Pak may never try another Kargil, but it could get worse

[Mercenary]

@Mercenary, We know we cannot talk sense into you. Also by your ideology of "victory", I fell it is useless to continue discussion with u in that matter of fact. I can't speak about my frnds over here but u show ME a credible, impartial source which supports your view (48-Win, 65- Win, 71- stalemate, 99 - Win) I would be happy to take this point of view.

Of topic: "We had our hands tied" Did we tie them ? No. Did India forced ur elites to tie ur hands ? No. Can't you see that, "The Four" pulled Waqar Ahmad on ur army and administration. One more thing, the present favors them who wins the history. India chose "Non-alignment" and Pakistan from day one was under USA, still today International balance tilts in India's court and yours is seen as an aggression-loving country. Just my two cents.

When did I say that 71 is stalemate and 65 is a Win?

48 is a win for the reasons I described above. Obviously, from an Indian perspective it can also be considered a victory that they beat back the tribals who wanted to take over all of Kashmir. But you also have to look at it from a Pakistani perspective.

65 is a stalemate for reasons I described above. While if the war had continued, Pakistan was at a disadvantage due to India's numerical superiority. But when the war had ended, the war was in a stalemate.

71 is a defeat just like 62 was a defeat for India. So there is no disagreement there.

99 is debatable. Pakistan did shock India initially but Pakistan did not have a follow up plan.

 

[Mav3rick]

I donn take you to be a chess player neither look up at u as a person who understands how to play in world politics with a winning hand. Every time India and Pakistan are on warfront, India never ever chose aggregation, always tried to mediate peace b4 firing a bullet. Why ? Naturally you may say "Hindus cowered, each pakistani 10 times of cow worshipers . . . " but it was these behavior which attributed to the position which India enjoys now.

If that had been correct, '48, '65, '99 etc. would never have happened, or would they have? If India had not been the aggressor and had occupied Kashmir illegally then we wouldn't have fought any wars now, would we have?

As for your NASR (Reportedly nuke-tipped), we can now safely say that the country which cannot identify a daylight fraud supported by its nuke-scientists may take a any thing said by the media as a fact without bothering for any reason.

Only 1 way to find out my friend

 

[RazPaK]

The indians have watched this film so many times that they have started believing that this is reality.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

1948 - Agreement is irrelevant. We know how well India holds up agreements. Look at what India did in Hyderabad or Goa as no further proof of agreement. The Agreement was a sham and a ploy for India to colonize Kashmir. Thank God we acted when we did, and we did manage to get 1/3 of Kashmir or otherwise we would have gotten nothing. So I consider that a Pakistani victory. We got 1/3 of Kashmir, otherwise we would have gotten nothing.

1965 - Yes, Pakistan started the war to take back Kashmir. But then the war changed from our attempt to take Kashmir to the foolish Indian attempt to take Lahore. We held you guys back in Punjab and you guys held us back in Kashmir, and thus a stalemate. The reason I say its a victory for Pakistan is that Pakistan was numerically inferior to India.

1971 - Pakistan lost. I just gave you examples of the near impossible odds Pakistan faced.

1999 - Pakistan's plan was not carefully thoughout otherwise Pakistan would have achieved a strategic victory. Pakistan did manage to shock India and 5,000 Pakistani soldiers held back an onslaught of 100,000 Indian soldiers, and inflicted heavy losses on them, while suffering less losses and managing to hold Point 5353.

As for 4,000 losses you guys keep parading, please name me one other source besides the disgraced PM of Pakistan who can substantiate these claims? Any reputable military historian, international think tank, defense experts will do.

Good luck.

lol Hyderabad cannot be an independent nation while sitting inside India , and junagadh , though there was legal agreement that raja can decide which country to joining or stay independent , there was general agreement that peoples sentiments should be considered . The nawab of Jungarh had accede to Pakistan and fled to Pakistan ablong with is family. India offered pak to reverse it's acceptance of accession and hold a plebiscite, but pak didn't agree. Consiquently the Dewan of Jungarh, Shah Nawaz Bhutto (father of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto) invited the Indian government to intervean. A pebiscite was held that went unanimously in favour of accessation to India. and Kashmir the plebiscite did not happen but you know the conditions also.

1965- pak attacked , India defended , and it's part of military strategy to open multiple war fronts and advance to enemy land where ever there is weak defence is , India did that only ..there was no real intention to accede lahor to India.

1999 - no denial that you surprised the world with your irresponsible behavior. with back stabing and cheating also you could not win over India.

about casualties pak prime minister is a better source than liar musharaf who has so much to hide to show kargil as a victory though realities don't support him.

 

[karan.1970]

The indians have watched this film so many times that they have started believing that this is reality.

And Pakistanis have watched this film so many times that they have started believing that this is reality.

 

[ajtr]

Pakistan Army's clear victories against India:

1947: Pakistan captured 1/3 of Kashmir and it could have occupied the whole Kashmir as Tribal and Afridis had captured Srinagar. Nehru begged UNSC to intervene and he promised to hold plebiscite. Indian Government is the Best in the world in renedging its international commitments...it a weeny thing as we all know.

1965: A glorious victory for Pakistan
as most of Indian soldiers left food and armaments and took off to the relattive safety of their homes. Once agains India begged UNSC to request pakistan to withdrwa from the conquered land and India would resolve the Kashmir issue. And as expected India did not honor its commitment because it a weeny thing that we all know..

1971: Pakistan Peoples party Chairman, Z.A. Bhutto, who was the leading politician at that time, had already made a plan to say good bye to Bangladesh because the Bangladeshi
Freedom fighters were excellent fighter, like all muslims, and it was useless to fight them when they wanted to go a separate way. So, the victory goes to our Bangladeshi brothers and sisters but Indian Army not only stole their victory but also looted and cleaned the country like a swarm of locust.

The biggest slap that Bangladesh landed on the face of India was when they thwarted Indian dreams to merge Bangladesh in the Indian Union. Now, Bangladeshis are kicking Indian rear in many ways which every one knows and I need not elaborate them.

Kargil- 1000 Kashmiris freedom fighters gave a bloody nose to 700,000 Indian P.Pump soldiers and India had to beg the U.S. to help save its honor. Is it a victory for India?
Certainly not. It was Pakistan's victory and as brought Kashmir issue from the backburner to the forefront.

 

[Mav3rick]

My eyes are opened... and i have realised now... India lost 1948 war.. kashmir is with pakistan (all of it)...here comes 1965... india lost all of its air force and again kashmir was retaken by pakistan( i dono how it again came back to india )... 1971.... 90k soldiers were given a party hosted by madam indira becos india again lost a war.... this time india lost half part of the bengal which is now called bangladesh... 1984.. india lost siachin to pakistan... and indian army still trying to recapture it.... 1998 kargil has been captured by pakistain army (again????????)... Now the pak armymen sit on the top of 5353 and every day enjoy the view of the indian high way and every day bombarding the high way... after the kargil victory Mushraff is the most famous person in the pakistan.. he has been loved so much that he is scared of going back to his own country...... now i heard one of my friends saying they want to attack india again.... you are not tired yet......

India could not retake part of Kashmir that had been liberated by Tribals in '48 despite no involvement by Pakistani Military, 1/3rd Kashmir is with Pakistan. 1965, again a much larger Indian Army is held at stalemate by Pakistan whereby India had exhausted almost all of her front-line ammunition and was almost certain to lose all her Tanks and Jets to Pak Army and PAF. In 1971, India lost men and resources and gained nothing in return, they have nothing to show for their losses and sufferings as everything went to Pakistan, the other Pakistan! 1984, India violated the CF and illegally occupied Siachin and we did the same thing in 1999 in Kargil. The only difference is that India raised such a hue and cry to the world that international community came to her aid and forced Pakistan to retreat and to vacate Indian posts....during all this however, Indian Army could not find it in herself to cross LoC and engage Pakistan Army! Musharraf is actually the most famous person, not only in Pakistan but internationally. And finally in 01/02, India threatened of an invasion and amassed almost 700,000 - 800,000 troops at our border and posted all her front line fighters at forward bases and held that position for 6+ months but could not find the courage to cross even an inch of LoC! Then they threatened with surgical strikes and those too proved to be full of hot air! Today India is the laughing stock of the world as they could never get the better of an adversary 8 times small!

Freinds lets chill... and enjoy the day... in this holy month of ramzan lets discuss something which is good for our countries rather than shouting and taunting at each others... Cheers my freinds

That's what I say my friend, lets chill....really

 

[karan.1970]

Today India is the laughing stock of the world as they could never get the better of an adversary 8 times small!

Every day I pray that Pakistan gets more and more people like you so that the downward spiral continues.. And I'd rather India be a laughing stock for not militarily attacking a neighbor than be an international migraine for being the only nuclear country which is also alleged to be a state sponsor and hot bed of terrorism.

btw, yout country is 8 times smaller land population wise and about 10 times smaller economy wise.. take a pick

 

[KRAIT]

That's what I say my friend, lets chill....really

World laughing at us.....Buddy one line answer for you.

Water Kit Fraud and Its Nation Wide Support.

See who is laughing stock now. Even there are few posters still defending it.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

India could not retake part of Kashmir that had been liberated by Tribals in '48 despite no involvement by Pakistani Military, 1/3rd Kashmir is with Pakistan.

Someone needs to recheck the maps here. Jahnger, Rajauri etc many other places were taken back from the tribals.

1965, again a much larger Indian Army is held at stalemate by Pakistan whereby India had exhausted almost all of her front-line ammunition and was almost certain to lose all her Tanks and Jets to Pak Army and PAF.

Regular LOL!

In 1971, India lost men and resources and gained nothing in return, they have nothing to show for their losses and sufferings as everything went to Pakistan, the other Pakistan!

Mega LOL!

1984, India violated the CF and illegally occupied Siachin and we did the same thing in 1999 in Kargil.

Siachen didn't come under the Shimla agreement, while Kargil clearly did. Besides you didn't do the same in Kargil, India didn't deploy mujahideens in Siachen.

The only difference is that India raised such a hue and cry to the world that international community came to her aid and forced Pakistan to retreat and to vacate Indian posts....during all this however, Indian Army could not find it in herself to cross LoC and engage Pakistan Army! Musharraf is actually the most famous person, not only in Pakistan but internationally. And finally in 01/02, India threatened of an invasion and amassed almost 700,000 - 800,000 troops at our border and posted all her front line fighters at forward bases and held that position for 6+ months but could not find the courage to cross even an inch of LoC!

Why would India deprive Pakistan the traditional role of premeptive action and starting any conflict?

Then they threatened with surgical strikes and those too proved to be full of hot air!

India Govt never made any such statements, all cooked up lies ,as always.

Today India is the laughing stock of the world as they could never get the better of an adversary 8 times small!

Nobody gives a damn about India or Pakistan as much as they would about the largest surrender in post WW2 history,

That's what I say my friend, lets chill....really

We all certainly should .

 

[RazPaK]

Every day I pray that Pakistan gets more and more people like you so that the downward spiral continues.. And I'd rather India be a laughing stock for not militarily attacking a neighbor than be an international migraine for being the only nuclear country which is also alleged to be a state sponsor and hot bed of terrorism.

btw, yout country is 8 times smaller land population wise and about 10 times smaller economy wise.. take a pick

The only thing you Indians can do is pray.

 

[Mercenary]

India could not retake part of Kashmir that had been liberated by Tribals in '48 despite no involvement by Pakistani Military, 1/3rd Kashmir is with Pakistan. 1965, again a much larger Indian Army is held at stalemate by Pakistan whereby India had exhausted almost all of her front-line ammunition and was almost certain to lose all her Tanks and Jets to Pak Army and PAF. In 1971, India lost men and resources and gained nothing in return, they have nothing to show for their losses and sufferings as everything went to Pakistan, the other Pakistan! 1984, India violated the CF and illegally occupied Siachin and we did the same thing in 1999 in Kargil. The only difference is that India raised such a hue and cry to the world that international community came to her aid and forced Pakistan to retreat and to vacate Indian posts....during all this however, Indian Army could not find it in herself to cross LoC and engage Pakistan Army! Musharraf is actually the most famous person, not only in Pakistan but internationally. And finally in 01/02, India threatened of an invasion and amassed almost 700,000 - 800,000 troops at our border and posted all her front line fighters at forward bases and held that position for 6+ months but could not find the courage to cross even an inch of LoC! Then they threatened with surgical strikes and those too proved to be full of hot air! Today India is the laughing stock of the world as they could never get the better of an adversary 8 times small!

I think you are stretching the facts there.

1948 - Was a technical victory for Pakistan in the sense that we managed to take and hold 1/3 of Kashmir. As India had done previously by sending in forces to take Hyderabad and Goa, same would have happened here had we not acted. India can view it as a victory as well as they believe they repelled the tribals who were bent on taking all of Kashmir and they managed to take 2/3 of Kashmir from the Tribals. So it depends on which view point you look at that war from.

1965 - You are right that we held India to a stalemate but it was Pakistan who was running out of Ammo and spare parts and not India. When the war had ended, it was in a stalemate but had India bogged us down in a battle of attrition, then in the long run we would have lost as we simply did not have the type of reserve forces needed to continue the fight.

1971 - That was a clear defeat. It can't be spun any other way.

1984 - It was our intelligence failure which led to India taking the top of Siachin Glacier. Pakistan placed an order for large number of Arctic Weather Gear with a British Company which also supplied the Indian Army for its Arctic Weather Gear. So Indian intelligence was easily alerted and thus decided to mount an expedition to take the top of Siachen before Pakistan.

1999 - This was an initial victory for Pakistan but we did not develop a strategic plan and thus while we did manage to shock India, we did not achieve our Strategic Aims of holding the Kargil Hills as a bargaining chip to negotiate Siachin Glacier.

2002 - It wasn't that India lacked courage to attack Pakistan it was that World Powers especially USA pressured India from attacking Pakistan as the war could go Nuclear and USA needed to hunt Al Qaeda and Taliban on its Western border. But the deployment on the border of Pakistan, India suffered some 700 casualties due to accidents and other mishaps.

Overall, India has a much better reputation in the world than Pakistan. That is due to our myopic focus on Kashmir which led to us losing East Pakistan and pumping money into our Armed forces at a detriment to other sectors.

 

[ajtr]

The only thing you Indians can do is pray.

Tootey hoye dilon ki dua mere saath hai,
Duniya teri taraf hai,khuda mere saath hai.


seems like Khuda is with Kafir India.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

I think you are stretching the facts there.

1948 - Was a technical victory for Pakistan in the sense that we managed to take and hold 1/3 of Kashmir. As India had done previously by sending in forces to take Hyderabad and Goa, same would have happened here had we not acted. India can view it as a victory as well as they believe they repelled the tribals who were bent on taking all of Kashmir and they managed to take 2/3 of Kashmir from the Tribals. So it depends on which view point you look at that war from.

Chornological error here.

Goa and Hyderabad happened in 1961 and 1948 respectively, first Kashmir war started in 1947.

 

[Mercenary]

Chornological error here.

Goa and Hyderabad happened in 1961 and 1948 respectively, first Kashmir war started in 1947.

I know but I am giving examples of how India conquered territory.