Killer Siachen — 'where a Pakistani soldier dies every four days from the cold'

[Areesh]

As said a moral booster was required only when situation went out of hand ...which is post blue star...you are not answering this part....

now given we are suffering from this phyche i wonder why there is no more siachen like attempt from our side?? may you please help??

Moral boosters always needed. Particularly when you are obsessed with someone. In this case India with Pakistan.

And there are no more Siachen from India since you are not finding any window of opportunity. I said before. You found an opportunity and you availed it. There are no more unless you are willing to accept threats like some full scale war under nuclear umbrella.

 

[deckingraj]

Moral boosters always needed. Particularly when you are obsessed with someone. In this case India with Pakistan.

That is what i am saying....if they are always needed then it has nothing to do with Punjab and if it is because of bad situation in punjab then indian planners got the year wrong..in short your Punjab analogy is not making sense...so let's put Punjab to rest and say it was India's obsession and widow of opportunity arrived and we embraced it with both hands...now let's move to other charge...

And there are no more Siachen from India since you are not finding any window of opportunity. I said before. You found an opportunity and you availed it. There are no more unless you are willing to accept threats like some full scale war under nuclear umbrella.

Correct me if i am wrong however you got your window of opportunity in Kargil because Indian troops used to vacate their posts in winters...however the same was true for Pakistani troops, no?? With no cure for our phyche and itching to win over Pakistan irrespective of how meaningful that victory is the above non-action can have only two possible explanations...

We were lazy or we were not even aware that Pakistani troops also vacate their posts...share your thoughts...

b/w one burning question...why this so called nuclear umbrella issue only applicable for India?? because when you did Kargil to us we both were nuclear powers, right???

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Actually that is where the whole issue is...Moving back without actually notifying where we are is equivalent to leaving that again to the interpretations which is what the root cause of entire Siachen conflict....now given we are already there it is illogical to move back without actually demarcating this piece of area as well...so catch 22 and thus no end to conflict...

Which is the point - the Indian position is that Pakistan surrender to illegal Indian occupation in the region and simply accept India's aggression and interpretation of the LoC demarcation - that is not going to happen and should not happen.

The only feasible compromise solution is the one proposed by Pakistan.

 

[deckingraj]

Which is the point - the Indian position is that Pakistan surrender to illegal Indian occupation in the region and simply accept India's aggression and interpretation of the LoC demarcation - that is not going to happen and should not happen.

The only feasible compromise solution is the one proposed by Pakistan.

Look what you have stated is Pakistani perspective...from Indian perspective anything less than demarcation is accepting illegal cartographic aggression by Pakistan.....that is why i called it catch 22.

Now here is the biggest tragedy of India-Pak issues. The elites on both sides are intellectually dishonest. Just because you are Pakistani it doesn't mean that only feasible compromise is what Pakistan propose...in fact the solution that Pakistan has proposed is stupid because here the only loser is India. Why on this earth will India leave something which is under our control, believe it to be rightfully ours?? When it comes to issue resolution you need to be practical as well.

There is no solution to Siachen and that is the harsh reality and in fact the reality of the entire Kashmir issue. Both India and Pakistan cannot move each other from the positions they are already in. Pakistan expects India to be the sole loser when it comes to issue resolution and solution proposed by India are not acceptable to Pakistan.... there is a reason 67 years old conflict/issue is no where to be resolved.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Look what you have stated is Pakistani perspective...from Indian perspective anything less than demarcation is accepting illegal cartographic aggression by Pakistan.....that is why i called it catch 22.

Now here is the biggest tragedy of India-Pak issues. The elites on both sides are intellectually dishonest. Just because you are Pakistani it doesn't mean that only feasible compromise is what Pakistan propose...in fact the solution that Pakistan has proposed is stupid because here the only loser is India. Why on this earth will India leave something which is under our control, believe it to be rightfully ours?? When it comes to issue resolution you need to be practical as well.

There is no solution to Siachen and that is the harsh reality and in fact the reality of the entire Kashmir issue. Both India and Pakistan cannot move each other from the positions they are already in. Pakistan expects India to be the sole loser when it comes to issue resolution and solution proposed by India are not acceptable to Pakistan.... there is a reason 67 years old conflict/issue is no where to be resolved.

You're contrasting India's physical, military aggression with Pakistan's alleged 'cartographical aggression' - that alone illustrates the absurdity of India's position.

The facts of the matter are that the two sides disagree on the interpretation of the language of the agreement demarcating the LoC. Any rational observer would agree (regardless of the identity of the parties involved in the dispute) that a mutual withdrawal by both parties from the territory without accepting/validating the claim of either party on the territory is the only viable compromise. The Indian position however is that Pakistan simply surrender and accept India's interpretation of the agreement on demarcation - there is no compromise offered by India's proposal of accepting the AGPL and it is therefore a non-starter.

The onus here is on India - India was the aggressor and India is the party making irrational demands for 'surrender' on the other party to the dispute.

 

[deckingraj]

There is a reason that i said elites are intellectually dishonest...anyways let me try to reply point by point...

You're contrasting India's physical, military aggression with Pakistan's alleged 'cartographical aggression' - that alone illustrates the absurdity of India's position.

This illustrate only the truth and is made look absurd because it is hard for a Pakistani mind to move away from long held belief and try to understand what is being said...Mind it - the same is true for Indian as well...so don't take any offense here...Now let me clarify...
India's military response was a direct reaction to Pakistan's 'cartographical aggression'. So if we go back to status quo then we are simply accepting your cartographical aggression similar to your claim which stats that marking India's current position is equivalent to accepting India's military aggression. Also you missed us by a whisker...tells us a lot about one sided aggression, no?? Anyways the simple point is that going back to status quo prior to 84 as proposed by Pakistan is legimitizing your claim on Siachen...similarly for you to accept our current position is legitimizing our claims on Siachen...both are unacceptable to either side...

The facts of the matter are that the two sides disagree on the interpretation of the language of the agreement demarcating the LoC. Any rational observer would agree (regardless of the identity of the parties involved in the dispute) that a mutual withdrawal by both parties from the territory without accepting/validating the claim of either party on the territory is the only viable compromise. The Indian position however is that Pakistan simply surrender and accept India's interpretation of the agreement on demarcation - there is no compromise offered by India's proposal of accepting the AGPL and it is therefore a non-starter.

If actually this is what a neutral observer suggests then I am sorry that neutral observer is not acting neutral...may be this is my lack of knowledge speaking...so you please help me from where are you going to withdraw when it comes to Siachen??

The onus here is on India - India was the aggressor and India is the party making irrational demands for 'surrender' on the other party to the dispute.

Again this is Pakistani perspective...From our perspective it was Pakistan who was the aggressor by starting claims on piece of land which was supposed to be untouched...however given genie is out of the bottle it aint coming in!!

 

[koolio]

Err - Please re-read my post and see the context in which it was quoted.




Please check the second Page of this thread to know the very little strategic value of Siachen. Poka!

You

Err - Please re-read my post and see the context in which it was quoted.




Please check the second Page of this thread to know the very little strategic value of Siachen. Poka!

I will standby what I have said, Siachen glacier is very little strategic value, it doesnt make any sense for any forces to be stationed at 19000 plus peaks, frozen all year round with no strategic objectives unless your forces want to invade Gilgit and Baltistan and choke KKH which aint gonna happen.

Can you please share some incidents which were tried by IA to do exactly what you are saying there?? We haven't heard something like that on this side....

Oh really so the Indian forces went there for a picnic in a frozen wasteland stretching miles and miles.

 

[surya kiran]

Educational Pakistanis should take interest in something more worthy like engineering etc instead of researching on India's occupation of an icebox.

For once, I agree.

 

[unbiasedopinion]

@Levina You missed the point. Our claim is on whole of Kashmir including siachen. Hence the attempts. If Siachen wouldn't be in Kashmir, you wouldn't have seen any Pak soldier in that area. We are just protecting what belongs to us.

More of a reason to not vacate it. As this is what fears India. Another reason is What if after our withdrawal you occupy it and gift it to your all weather friend like you did Saksham Valley? after all Siachin is next to the Saksham.

 

[Scavenger]

Even K2 the second highest peak in the world is secure. You cannot move an inch forward. You are locked where you are.

Keep coming with all the stories about Siachen's "strategic importance" and keep fooling yourself. Pakistan already shares a hundreds of miles border with China anyways.

The same way Indian troops cannot move an inch forward from the LoC in Kashmir or IB in Punjab. But that does not mean that its futile.

Similarly Pakistan army cannot move an inch forward from the LoC, would you consider Pakistan Army's deployement futile?

Our actions ensured that our land was secured from Pakistan. Whether or not they move forward is now irrelevant. We have ensured safety of the land.

The onus here is on India - India was the aggressor and India is the party making irrational demands for 'surrender' on the other party to the dispute.

And yet, India is highly comfortable in Siachen. The cost of maintaining our presence in Siachen - both economic and human - is going down steadily over the decades with induction of better technology.

Are you aware that the economic cost is less than a drop in the bucket of the Army in terms of budget? I mean literally, just Army's budget, not even the MoD's budget or the National budget.

And yet..another quatum leap is still going to be made in a couple of years in our Siachen deployement which would completely change the logistics of operating in Siachen.

So why would India ever worry about coming back?

It is Pakistan that wants India to go back, not India. So the onus is on Pakistan. Not India.

 

[Tshering22]

My calculation says it amounts to $ 150 Million. Anyways this amount can be put to more fruitful use once the Borders are demarcated and peace and tranquility prevails.

In our region? Unlikely unless something dramatic happens.

Pakistan won't, China won't and we can't.

 

[surya kiran]

The facts of the matter are that the two sides disagree on the interpretation of the language of the agreement demarcating the LoC. Any rational observer would agree (regardless of the identity of the parties involved in the dispute) that a mutual withdrawal by both parties from the territory without accepting/validating the claim of either party on the territory is the only viable compromise. The Indian position however is that Pakistan simply surrender and accept India's interpretation of the agreement on demarcation - there is no compromise offered by India's proposal of accepting the AGPL and it is therefore a non-starter.

This is impossible. Multiple Pakistani leaders have clearly said, they do not recognise the LoC. India will simply not trust anything less of actual acceptance by the Pakistani leadership of a non-aggression pact along the LoC, before any withdrawal by Indian forces. Kargil is a lesson which will not be forgotten. So, yes. India has hardened its stand.

Accept the LoC. The question of compromise of AGPL does not arise. It is accepted by Pakistan. Signed in 1949. This further illustrates the incapability of Pakistan to adhere to documents it signed. Be it Simla or the Kashmir agreements.

 

[Areesh]

The same way Indian troops cannot move an inch forward from the LoC in Kashmir or IB in Punjab. But that does not mean that its futile.

Similarly Pakistan army cannot move an inch forward from the LoC, would you consider Pakistan Army's deployement futile?

Our actions ensured that our land was secured from Pakistan. Whether or not they move forward is now irrelevant. We have ensured safety of the land.

Indian soldiers don't live in unnatural conditions on LoC or IB either. LOC or IB are like any other border in the world. Siachen is a special case madness produced and presented by India. Indian soldiers don't die in avalanches neither they require billions in budget to help there stay. They don't get paralyze because of frost bite neither they fall hundreds of feet below because of thin ice. Situation at LOC/IB is far different from Siachen. It is unnatural and insane. An insanity that India opted for. While all these deaths and costs can be avoided by following a solution to this problem. Any sane country would opt for not deploying any human in that frozen hell. But then we are dealing with India here. Siachen has no special "strategic importance". Whatever you occupy and control is strategic. Pakistan holds all the highest peaks of Karakoram along with military base like Dansem which helps Pakistan a very smooth road to Saltoro ridge and Siachen itself. So it can claim all the strategic advantage. India can say since it occupies higher ground so it has strategic advantage. All the stories of strategic advantage in Indian media are nothing more but justifications for adventure of India.


Good that you secured your land. Don't forget to grow some wheat there or drill oil from it.

 

[Scavenger]

Indian soldiers don't live in unnatural conditions on LoC or IB either. LOC or IB are like any other border in the world. Siachen is a special case madness produced and presented by India. Indian soldiers don't die in avalanches neither they require billions in budget to help there stay. They don't get paralyze because of frost bite neither they fall hundreds of feet below because of thin ice. Situation at LOC/IB is far different from Siachen. It is unnatural and insane. An insanity that India opted for. While all these deaths and costs can be avoided by following a solution to this problem. Any sane country would opt for not deploying any human in that frozen hell. But then we are dealing with India here. Siachen has no special "strategic importance". Whatever you occupy and control is strategic. Pakistan holds all the highest peaks of Karakoram along with military base like Dansem which helps Pakistan a very smooth road to Saltoro ridge and Siachen itself. So it can claim all the strategic advantage. India can say since it occupies higher ground so it has strategic advantage. All the stories of strategic advantage in Indian media are nothing more but justifications for adventure of India.


Good that you secured your land. Don't forget to grow some wheat there or drill oil from it.

Well, our think tanks say its strategic. If you feel otherwise you are free to disagree.
India however will act based on what Indian think tanks suggest - both military as well as civilian.

As far as economic and human costs are concerned, I have already pointed out - the cost is not billions but millions. Secondly, its a drop in the bucket for the Army's budget. The Army does not even take extra "Siachen grants" from MoD. It pays that out of its pocket directly. Its that less for India.
One of the advantages of being a large economy is that what you find expensive, we find cheap.

Other than that - the human costs - our costs are declining rapidly with induction of new technology. Our fatalities as well as sickness are declining very steadily with introduction of new tech in Siachen.

Which is why from both angles - human as well as economic - the costs are reducing very steadily for India. So there is no need for us to withdraw.

 

[Areesh]

That is what i am saying....if they are always needed then it has nothing to do with Punjab and if it is because of bad situation in punjab then indian planners got the year wrong..in short your Punjab analogy is not making sense...so let's put Punjab to rest and say it was India's obsession and widow of opportunity arrived and we embraced it with both hands...now let's move to other charge...

They are always needed but their need increases when you have your own former military generals and soldier start fighting against you. So it makes complete sense.

We were lazy or we were not even aware that Pakistani troops also vacate their posts...share your thoughts...

You just expected that Pakistan would accept to your aggression in Siachen and won't do anything in return. Just like you expect Pakistan to accept your aggression as a solution for Siachen conflict.

Nuclear umbrella applies to both. But more to India since it is Pakistan that has rejected to any "no first use policy". India has a no first use policy. At least publicly.

Well, our think tanks say its strategic. If you feel otherwise you are free to disagree.
India however will act based on what Indian think tanks suggest - both military as well as civilian.

As far as economic and human costs are concerned, I have already pointed out - the cost is not billions but millions. Secondly, its a drop in the bucket for the Army's budget. The Army does not even take extra "Siachen grants" from MoD. It pays that out of its pocket directly. Its that less for India.
One of the advantages of being a large economy is that what you find expensive, we find cheap.

Other than that - the human costs - our costs are declining rapidly with induction of new technology. Our fatalities as well as sickness are declining very steadily with introduction of new tech in Siachen.

Which is why from both angles - human as well as economic - the costs are reducing very steadily for India. So there is no need for us to withdraw.

As I said. What you occupy is strategic. This is the theory behind all those think tanks and their thinking.

As for costs. they are still huge and unnecessary. Even PA doesn't get any special Siachen grant from federal government nor it asked for any rise in budget so they can spend it in Siachen. But still costs are big and unnecessary. Yeah India may be all richie rich. We hear that 24/7 from Indians who think their country is a supa puwa. But still it is one that cost that can be easily avoided if India agrees to sacrifice its classical insane attitude. But I think that is too much a cost for India.

There are still casualties and injuries due to different reasons in Siachen. Not all are reported in media. But anyways you can continue to occupy frozen wasteland. Nobody in this world wants to admit that they have gone mad. Same is the case with India.

I will standby what I have said, Siachen glacier is very little strategic value, it doesnt make any sense for any forces to be stationed at 19000 plus peaks, frozen all year round with no strategic objectives unless your forces want to invade Gilgit and Baltistan and choke KKH which aint gonna happen.

Well let them think that they are occupying something very "strategic". At least they have a lot of ice to make gola ganda 365 days a year. You just can't ignore the tasty gola ganda. Can you?