India should stop using Mumbai attacks for propaganda: FO

[rockstarIN]

Actually you do. This isn't a one on one fight we are talking about. Considering the nuclear hang over, millions of lives were at stake and in such a environment, every possibility has to be kept in mind.
Let me be clear If India knows it could decimate Pakistan and can strike a powerful blow to its opponent, it would not hold back a second.71 is the example of this. So please lay off from the moral high horse.

We could have done that in 1999, then why we did choose not to cross international border or LoC?

1971 is quite different scenario, it has been discussed to death you know. But we did cross border and open a new war front in 1965 against your operation Gibraltar, Your that point is not valid that we fear Pakistan, if we start war immediately you go nuclear..

 

[IceCold]

It was really a matured action and the whole world appriciate that.
Whether we have superiority or not, still we could opt war as an option and we did not.
And we did go on offensive in Kargil, that too you know..

World appreciated Indias response is another thing. We are not arguing over that. My reply was to one thing. Kargil was a different story. India got offensive but remained well within its own borders. The only time India crossed over, was when your planes were shot down.

Remember Gujral stopped RAW for any wrongdoing in Pakistan in 1990s and the same policy still persues.
I know lots of you guys do not really believe it..

Ohh I do have a hard time believing it because whats happening inside Pakistan from Afghanistan speaks contrary to that. I know you would object to that but then again, thats not what we are arguing over right.

Our leader, Mr. Pranab Mukherjee clearly said that not even a single soldier moved to the border unlike 2001. And you gotta believe Indian leaders in that case.

If i got this right you mean to say not one soldier was moved to the border, but then again your airforce was out on a full alert and were moved from peace time. Also Indians jets violated Pakistan airspace.

 

[AHMED85]

New year new propaganda

 

[IceCold]

We could have done that in 1999, then why we did choose not to cross international border or LoC?

1971 is quite different scenario, it has been discussed to death you know. But we did cross border and open a new war front in 1965 against your operation Gibraltar, Your that point is not valid that we fear Pakistan, if we start war immediately you go nuclear..

The example of 65 is not valid because back then there was no nuclear environment. It was a conventional fight and India knew it had the quality as well as the quantity advantage. Both India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 98 and we both know that both countries posses nuclear weapons since the early nineties(India maybe even before). So how would have India crossed the border in 99?

 

[Prometheus]

I dont know you are making all of this up or you were really told what you said in your earlier post, but rest assured its completely BS. No wanted men roam freely as your relatives say anywhere in Pakistan. This is just absurd. I wonder how much brain washing is done in India.
As for handing over i dont think that is the case, Pakistan is absolutely safe for people to visit their holy shrines, but if someone feels different, he/she should stay back in India.

Sir,
ur this comment is quiet different from ur last trolling type comment .
The brain washing that you are talking about is not done by the administration as it is the school books of Pakistan..

as far handing over issue, this was not about security of Sikh pilgrims, but was reflected in ur comment as if our Holy shrines are some kind of shop that sells exclusive medicines and Pakistan is the shopkeeper which knows no matter what ever he do, they will still come to me..

 

[rockstarIN]

The example of 65 is not valid because back then there was no nuclear environment. It was a conventional fight and India knew it had the quality as well as the quantity advantage. Both India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 98 and we both know that both countries posses nuclear weapons since the early nineties(India maybe even before). So how would have India crossed the border in 99?

IN 1965, we both didn't have nukes & in 1999 we had, so whats the difference?

Nobody gonna use it, but only threaten with it.

 

[Dalai Lama]

Actually you do. This isnt a one on one fight we are talking about. Considering the nuclear hang over, millions of lives were at stake and in such a environment, every possibility has to be kept in mind.
Let me be clear If India knows it could decimate Pakistan and can strike a powerful blow to its opponent, it would not hold back a second.71 is the example of this. So please lay off from the moral high horse.

A lot of factors were taken into account before making the decision to intervene in 1971. I don't wish to discuss this here as it would only derail the thread.

However if you look closely, you will see examples of India's restraint when dealing with Pakistan.

- Giving back 13,000 km2 of West Pakistan in 1971 as a gesture of goodwill

- Not imposing a naval blockade on Karachi in 1999.(which most experts believe India to be capable of).

etc.

So in conclusion what I am saying is that I think you are incorrect when you say "it would not hold back a second. 71 is the example of this".

 

[amigo]

i,ve seen in this thread & also in other threads that members talk abt. nukes like it is some what a cracker in their own house. they argue with each other that we can use nukes, other one says we can use it also. but the reality is that in today's world no one will use nukes no matter whatever the situtation is. nukes are just threatening tools. in future we will never see a full scale war b/w two nuclear nations, even if they want to, bcoz other powers will jump & there will be ceasefire in few days. so we can admire our nukes but in reality they are of no use.

 

[rockstarIN]

World appreciated Indias response is another thing. We are not arguing over that. My reply was to one thing. Kargil was a different story. India got offensive but remained well within its own borders.

Thats called maturiety. We well knew that war is not an option.

Ohh I do have a hard time believing it because whats happening inside Pakistan from Afghanistan speaks contrary to that. I know you would object to that but then again, thats not what we are arguing over right.

Upto you, But I will the last one to believe that TTP is supported by us. Will Americans allow that, who are holding Afgan?

If i got this right you mean to say not one soldier was moved to the border, but then again your airforce was out on a full alert and were moved from peace time. Also Indians jets violated Pakistan airspace

You cant mix with it. Alertness is not always offensive.

Do you think a mere air space violation is an act of war?

 

[Goodperson]

I am confused how members manager to change the discussions all together.
Mumbai attack did happen in Indian soil and Pakistan finally agreed that its citizens were involved after Initial denial that came after Indian and International agencies which was supported by GEO TV and Dawn published interviews of Kasabs parents from Faridkot.

Pakistani government should pursue elements which let to Mumbai attacks and bring them to justice. India will continue to use means available to do that call that as a propaganda is self denial and a shame.

The whole world saw it live on TV.

 

[IceCold]

Sir,
ur this comment is quiet different from ur last trolling type comment .
The brain washing that you are talking about is not done by the administration as it is the school books of Pakistan..

as far handing over issue, this was not about security of Sikh pilgrims, but was reflected in ur comment as if our Holy shrines are some kind of shop that sells exclusive medicines and Pakistan is the shopkeeper which knows no matter what ever he do, they will still come to me..

I am anything but a troll. If you feel otherwise, the report button is on the left hand side.Feel free. The rest of your post is no different from what i have heard before from many Indian members and countered. Pakistanis text books ehh?

 

[IceCold]

Thats called maturiety. We well knew that war is not an option.

You have a entirely different meaning of the word maturity.

Upto you, But I will the last one to believe that TTP is supported by us. Will Americans allow that, who are holding Afgan?

Like i said this is not the topic of our argument.

You cant mix with it. Alertness is not always offensive.

Do you think a mere air space violation is an act of war?

Considering the drums from across the border and talks of surgical strikes, considering the fact that your jets were fully armed and considering the fact that in such a hostile environment, this act would further inflame, i would say yes and the only mature response was ours since we did not shot them down and prevented a conflict.

 

[GangLeader]

Its good for India to keep the Mumbai issue alive as long as the perpetrators are punished.

If it is taking eternity for prosecuting the perpetrators then lets keep the issue alive for eternity.

This must be a good lesson for those who are planning similar stuff against India. Let them know the cost!

 

[IceCold]

IN 1965, we both didn't have nukes & in 1999 we had, so whats the difference?

Nobody gonna use it, but only threaten with it.

Your sarkar does not share the same enthusiasm. The difference is that a nuclear environment has prevented a conflict in South Asia.

 

[Ignited Mind]

Your sarkar does not share the same enthusiasm. The difference is that a nuclear environment has prevented a conflict in South Asia.

Yes it has, so far. Will it keep doing so? Can't say. It depends on the degree of provocation.

Another Mumbai and who knows what'll happen?

There's a limit to everything, you know, be it patience.