Indian Military Picture Thread

[brahmastra]

^^ off topic

 

[Kompromat]

Give sources for captions you put on those pics or accept you pulled out those comments out of orifices in your body just to flame!
You will be considered just another BS poster untill you prove what you posted with credible sources, Smartypants!
Btw, truth aint some discharge hard to swallow!

Calm down mate , No one cares what you think , i am just showing the PDF members the reality of the Encounters of indian Military.

We have few people from other places have'nt we?

They might like to know about these encounters and would'nt they?

 

[SandsofTime]

Sad to see a lot of probably innocent Kashmiris branded as terrorists and shot dead in false encounters. May the souls rest in peace.

 

[Peshwa]

Wholy Crap!!

What does india wants to do by killing these Freedom fighters? Build a wall of dignaty with their Dead bodies?

60 years of Hindustani occupation could'nt opress Kashmiri's will to live freely .
If Westerns call them Terrorists it does'nt matter.. WHO CARES!!
If this is the case that every one who fights for Liberty is a terrorist wether by politics or an armed movement Then:
Abraham Linclon was a terrorist.
Gandhi and jawaharlal Nehru was a terrorist .
Bhagat singh was a terrorist .
Tipu sultan and his father Haidar were terrorists.
winston churchill was a terrorist
Syed ali gilani is a terrorist
Iraqi people are terrorists
Bosnian muslims were terrorists
Sri lankans are terrorists


If indians believe that whoever fights for one's land and right is a terrorist then lemme add Whole Indian Millitary is a terrorist millitary .

Regards:

Difference in ideologies.....

Terrorists think they are fighting for Freedom by illegaly taking up arms and targetting civilians.......
Indian army is fighting a battle to keep its nation free from occupation by the scumbag terrorists.......

The world backs us up in our claims.......And if the world opinion does not matter, then please stop using the same old "UN resolutions" rhetoric.....because 4 out of 5 top leaders of the UN are considered the "West" .....So there opinion definitely matters more than any of us on this forum......

 

[SandsofTime]

Difference in ideologies.....

Terrorists think they are fighting for Freedom by illegaly taking up arms and targetting civilians.......

One thing I do not understand is what would the "terrorists" stand to gain by targeting civilians other than losing support. This canard of supposed terrorists attacking civilians seems unjustified.

 

[gubbi]

One thing I do not understand is what would the "terrorists" stand to gain by targeting civilians other than losing support. This canard of supposed terrorists attacking civilians seems unjustified.

Spreading terror! Isnt that exactly what a terrorist aims for?

 

[SandsofTime]

Spreading terror! Isnt that exactly what a terrorist aims for?

And how does that help "Pakistan funded terrorists" to "break away" Kashmir? Spreading terrorism will only lead to loss of local support as has been seen in Swat and Waziristan. Randomly spreading anarchy apparently does not lead to achieving the objectives of "Pakistan funded terrorists". My own hunch is that this is complete hogwash by the IA to brand militant fighters (and even complete innocents) as terrorists in the hope that by calling them as such they will gain sympathy from the population of Kashmir and India.

 

[Peshwa]

One thing I do not understand is what would the "terrorists" stand to gain by targeting civilians other than losing support. This canard of supposed terrorists attacking civilians seems unjustified.

In very simplistic terms, they are like stubborn kids, when their parents tell them no, they resort to breaking things, holding their breath and screaming until they get heard......

Terrorists are similar in trying to grab attention by killing innocent as that get everyone's attention......You kill a soldier, he died doing his duty....You kill a civilian, there is your news!!!

Only problem is, these "stubborn kids" will end up meeting the "Indian parents" who set them straight!!!....as can be seen from the pics....

 

[gubbi]

And how does that help "Pakistan funded terrorists" to "break away" Kashmir? Spreading terrorism will only lead to loss of local support as has been seen in Swat and Waziristan. Randomly spreading anarchy apparently does not lead to achieving the objectives of "Pakistan funded terrorists". My own hunch is that this is complete hogwash by the IA to brand militant fighters (and even complete innocents) as terrorists in the hope that by calling them as such they will gain sympathy from the population of Kashmir and India.

Why don't you walk down a street in Srinagar and talk to the local people about these terrorists? Its so easy to sit in a cosy apartment in front of a computer screen and formulate wild conspiracy theories usually under the influence of hallucinogens!

 

[Naushad]

This tread gives us an good Idea about pakistani mindset and why exactly pakistan is in problem today.
Pakistanis use Islam to achieve their goals, today the war from taliban that pakistan is facing is because of this attitude; people were nurtured and referred edited quran back then to achieve objectives, when objectives were achieved these terrorists were dumped.
Pakistan is in misery for defaming Islam, and paying price for every drop of blood of innocent Indians... If pakistanis continue to use Islam to achieve their objectives, then sorry to say, but you'll continue to live in misery

 

[SandsofTime]

Why don't you walk down a street in Srinagar and talk to the local people about these terrorists? Its so easy to sit in a cosy apartment in front of a computer screen and formulate wild conspiracy theories usually under the influence of hallucinogens!

None of you answered a simple logical question and tried to derail the discussion with wild excuses and straw man attacks.

Not all of the rhetoric that the IA and GOI parrot is necessarily true. The only way to judge the information is to analyze the argument on its own merit. The past record of IA is not good with regard to transparency in its operations. Several people have been killed so that a bounty could be collected, a promotion hastened, or media publicity gained. One is only left to wonder how much info they dump out is for real. Even real world terrorists have political objectives, and oh they don't attack their own native population to achieve it. The cases I have read about of civilians getting killed in militant attacks were where the civilians got caught in cross fire, and got the bullet from either the security forces and the militants. In these instances both of them are guilty of terrorism and cannot be justified. IA has also been separately involved in extra judicial killings. Apart from this, fighting which is purely between armed parties cannot be technically classified as terrorism (yes this holds true even in Pakistan, but here the militants don't have any justified reasons for their attacks).

 

[gubbi]

The past record of IA is not good with regard to transparency in its operations. Several people have been killed so that a bounty could be collected, a promotion hastened, or media publicity gained. One is only left to wonder how much info they dump out is for real. Even real world terrorists have political objectives, and oh they don't attack their own native population to achieve it.

I have many friends who have witnessed and borne the brunt of such attacks in kashmir. I even lost a childhood friend, an army medic, in a suicide attack in Kashmir. Should I trust them or believe your word?

The cases I have read about of civilians getting killed in militant attacks were where the civilians got caught in cross fire, and got the bullet from either the security forces and the militants. In these instances both of them are guilty of terrorism and cannot be justified.

Again wrong pov. A civilian population picks up arms against a state is considered an armed rebellion, doesnt matter under whatever false pretensions. As such they will be deemed armed combatants and furthermore if their actions manage to terrorize a portion of the population, they will be considered as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

IA has also been separately involved in extra judicial killings.

Incidents are well documented, condemned and perpetrators are punished. Apart from that, what is an army to do? Arrest a militant who is not bound by laws, who can kill anyone on a whim, who has most probably killed one of their fellow serviceman? Let him go scotfree under provisions provided by the very constitution which the scumbag was fighting against? A bullet in his rear or head is the best solution. Your army personnel will very well agree with this attitude.

Apart from this, fighting which is purely between armed parties cannot be technically classified as terrorism (yes this holds true even in Pakistan, but here the militants don't have any justified reasons for their attacks).

One cannot justify attacks on any armed forces by a civilian population, no matter what excuses they give. Its very important that civilian grievances should be presented and addressed through proper civilian channels and not through a barrel of a gun. Hence its very important to have proper civilian structures/establishments and control in a country!
FYI the TTP do have an agenda and their own skewered version of justification for their attacks on the PA. So, since they justify their attacks based on their ideology, would you still not consider them terrorists?

@ Bezerk - I do respect your moderation, but is it fair that the poster of those pics posts pics with outrageous comments without credible sources for his comments? You keep that post but delete mine asking for sources?

 

[Peshwa]

None of you answered a simple logical question and tried to derail the discussion with wild excuses and straw man attacks.

Not all of the rhetoric that the IA and GOI parrot is necessarily true. The only way to judge the information is to analyze the argument on its own merit. The past record of IA is not good with regard to transparency in its operations. Several people have been killed so that a bounty could be collected, a promotion hastened, or media publicity gained. One is only left to wonder how much info they dump out is for real. Even real world terrorists have political objectives, and oh they don't attack their own native population to achieve it. The cases I have read about of civilians getting killed in militant attacks were where the civilians got caught in cross fire, and got the bullet from either the security forces and the militants. In these instances both of them are guilty of terrorism and cannot be justified. IA has also been separately involved in extra judicial killings. Apart from this, fighting which is purely between armed parties cannot be technically classified as terrorism (yes this holds true even in Pakistan, but here the militants don't have any justified reasons for their attacks).

Clearly you didnt my earlier post.....enlighten yourself and then argue....

Secondly, you highlight a very important point "Even real world terrorists have political objectives, and oh they don't attack their own native population to achieve it."......Which bring us to the next part of the argument.....
How the hell do you know that these are even Kashmiri??
Yes, real "freedom fighters" dont kill their kin, but Pakistani terrorists who have been propped to wage a proxy war in India do!!!.....You answered your own question......

Secondly, Hypocrisy wreaks in your post since you justify and call the people attacking Pakistani establishments as terrorists and militants and then defer to calling these scumbags "freedom fighters"......What goes around comes around.....

 

[Peshwa]

@ Bezerk - I do respect your moderation, but is it fair that the poster of those pics posts pics with outrageous comments without credible sources for his comments? You keep that post but delete mine asking for sources?

I second that......

Pure propoganda techniques .....and putting captions on the pics which might or might not have anything to do with Kashmir, militancy or maybe completely out of context?? ....Are we being indoctrinated to wage a war in Kashmir or something??
What the poster of the picture did is highly irresponsible....

 

[SandsofTime]

I have many friends who have witnessed and borne the brunt of such attacks in kashmir. Should I trust them or believe your word?

I have sympathies with your friends. Most certainly you don't need to trust my words -
Indian Army and Police Tied to Kashmir Killings
A Brief Catalogue of Indian Atrocities in Kashmir

Again wrong pov. A civilian population picks up arms against a state is considered an armed rebellion, doesnt matter under whatever false pretensions. As such they will be deemed armed combatants and furthermore if their actions manage to terrorize a portion of the population, they will be considered as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

This is where our viewpoints fundamentally diverge. We recognize Kashmir as disputed territory whereas you guys don't. A civilian population picking up arms under "false pretensions" is most certainly engaged in rebellion. However, if this were to happen in any proper territory of the state then it wouldn't be justifiable.

Incidents are well documented, condemned and perpetrators are punished.

There are still quite a few spiders in the cupboards who haven't been dug out yet and most likely never will (after all who will account for atrocities of the 90's and even recent ones).

Apart from that, what is an army to do, arrest a militant who is not bound by laws, who can kill anyone on a whim, who has most apparently killed another of their fellow serviceman?

You are most welcome to do the above mentioned. It takes two to make a decent fight. Isn't this what a rebellion and counter insurgency all about?

One cannot justify attacks on any armed forces by a civilian population, no matter what excuses they give.

In my view, in this case the "excuse" is too hard to ignore as I have already explained in the beginning. Again if the "State" is so important to you that you become blinded of the sentiments of the people that constitute it then what good is it for the "State" to exist in such a fascist nature. According to your argument the war of 1857, the protests against colonial rule (both armed and unarmed) in the 1900s, the resistance movement of Subhas Chandra Bose are all unjustified. Then why don't we voluntarily surrender our territory to the British and apologize for our past violent and savage ways.

Its very important that civilian grievances should be presented and addressed through proper civilian channels and not through a barrel of a gun.

Failure in the past to give due consideration to these has led to this point.

FYI the TTP do have an agenda and their own skewered version of justification for their attacks on the PA. So, since they justify their attacks based on their ideology, would you still not consider them terrorists?

This is a tricky question so we will have to analyze it more carefully here. One could argue that these guys are merely a bunch of rag tag militants attacking security forces. As such we could forgive them for being misguided (we would still deal with them as rebels of course). However, TTP is neither fighting for independence nor are the areas under their control disputed territories. They aren't fighting for more development resources for their cash starved region or protesting about lack of fundamental democratic rights. TTP in many instances have shown that they are not fighting for any rights of the people, rather bent on imposing their views. Fighting to impose an ideology and then slaughtering civilians in broad day light is in no way justified and hence are clear acts of terrorism. Could the same be shown about Kashmiri militants in a credible manner? Are Kashmiri militants fighting to impose their rule upon the population?

PS: I would like to clarify my comments earlier which may have miffed some here. When I said "probably branded terrorists", it doesn't mean some of them couldn't have been militants (again I would refrain from calling them terrorists unless they have been shown to engage in deliberate attacks on civilians - terrorist is a much abused word in modern times). However, in due consideration of the past record of IA and in absence of independent verification, it is entirely possible some of those could be civilians.