'Next Kargil could happen in the Andamans'

[FaujHistorian]

Why are we turning this forking thread into Pak-India $hit shoveling

if you want to discuss Kargil

do it in separate thread

 

[BATMAN]

Our airforce doesnt have the hedache of not crossing LOC unlike the Kargil war.
And Indian navy rules in Indian ocean.

Why not your naval chief thinks like you?

 

[trident2010]

bro leave it let these hindu pajama chaps take credit

Post reported !!

 

[Mike_Brando]

Why not your naval chief thinks like you?

weel our Navy Chief is quite confident of the fact that the Indian Ocean is firmed under Indian control and no other country except the U.S.A. has the power or capability to challenge our supremacy in this part of the world

 

[sancho]

Even if the allusion is not to Pakistan, the Andamans are not a mountain peak backed up by logistics and fallback.

I think you are looking at his statement in a too complicated manner. Kargil in first place, was the last attack on Indian soil, by an infiltration force that at least officially didn't belonged to a county, that tried to held strategically important locations.
He points out, that the same could happen at the Andamans, because the strategic location of the Islands makes them so interesting and the sheer number of the Islands makes them difficult to control, if the number of forces and equipment will be diverted there. So it's just about a possible future attack and how or why it might happen, not on who or any relations to the location of Kargil.

That's actually a common idea in the navy and he is not the first official that states that. In fact the whole point for amphibious capabilities is aimed on the defence of Indias Islands, just like the infrastructure upgrade, or build up of marine forces. But then again, all that hints on a attack of a major enemy and not on the infiltration of smaller groups of troops.

 

[Mav3rick]

From where do you pakistanis get fuctarded information.

It was you ganja pm who took first available flight to US to save his *** from India.

The ganja pm was "SUMMONED" by the US President, to exert pressure on him and have Pakistan retreat from held positions. It happened because the mighty India could not dislodge the 5000 Men, despite all her military might!! The biggest proof of it all is that even today, we have not vacated that strategic position and you could not push uncle Sam any more!!!

You lost all high fortified tops except one , wasn't that your military as well as diplomatic loss.

Had your military been as capable or as effective, none, and let me repeat that again, NONE of the posts would still be with Pakistan.....sadly for you, the post with Pakistan is a slap on your retarded head for even thinking that you were in any decent military position.

Everybody knows who ran to US to get their @ss saved.

When Nawaz Sharif gave Bill Clinton a hard time over Kargil - Rediff.com India News

You want to believe in UFO's or do you want to think logically? If you want to think, think on what Pakistan stood to lose in Kargil if we had refused to retreat? Just think about it with an open, cool mind and come back to me.

 

[Mav3rick]

If it wasn't your military victory then it was your loss as your pakistan was aggressor.

Well, it was a military victory for Pakistan that ended in a diplomatic defeat.

 

[karan.1970]

Well, it was a military victory for Pakistan that ended in a diplomatic defeat.

every operation is either a victory or a defeat, depending on whether end objectives are attained or not...Any further classification is normally done by the losing side to make defeat more palatable.. Just my 2 cents ...

 

[Mav3rick]

every operation is either a victory or a defeat, depending on whether end objectives are attained or not...Any further classification is normally done by the losing side to make defeat more palatable.. Just my 2 cents ...

Perhaps. Neither Jammu Kashmir nor Kargil is with Pakistan so what else can I say.

 

[VeeraBahadur]

The ganja pm was "SUMMONED" by the US President, to exert pressure on him and have Pakistan retreat from held positions. It happened because the mighty India could not dislodge the 5000 Men, despite all her military might!! The biggest proof of it all is that even today, we have not vacated that strategic position and you could not push uncle Sam any more!!!

That's cooked up , you know it don't you?? Is your PM US puppet that they would respond to US summons ??

You lost your positions after occupying that and if that's not loss by Pakistani logic then may god bless with many such victories in future.

Had your military been as capable or as effective, none, and let me repeat that again, NONE of the posts would still be with Pakistan.....sadly for you, the post with Pakistan is a slap on your retarded head for even thinking that you were in any decent military position.



.

Sadly you don't know that India captured two Pakistani tops for one Indian top which before Kargil war were with Pakistan.

 

[nair]

I think even if some groups try to do something similar kargil it would be easier for agencies to tackle it.....

 

[VeeraBahadur]

If you want to think, think on what Pakistan stood to lose in Kargil if we had refused to retreat? Just think about it with an open, cool mind and come back to me.

You should better ask that to your PM or Musshraff.

 

[Mav3rick]

That's cooked up , you know it don't you?? Is your PM US puppet that they would respond to US summons ??

You seriously want me to answer whether our democratic leaders are US puppets or not?? I am sure you know better then that to ask me this question!

You lost your positions after occupying that and if that's not loss by Pakistani logic then may god bless with many such victories in future.

Some positions were supposed to be held on to, others were not. It's as simple as that. India was unable to regain most of the positions until they were vacated by Pakistan.

Sadly you don't know that India captured two Pakistani tops for one Indian top which before Kargil war were with Pakistan.

India could have captured half of Pakistan if she had wanted, for arguments sake ok? Again, for arguments sake, why was India unable to retake the post that Pakistan still occupies???

You should better ask that to your PM or Musshraff.

I would rather engage you in an intelligent conversation.

 

[VeeraBahadur]

I think even if some groups try to do something similar kargil it would be easier for agencies to tackle it.....

Lot easier but why let the situation get worse.

Some positions were supposed to be held on to, others were not. It's as simple as that. India was unable to regain most of the positions until they were vacated by Pakistan.

No doubt it would have taken more time but it would have been ultimately vacated as yout supply route was alread cut but you would have lost your 5000 men instead of 1500.

India could have captured half of Pakistan if she had wanted, for arguments sake ok? Again, for arguments sake, why was India unable to retake the post that Pakistan still occupies???



I would rather engage you in an intelligent conversation.

Now tell me why India occupies your two posts ?? If you consider sole post as victory in lieu of loss of your two posts then it's ok for me.

 

[jarves]

Some positions were supposed to be held on to, others were not. It's as simple as that. India was unable to regain most of the positions until they were vacated by Pakistan.

Or were forced to retreat.