Indian aggression at LOC

[deckingraj]

even though we surrendered in 1971, that was only in the Eastern front, the western from war ended in a ceasefire, yes i have grown up that is why i read a bot more to see, the war of 1971 was not as hopeless as you people show it to be.

i am not going to discuss 71 here but point being simple...if PAF had the upper hand during 71 then how come PA could not dent the western sector?? after all defense of east lies in the offense on west, no?? Look there are always positives and negatives of a war...also victory and defeats are measured against the goals and not on battles...if PA goal was to defend western border then yes war was not hopeless for you otherwise it was...now let's get back to the topic in hand, shall we??

 

[Jf Thunder]

i am not going to discuss 71 here but point being simple...if PAF had the upper hand during 71 then how come PA could not dent the western sector?? after all defense of east lies in the offense on west, no?? Look there are always positives and negatives of a war...also victory and defeats are measured against the goals and not on battles...if PA goal was to defend western border then yes war was not hopeless for you otherwise it was...now let's get back to the topic in hand, shall we??

i am not saying that we won it, oh no, we are far from it, what i am trying to say is that it was not as hopeless as it is shown to us, specially for a country like Pakistan

 

[deckingraj]

i am not saying that we won it, oh no, we are far from it, what i am trying to say is that it was not as hopeless as it is shown to us, specially for a country like Pakistan

of-course...as said there are always positives and negatives in a war...now let's get back to topic in hand

 

[Jf Thunder]

of-course...as said there are always positives and negatives in a war...now let's get back to topic in hand

who cares about the topic, it also leads to war.
lets talk about something better.
DUDE NARUTO IS ENDING, CAN YOU BELIEVE IT?

 

[Capt_ghalib]

I by no mean a hawk...but just to let you know i believe you are wrong on two counts...

a) This is not someone somewhere snapped thing...because this time civilians have been targetted deliberatly...
b) About dignified Nawaz Sharif...Look politicians are politicians...they will be dignified when it suits them and will transform into war monger the moment it suits them...Had there been elections in Pakistani Punjab you would have seen another twist...

One thing that I believe Pakistan needs to understand is that foreign policy of India atleast for next 5 years is going to be tough with clear red lines....There were golden 15 years when we had Vajpayee and MMS as our premier who were far more generous with Pakistan...however for various reasons Pakistan could not seize the opportunity...

I was replying to the post I quoted, where our Pakistani friend suggested that this all might be just a simple, plain misunderstanding overhyped by our Govt. to show that they walk the talk as well. And seeing that we have no way of conclusively proving the things one way or another, I agreed to take his hypothesis forward. My original view on this matter can be found a few posts above the one you quoted based on just facts. Where I mentioned how even after more then 10 days media is barred from the other side of LOC, the point very conveniently overlooked by many Pakistani commentators.
I was trying to take it step by step, first proving that India had no reason whatsoever in provoking, internationalizing this incident, and lastly I raised the most sticky point - at least in my mind, that why is media not being allowed to visit the forward posts even after 10 days. Pakistan started it as a pin prick maybe to needle India into come to the dialogue table (business) without fulfilling the prerequisite of Peace in valley and along the border condition.

 

[iPhone]

I think Indians need to make up their mind about Nawaz Shrief and the PA.

Indians say these skirmishes are Nawaz Shrief's tactics to divert attention from Imran and his dharnas, if thats the case then Nawaz must have a hell of control on the army for them to obey his commands like that.

But Indians also say that is not the case. That the army controls Nawaz which is why he delivered the kashmir speech at the UN.

So, if the army controls Nawaz then no way these skirmishes are Nawaz's doin........, why would the army take his order seriously.......under this argument.

Then which one is it?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

... how even after more then 10 days media is barred from the other side of LOC, the point very conveniently overlooked by many Pakistani commentators.

Pakistan has invited UNMOGIP to visit the LoC to validate her POV on the ceasefire violations - taking independent observers to the scene of the conflict is a far better exercise than simply allowing partisan media coverage (as can be seen from the nonsense being spewed in the Indian media).

 

[Screambowl]

i am not going to discuss 71 here but point being simple...if PAF had the upper hand during 71 then how come PA could not dent the western sector?? after all defense of east lies in the offense on west, no?? Look there are always positives and negatives of a war...also victory and defeats are measured against the goals and not on battles...if PA goal was to defend western border then yes war was not hopeless for you otherwise it was...now let's get back to the topic in hand, shall we??

PA tried to bargain Dhaka by attacking on the western sector, but failed. Why? There you can do analyses.

 

[Yeti]

Fact is all the UN can do is tell both parties to presume dialogue and talk to resolve outstanding issues but Pakistan continues to back militants which are banned by the UN and all western countries so thus India can respond to this threat with a fitting reply. Pakistan can go cry to the ummah the OIC or to anyone else but India will maintain it's stance regarding Kashmir, if you want peace stop the infiltration of militants and we can talk if not we do not give a stuff about UN which is a dead organisation anyway.

 

[Screambowl]

Pakistan has invited UNMOGIP to visit the LoC to validate her POV on the ceasefire violations - taking independent observers to the scene of the conflict is a far better exercise than simply allowing partisan media coverage (as can be seen from the nonsense being spewed in the Indian media).

simla agreement 1972. It is purely Bilateral talk. Pakistan may or may not invite whosoever, but one cannot direct terms on solution and change in LOC except India or Pakistan.

 

[Yeti]

The UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan


Tensions in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks. After four years, in July 2012, Indian officials again accused Pakistani state actors of being involved in the 2008 Mumbai attacks. In 2008, terrorists coordinated 11 attacks, using both bombs and guns, killing 173 and wounding 300. Further tensions arose in 2011 when terrorists opened fire on crowds and set off three bombs near the Mumbai opera house, killing more than 150 people. Since then, India has continuously accused the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a militant Islamic group from Pakistan, of being responsible for the attacks. Pakistan has acknowledged that the LeT were behind the attacks, but denies any state involvement. Pakistan trials have been moving very slowly due to changes in administration, resulting in many of the attacks' masterminds remaining free. In July, the Indian High Commission in Islamabad lodged diplomatic protests with the Foreign Ministry in Pakistan over the lack of progress. While talks have again begun between Pakistan and India, political tension remains between the two nations.

• Kashmir’s “Proxy War”. Despite the opening of relations, India and Pakistan have not attempted to develop a strategy for Kashmir. At the last UN General Assembly, India emphasized their nation’s right to Kashmir and condemned Pakistan for raising the issue in an earlier speech. Given India and Pakistan’s nuclear status, this prolonged tension continues the risk of nuclear weapons landing in the wrong hands, a concern for both the U.S. and the international community. UNMOGIP is continuously engaged on the Kashmiri border, reporting on the situation. While over all the security situation has improved in Kashmir, skirmishes continue. Just recently, in August 2014, The Prime Minister of India accused Pakistan to be engage in a “proxy war of terrorism”, stating that the Indian armed forces were suffering more casualties from small attacks than from the war. There have been 523 ceasefire violations in the past three years and 27 Indian soldiers have been killed in various incidents along the LoC (line-of-control).

The world is with India because they know Pakistan continues to maintain terrorist groups on it's soil and who is going to take Pakistanis side? perhaps their Saudi brothers who give funding to ISIS but is any western country going to side with Pakistan against India? I think not

 

[Screambowl]

When defence minister of Pakistan wars of Nuclear war , then I suppose the aggressor is Pakistan not India. BSF is a civilian force, none have affiliation with the army. But Pak Rangers are headed by two star rank rank Army officers. Who is the aggressor is no more classified.

Islamabad's dark warning to India as defence minister hints at nuclear response | Daily Mail Online

 

[Yeti]

Pakistan under watch - advanced Indian Satellites Eyeballing the country [RISAT-2] - AA Me, IN

launching nukes on India is not so easy as we have eyes in the sky looking down on Pakistani soil and any indication nukes are being prepared will be met with a wave of Brahmos missiles to those targets.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

simla agreement 1972. It is purely Bilateral talk. Pakistan may or may not invite whosoever, but one cannot direct terms on solution and change in LOC except India or Pakistan.

I have debunked the Simla canard raised by Indians several times already, but the argument here is not about the Simla Agreement, it is to point out the fact that Indians are raising yet another nonsensical canard as part of their propaganda campaign against Pakistan by raising the question of "a lack of media access to the Pakistani side of the LoC" - what I pointed out was that Pakistan, by inviting UNMOGIP observers to the LoC to validate her POV on the recent ceasefire violations, was acting in a far more transparent and open manner than had it merely done what India has done, and allowed "partisan media coverage".

 

[agamdilawari]

The director-general of Border Security Force (BSF) got encouraging calls from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, exhorting him to return fire with fire.

"It is rare for a PM to speak directly to the BSF chief... Usually the home minister or the home secretary remain in touch with the DG. But this time, from national security advisor Ajit Doval to the home minister and the PM, he was the direct go-to man,"

"We have decided we will give Pakistan a thrashing for their misadventure this time. We have given them a very solid pounding and the loss on the other side is very heavy," Pathak told ET on Friday. "We have fired many more times the rounds Pakistan has fired.

Devendra Pathak: Meet the soldier who keeps Pakistan in check - The Economic Times