VkdIndian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,163
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Highly possible. But India dicatated the terms because it was in position to do that. Now it is officially called “instrument of surrender”.I mean there are some things about the instrument of surrender which is funny, such as it originally being called a ceasefire agreement to it called a surrender last minute, but that's all just hearsay for now unless someone can prove it.
That idiot Arnab is not India. I have’t seen any of his programs in years.5th floor of the Serena Hotel.
Such idiots exit on your side too. Laal topi comes to mind right away.
In every war there are battles. Likely that both sides would have won few of them each. And there is an overall outcome. All nations celebrate the valour of soldiers who die for the nation, even when they loose a war. India has innumerable such accounts of 1962 war. We celebrate few battles and valour of soldiers who fought in those battles. That doesn’t make India a winner. Nehru and his government messed up.India has decided to create lots and lots of myths about the Pak-Indo wars in general, such as the 93,000 soldiers POW figure, sinking of the PNS Ghazi, victory at Lahore, victory at Kargil,
That is the issue here. People quote a certain battle and start celebrating. They contest a specific battle and try to make that appear as an outcome of that entire conflict.
Nations start a war with an aim. If they fail to achieve that aim then it’s a failure and not a victory.
1965 and Kargil fall in that category. Both initiated by Paksiatn. By Generals gone loose. Generals who didn’t take anyone in confidence. Not even other services in case of Kargil. Without proper assessment of various possibilities resulting in stalemate in 1965 and your PM knocking at the doors of the White House after Kargil.
It is not about valour of soldiers. They fight and fight for honour with bravery.
It is the higher ups who fail them by throwing them into impossible situations.
Last edited: