did not want a nuclear showdown with Russia, so they ran with their tails in their hands.

Wrong ! The US task force stayed anchored off Sri Lanka till India accepted the UN ceasefire resolution on December 21, 1971. India also agreed to withdraw to the December 17, position loosing Chambh jhaurian in the proces.
"Liberating" Azad Kashmir was a distant dream.

So why did you allow Mujib Ur Rehman to stand in your 1970 elections? You realized he is an Indian mole only after he won the election?

He wasn't an Indian mole, but a regional chauvinist. Just as Mehbooba Mufti is not a Pakistani mole, but a petty regional politician and stands for elections. If Pakistan were to invade she might change color but it is doubtful.

If you want by force, then game on. If you are dreaming of by legal means or diplomacy, then read the 1st condition of UN resolution 1948 - Pakistan was to withdraw all regular / irregular forces from the entirety of J&K.

UN resolutions mean nothing. Kashmir will fester for the foreseeable future. With Hindutva you have alienated the people forever. In Pakistan we will stand by and watch with lots of popcorn.

 

[magra]

In fact officially India has not acknowledged rapes or war crimes .
This would have been mentioned in
the Simla Agreement or the two tripartite agreements in Delhi in 1973 and 1974. India did not extradite a single West Pakistani soldier or civilian back to Bangladesh for war crimes and repatriated them back to Pakistan with honor.
Indian historians like Sarmila Bose do not cite figures of rape in that quantity and emphasize that atrocities were committed on both sides.

So again you dispute the conspiracy charge on India by your fellow Pakistani.

I am surprised that you have disputed almost all his charges and still encouraged him by 'love'ing his post. Why are you letting him continue in his delusion? You should have corrected him without needing me to intervene.

 

[Baibars_1260]

So again you dispute the conspiracy charge on India by your fellow Pakistani.

I am surprised that you have disputed almost all his charges and still encouraged him by 'love'ing his post. Why are you letting him continue in his delusion? You should have corrected him without needing me to intervene.

I am not the thought policeman here. My opinions are my own.
This is a public forum with everyone entitled to present his or her views within the boundaries of decency.,
In case you are interested I have differences of opinion with my countrymen also, We are building an environment of freedom of expression.
Read my other posts and then judge. I try to find facts but only 10% of the Global information particularly the historical information is on the internet.

 

[Baibars_1260]

Please give me the relevant link. What is your response on Pak attack on undisputed princely state of J&K thus making it disputed? Was it not naked aggression?

Yes, Pakistan's support of irregular forces in Kashmir was aggression. As much an aggression as India's actions in Bangladesh, Tibet, and Sri Lanka. A non-elected regime, whether headed by a tin-pot prince, martial law dictator, Communist governor, or a religiously fundamentalist majoritarian regime oppressing its own people will provoke a reaction from a neighboring power if it has to deal with refugees. Pakistan was flooded with refugees from the depredations of the Maharajah of Kashmir's Dogra army.

And the video you sent me shows that Pakistan attacked in Rann of Kutch area before Operation Gibraltor, was it not attack on international border, if such a fight happened?

Where the international border was over the Rann was not clear. The skirmish resolved the issue.

I said Jihadi fighters free from Soviet, not Afghan fighters. As everyone knows, Zia trained Pak nationals using US money to attack Soviets in Afghanistan.

Ok, then how come we see no evidence of Pakistani militants captured. Has the IA identified these persons?

Thank you. You are one of very few Pakistanis having any sympathy for non-Muslim Kashmiris.
Indian army can ensure their return but cannot ensure their safety. Constant insurgency makes them soft targets for terrorists. VIP security for few is possible, but not for hundreds of thousands.

 

[PakistaniAtBahrain]

And in 1947, Kashmir was not disputed but a princely state yet to make its decision. Pak sent its irregular forces to attack a then non-disputed princely state, was it not a naked aggression?

oh yeah, pffft, who cares what the Kashmiris think and what they want.

So Pakistan is to blame for all of Kashmir's pain since 1990.

umm, hello, there was trouble in Kashmir in the 80s too when they felt elections were being rigged by India. that started an armed rebellion.

As I said, I am proud of Indian propaganda machinery if thats the case. @Atlas : Do you agree with what Pakistanis are saying that India planted fake stories of Mass killings / rapes of East Pakistanis by West Pakistani military?

references to the Indian and Soviet propaganda about Pakistan killing 1 million Bengalis, and a lot more stuff can be found here.

http://storyofbangladesh.com/ebooks/Behind%20the%20Myth%20of%203%20million.pdf

Surely, declassifed records of 1970 would tell us how conflicted W. Pak generals were to allow Mujib standing for election while knowing he is Indian agent, right?

of course the military didnt want Mujib to win after the Agartala conspiracy was exposed. that is why they favoured Bhutto, who also had an anti-India stance, whereas Mujib had a pro-India stance. one day Bhutto would say something anti-India, then Mujib would counter it with something pro-India. so clear sign that the political leadership in Pakistan werent on the same page which is a bad look for Pakistan. after 1971, Mujib might have been somewhat anti-India, but not one person in Pakistan doesnt believe that Mujib and Awami League werent getting a lot of support from India since at least the 60s, especially the Agartala conspiracy. India has always interfered in Pakistan's internal affairs.

 

[magra]

I am not the thought policeman here. My opinions are my own.
This is a public forum with everyone entitled to present his or her views within the boundaries of decency.,
In case you are interested I have differences of opinion with my countrymen also, We are building an environment of freedom of expression.
Read my other posts and then judge. I try to find facts but only 10% of the Global information particularly the historical information is on the internet.

Hope the present example would teach you to be more circumspect of the claims made by your compatriots and not encourage them in their folly

 

[magra]

Yes, Pakistan's support of irregular forces in Kashmir was aggression.

Thanks for admitting that Pakistan was the aggressor as it pushed its irregular forces in Kashmir. It did not approach UN or tried reaching out to resolve dispute by talks, but directly attacked.
In case of East Pak, India tried diplomacy for several months and was never an eager participant in the war.
Even after it did enter, our intentions were only to help and not to capture land. We vacated after liberating BD. Unlike you, who captured Kashmir, rather than giving it back to local Kashmiris and letting them rule it themselves.
Had you truly wanted to do good for Kashmiris, you would have followed UN Resolution 1948 - 1st conditon of which asked Pak to withdraw all its regular / irregular forces from the entirety of J&K.

As much an aggression as India's actions in Bangladesh, Tibet, and Sri Lanka.

What Indian action in Tibet? We sat silently by when China captured Tibet in 1950s leading to Dalai Lama running to India.
We went to Sri Lanka as a peacekeeping force on Sri Lanka's invitation. How is that an aggression? Even Sri Lankans never accussed India of this.

Ok, then how come we see no evidence of Pakistani militants captured. Has the IA identified these persons?

Thats because Pak has always used the policy of sending its irregulars to do its dirty work so that it can lie to everyone that it has no role to play. Eg. In Kargil 1999, Pak initially claimed that it was the militants doing out of their own will and not sent by Pak. Whenever such militants are caught or killed, Pak denies any link with those people. We try to bury their bodies with as much respect as we can. But imagine a country which disowns its fighters and does not even claim their bodies.

 

[Baibars_1260]

Hope the present example would teach you to be more circumspect of the claims made by your compatriots and not encourage them in their folly

Why the circumspection on my part ?
I don't speak for my compatriots or the Bangladeshi guests here.
I recently stumbled upon a Princeton University paper mentioned in the OP here which based on declassified information completely changed my perception of the events in Bangladesh and the aftermath of the Civil War.
I now know that the India of 1972 was very different from India as it is today in its perception of Pakistan.
I have tried mostly unsuccessfully to highlight this difference to both Indian and Pakistani members on this forum.
It is far easier to write a one line flame bait then go through a serious 40 page thesis.

But who cares ? I doubt if even the respective MEAs of our nations care.
So the stark reality is that we have squandered away the chances for peace and have converted a cooked up religious conflict into an existential one threatening mutual
annihilation.

In Kargil 1999, Pak initially claimed that it was the militants doing out of their own will and not sent by Pak. Whenever such militants are caught or killed, Pak denies any link with those people. We try to bury their bodies with as much respect as we can.

Ok, so Pakistan is to blame then if you are so righteous why didn't you strike across the LOC or International Border in 1999 or in 2002 ? The UN Charter of pre-emption gives you that option.
You threatened Pakistan with a massive invasion in 1987 ( Operation Brasstacks) just when the SAARC conference was in progress in Bangalore being attended by our prime minister Mohammed Khan Junejo.

There is no point talking and hurling accusations. The ultimate fate of our peoples has already been decided.

 

[magra]

oh yeah, pffft, who cares what the Kashmiris think and what they want.

but Pakistan does care? then why did it shy away from following UN resolution 1948 and withdrew its forces from J&K to allow for plebiscite? Till date, it hypocritically blames India whereas the blame lies with Pak's refusal to follow the resolution.

umm, hello, there was trouble in Kashmir in the 80s too when they felt elections were being rigged by India. that started an armed rebellion.

Yes, trouble started in late 80s when a rigged election was coupled with Pak sending militants in Kashmir. Rigged elections in the subcontinent is not new, but sending militants is what blew things out of proportion. Even BD have had rigged elections, India did not use that as an excuse to send forces to foment trouble.

references to the Indian and Soviet propaganda about Pakistan killing 1 million Bengalis, and a lot more stuff can be found here.

http://storyofbangladesh.com/ebooks/Behind%20the%20Myth%20of%203%20million.pdf

of course the military didnt want Mujib to win after the Agartala conspiracy was exposed. that is why they favoured Bhutto, who also had an anti-India stance, whereas Mujib had a pro-India stance. one day Bhutto would say something anti-India, then Mujib would counter it with something pro-India. so clear sign that the political leadership in Pakistan werent on the same page which is a bad look for Pakistan. after 1971, Mujib might have been somewhat anti-India, but not one person in Pakistan doesnt believe that Mujib and Awami League werent getting a lot of support from India since at least the 60s, especially the Agartala conspiracy. India has always interfered in Pakistan's internal affairs.

First, convince your own countrymen on these conspiracy theories. @Baibars_1260 has proven each of your points wrong today.

 

[PakistaniAtBahrain]

but Pakistan does care?

of course we care. every Pakistani says Kashmiris should have the right to decide if it wants to be independent, or be with Pakistan, or be with India.

then why did it shy away from following UN resolution 1948 and withdrew its forces from J&K to allow for plebiscite? Till date, it hypocritically blames India whereas the blame lies with Pak's refusal to follow the resolution.

allow for a plebiscite? India has never given Pakistan a reason for trusting India. did India invite Pakistan to do a plebiscite after it annexed Junagarh? after all, it was Pakistan's right, as per the instrument of accession.

Yes, trouble started in late 80s when a rigged election was coupled with Pak sending militants in Kashmir.

this is the same bullshit indians come up with whenever a kashmiri picks up a gun. oh look, a militant from Pakistan. at least you admit India rigged elections in Kashmir. no reason for Kashmiris to fight. lol

Even BD have had rigged elections, India did not use that as an excuse to send forces to foment trouble.

does Bangladesh look like disputed territory to you? so why should India care if elections are rigged in Bangladesh or not? what a stupid example you chose.

First, convince your own countrymen on these conspiracy theories. @Baibars_1260 has proven each of your points wrong today.

i dont care what anyone else believes.

 

[magra]

Why the circumspection on my part ?
I don't speak for my compatriots or the Bangladeshi guests here.
I recently stumbled upon a Princeton University paper mentioned in the OP here which based on declassified information completely changed my perception of the events in Bangladesh and the aftermath of the Civil War.
I now know that the India of 1972 was very different from India as it is today in its perception of Pakistan.
I have tried mostly unsuccessfully to highlight this difference to both Indian and Pakistani members on this forum.
It is far easier to write a one line flame bait then go through a serious 40 page thesis.

You need to be circumspect of their claims as we have seen most claims of your countrymen not standing up to scrutiny of facts. Most of your countrymen have been fed incorrect version of uncomfortable truths and they have readily internalized the official (but incorrect) versions.

Ok, so Pakistan is to blame then if you are so righteous why didn't you strike across the LOC or International Border in 1999 or in 2002 ? The UN Charter of pre-emption gives you that option.

We wanted to localize or avoid conflicts as much as we can.
In 1999, since initially, your govt lied that they have not sent anyone and it may be militants entering on their own will, India did not want to sound the aggressor to the world by crossing the LOC. India had just come out of major sanctions after the nuclear tests of 1998, so we did care of how western powers thought of India's conduct.

There is no point talking and hurling accusations. The ultimate fate of our peoples has already been decided.

I am never to hurl accusations. I always enter to defend India against false accusations. My strong defense may feel like an attack.