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

[Ticker]

Joe Shearer,

The Tehsil of Shakargarh had 56.3% Muslims and was given to the Pakistan by Rad Cliff. The adjoining Tehsil of Batala had 55.07% Muslims and Tehsil of Gurdaspur had 56.1% Muslims, but these two were given to India. Why, because India would have had no access to Kashmir without Gurdaspur. Rad Cliff's secretary had published his diary and papers some years ago and he had given clear evidence of the mal-intent not only of Rad cliff but also Mountbatten. Lord Birdwood have clearly talked about it in his book. Sir Conrad Corfield, Viceroy's adviser resigned on this issue and left, also wrote about it.

How all this was manipulated has been written and accepted by many of those who were part of the planned conspiracy to allow India to acquire Kashmir. I can bring in tons of references as well, but like I said before, you will have your own version of history and I may not agree with you.

A bit about Sheikh Abdullah. He was blamed by the Kashmiris in those days as a Qadiyani, many known Kashmiri leaders of the time publicly accused him of being so and his support base had eroded to a great extent. And if you understand the Muslim psyche, you would know how Muslims would have reacted then about these pronouncements. His theory of joining India was based on what he said on many occasions that, Kashmiris will be absorbed by Punjabis if they joined Pakistan and would therefore lose their identity. he wanted to become an all India leader like Nehru and Ghaffar Khan etc and he could not have gained such a stature in pakistan because his own people accused him of being a Qadiyani.

I would not like to continue with this anymore please.

I'll stop here as I know this is not going to go anywhere.

Lets move on express ourselves on current topics.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe Shearer,

The Tehsil of Shakargarh had 56.3% Muslims and was given to the Pakistan by Rad Cliff. The adjoining Tehsil of Batala had 55.07% Muslims and Tehsil of Gurdaspur had 56.1% Muslims, but these two were given to India. Why, because India would have had no access to Kashmir without Gurdaspur. Rad Cliff's secretary had published his diary and papers some years ago and he had given clear evidence of the mal-intent not only of Rad cliff but also Mountbatten. Lord Birdwood have clearly talked about it in his book. Sir Conrad Corfield, Viceroy's adviser resigned on this issue and left, also wrote about it.

How all this was manipulated has been written and accepted by many of those who were part of the planned conspiracy to allow India to acquire Kashmir. I can bring in tons of references as well, but like I said before, you will have your own version of history and I may not agree with you.

Again, it is a perpetual source of wonder, and of amusement, how an entire country lives by conspiracy theories. It doesn't seem to leave any time to introspect, to inspect decisions made and spot mistakes or bad assumptions, or take corrective action. Instead it encourages more and more of the same behaviour that failed, more failures, and more conspiracy theories.

Having set their hearts on something, when they got it, against all odds, the League leadership probably thought it had achieved heaven. That became their formula, and from them, the country adopted it.

So next they set their hearts on Kashmir. The same tactics, brow-beating and naked threats, failed. The Pakistani emissary, a military officer, went to Srinagar and tried in vain to get the Maharaja's signature on an accession document.

It failed, and immediately a conspiracy was detected. The brow-beating and naked threats continued. This time it was the tribals who served as a threat. We already know that at their peak, they were outside Leh, controlling Kargil, Dras and the highway between Leh and Srinagar, and we also know how they were routed. But that stopped nobody.

The policy was dusted off once the leadership saw India's poor showing against the PLA. More brow-beating, more aggression. More defeat. More conspiracy theory.

Oh dear, the next one is not easy to explain. Against their own countrymen, the policy was applied once again. In Bangladesh, first there was brow-beating, then there was naked aggression. Debacle. Conspiracy theory. Right.

So to Kargil.
Brow-beating? Check
Aggression? Check
Brilliant victory, retaining a peak, losing >350, <4000 men? Check
Cordial agreement that even more brilliant victory ruined by intervention of politician pretending to be Prime Minister despite existence of perfectly good COAS? Check

Consistent, if nothing else. And people making wise cracks about consistency being the virtue of this, that and the other will be posted to - well, that's confidential. Everyone's read about plausible deniability by now.

(to be continued)

A bit about Sheikh Abdullah. He was blamed by the Kashmiris in those days as a Qadiyani, many known Kashmiri leaders of the time publicly accused him of being so and his support base had eroded to a great extent. And if you understand the Muslim psyche, you would know how Muslims would have reacted then about these pronouncements. His theory of joining India was based on what he said on many occasions that, Kashmiris will be absorbed by Punjabis if they joined Pakistan and would therefore lose their identity. he wanted to become an all India leader like Nehru and Ghaffar Khan etc and he could not have gained such a stature in pakistan because his own people accused him of being a Qadiyani.

I would not like to continue with this anymore please.

I'll stop here as I know this is not going to go anywhere.

Lets move on express ourselves on current topics.

 

[KRAIT]

^ Prime time and huge coverage given to Zaid Hamid and that water kit fraudster explains a lot. What else you expect ?

 

[karan.1970]

So as per the same analogy, your generals killed your soldiers in cold blood in 1962, 1965 when you attacked Pakistan and later as well and during your internal skirmishes with freedom movement groups etc. Have a heart yaar

In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there..

 

[Joe Shearer]

Dear Sir,

I have taken a little time to refresh my mind about the events concerning Junagadh.

Achieving independence was a glorious occasion. To many sensitive minds, it was overcast by the horror of the slaughter of innocents that accompanied it. The events surrounding partition were so dreadful that few, if any, of them would draw anything less than a shudder of fear and loathing. Both my parents' families were from a land overnight declared alien and forbidden. The trek of the refugees, and of their neglect and slow slaughter by a government that was obsessed by the plight of the northern refugees, and totally neglected those in the east. Those who are interested may like to read Amitava Ghosh' The Hungry Tide. The last despairing days of these wretched people are described with feeling and emotion. Those who read it may gauge dimly how deep the iron has entered the soul of Bengal, how deep our resentment of nameless and shapeless politicians and bureaucrats in Delhi lies. That Bengal remains loyal is due to our embracing the ideal of a secular, multi-lingual India, not due to anything that the politicians have done.

In all this, there was a comic moment, when we witnessed a Ruritanian revolution, with the full accompanying paraphernalia of royal guards in richly embroidered uniforms and showy arms, a wicked but incompetent minister, a foolish king, princes and barons in revolt, the representative of the Emperor wafting through with august words of imperial wisdom, subjects surging around in all directions, and an Army that was sent to the border of a statelet and then, to its bafflement, kept waiting there in complete inactivity.

That, Sir, was Junagadh.

Sir
Nizam did not agree to join either India or Pakistan. If it was up to him he would have wanted Hyderabad to remain a sovereign state. But you cannot deny the fact that the Nizam had a soft corner for Pakistan, after all he bankrolled the Pakistani government at the time of Pakistan's inception. At no point did the Indian forces had the permission to enter and take Hyderabad forcefully, it was against the mandate. Thus, India was in clear violation of the law at the time.

The same argument can be used for Junagadh. Nawab Khanji chose to accede to Pakistan but India forcefully captured the state with use of military force. This again was in violation of the law at the time. My question is why is Pakistan being singled out for sending the lashkars to capture Kashmir when India used force to annex Junagadh and Hyderabad. I am clearly seeing a pattern of hypocrisy here Sir. India violated UN's resolution which called for a plebiscite in Kashmir. If my memory serves me right, Nehru also promised to hold a plebiscite in the disputed Kashmir.

The matter was far more complicated.

Junagadh was itself a Suzerain, while being sovereign in itself, also responsible for the foreign policy of two other even smaller states, Mangrol and Babarwadia. These were all accounted within the 562 powers that were set free to decide their destinies after August 15. In other words, Mangrol and Babarwadia were themselves free to accede to either Pakistan or India, irrespective of the decision to be taken by Junagadh. This is an important point.

Mountbatten plays a role in all these events, far more than his role in other matters relating to British India, because of his position prior to August 15. It was primarily he who spoke to the Indian princes on behalf of the Crown, and he who laid down guidelines for the implementation of the rules governing accession, for while in theory, each prince was free to declare himself an independent realm and apply for membership of the UN, in practice, each was expected to align himself to either of the two Dominions. Only Hyderabad, Kashmir, Jodhpur, Travancore-Cochin and Junagadh (Tripura and Manipur were very different in nature) resisted easy merger and took a lot of the time and attention of the secretary concerned, V. P. Menon.

The events were as follows:

Mountbatten had proposed, as a voluntary guideline, not as a fixed rule, that only states contiguous to Pakistan should consider acceding to Pakistan. The Nawab of Junagadh, however, exercised his option to accede to Pakistan. Mangrol and Babarwadia promptly declared for India. The Nawab then occupied Babarwadia with his state troops. India sent in troops to free Babarwadia and did so, but refrained from entering Junagadh. The Nawab gathered his collection of dogs and left hurriedly for Karachi. After about a week or so, the Dewan reversed accession to Pakistan, wrote to the nearest Indian functionary to step in and manage things, and himself departed to Karachi, to concentrate on breeding a line of Prime Ministers. The Indian Administration took over. The Government of Pakistan discovered a conspiracy. Life continued.

Please note that Indian troops DID NOT enter Junagadh, contrary to popular impression.

(to be continued)

 

[MastanKhan]

QUOTE=karan.1970;3269229]In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there.. [/QUOTE]

Really----kid---in 1965 sept---end of war----indians living in europe and america were hiding in shame---because they were the pun of jokes by the europeans and americans---because all the claim made by your nations were shown to be lies----.

You should have destroyed us in 65---with twice the size of army and air force.

You people have been playing these political games with us---and without learning that political games won't keep us down---it will give you time for momentary laughter---it is not prudent to laugh at enemies who can literally kill you as many times as you can kill them----.

Grow up young indian child---grow up---pin pricks start wars---.

In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there..

Oh really---when it is your turn---it was the politicians---. So---if we say that in kargil the politicians killed us then what---. The excuse that is good for you---no reason why it should not be good for us.

 

[SR 71 Blackbird]

QUOTE=karan.1970;3269229]In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there..

Really----kid---in 1965 sept---end of war----indians living in europe and america were hiding in shame---because they were the pun of jokes by the europeans and americans---because all the claim made by your nations were shown to be lies----.

You should have destroyed us in 65---with twice the size of army and air force.

You people have been playing these political games with us---and without learning that political games won't keep us down---it will give you time for momentary laughter---it is not prudent to laugh at enemies who can literally kill you as many times as you can kill them----.

Grow up young indian child---grow up---pin pricks start wars---.

On the contrary:

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy--on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdyfield%28DOCID+pk0152%29

But the defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition.

BBC NEWS | South Asia | The rise of Pakistan's army

 

[meena24]

Less than 350 my son, and we do hold liberated land.

Yes you have liberated siachen, I can very well understand that.

 

[Joe Shearer]

In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there..

I wish you would not exaggerate; it casts doubt on the authentic portions of your narrative.

 

[K-Xeroid]

Oh yes they did.. That has been the bane of Pakistan from day 1.. Pakist army needs to show they are a successful martial race else the whole facade of PA's military excellence comes crashing down. I dont know how old are you, but in 1971, even till the day of actual surrender of the Pakistani forces in Bangladesh, the ISPR equivalant was publicising Pakistan winning the war in East Pakistan.

Initially during 71 Operation Searchlight was a productive one , Managed to stop accuracy of killings were happening in Bengal against Non bengalis by Bihani, even furthur many sources including Bengali sources. Wat ISPR said wrong? well Later your intrusion made many thing uncleared at then. Similarly Indian armed unit claimed of shoting downed 73 aircrafts which is an absolute lie. So mis-reportings happens in cases of wars .

You may be right about 4000, but the casualties were in thousands not hundreds.. Multiple folks in IA involved in actual ground operations have shared the fact that close to 1200+ soldiers's bodies never even made it back to Pakistan and are still buried in India

If that were the case then families of 1200+ soldiers were protesting here in Pak as our media cell is enough strong to highlight such things , even international media would have approached to them, Unlike , past your random statements were as dead as your Intellegence during Kargil.

 

[Vinod2070]

On the contrary:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdyfield%28DOCID+pk0152%29

BBC NEWS | South Asia | The rise of Pakistan's army

Some people are real experts at snatching victory from the worst defeat. At least in their own imagination.

1965 was a stalemate, both sides demonstrated utter incompetence.

It was started by Pakistan to snatch Kashmir. Operation Gibralter and operation Grandslam were launched by Pakistan army fed on the belief of Muslim superiority against "Hindu India". Trying to fulfill its destiny, realizing the partition time slogans:

Hans ke liya tha Pakistan, lad ke lenge Hindustan!

This was self evident to many Pakistanis and certainly their generals and armymen fed on religious frenzy.

India had the limited aim to repel the invaders back to their caves. The operations in Lahore and other sectors were only meant for diversion.

We finally won more land and even the Hazi Pir pass (which we foolishly returned, same as relinquishing all gains from 1971, this only makes the generals believe they can get away with any blunders) in Kashmir. Pakistan ran out of ammo and steam in a matter of weeks. All its "Muslim superior fighter to Hindus" pretensions bitten to the dust for ever.

After that PA has always been on defensive. Its only victories have been by the 111 brigade over its own politicians. And they have always been bloodless. Just a couple of commandos jumping over some fences and a great victory secured.

Its funny to see comments about "indians living in europe and america were hiding in shame". Our parents in India were never ashamed of repelling the invaders.

In the ultimate analysis, Pakistan has a very small and decreasing footprint in Indian calculus. Of course it still takes more bandwidth that we would want and more effort to "manage" that we should need, it is becoming less relevant by the day, to us and to the world. Its only value is in case of "problems", without them no one cares.

It flourishes from Afghanistan's misfortune. That is hopefully soon coming to an end.

 

[Ticker]

Again, it is a perpetual source of wonder, and of amusement, how an entire country lives by conspiracy theories. It doesn't seem to leave any time to introspect, to inspect decisions made and spot mistakes or bad assumptions, or take corrective action. Instead it encourages more and more of the same behaviour that failed, more failures, and more conspiracy theories.

Having set their hearts on something, when they got it, against all odds, the League leadership probably thought it had achieved heaven. That became their formula, and from them, the country adopted it.

So next they set their hearts on Kashmir. The same tactics, brow-beating and naked threats, failed. The Pakistani emissary, a military officer, went to Srinagar and tried in vain to get the Maharaja's signature on an accession document.

It failed, and immediately a conspiracy was detected. The brow-beating and naked threats continued. This time it was the tribals who served as a threat. We already know that at their peak, they were outside Leh, controlling Kargil, Dras and the highway between Leh and Srinagar, and we also know how they were routed. But that stopped nobody.

The policy was dusted off once the leadership saw India's poor showing against the PLA. More brow-beating, more aggression. More defeat. More conspiracy theory.

Oh dear, the next one is not easy to explain. Against their own countrymen, the policy was applied once again. In Bangladesh, first there was brow-beating, then there was naked aggression. Debacle. Conspiracy theory. Right.

So to Kargil.
Brow-beating? Check
Aggression? Check
Brilliant victory, retaining a peak, losing >350, <4000 men? Check
Cordial agreement that even more brilliant victory ruined by intervention of politician pretending to be Prime Minister despite existence of perfectly good COAS? Check

Consistent, if nothing else. And people making wise cracks about consistency being the virtue of this, that and the other will be posted to - well, that's confidential. Everyone's read about plausible deniability by now.

(to be continued)

Joe Shearer,

You are doing the same thing you accused me of. You were wrong then and you are wrong even now.

You have now started ranting - yes ranting.

Nassr said very aptly in another thread and I agree wholeheartedly with him;

In my opinion, nuclear powers with strong armed forces like Pakistan and India, Kargil and 62 are setbacks and are not defeats.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...tegic-thinking-pakistan-13.html#ixzz22fHiJGt0

And you can just speculate about the bigger objectives set-forth for Kargil. You and I can just speculate - how do you know that some of these bigger objectives may have been achieved. It could have been a precursor to something else. We can just speculate and create doubts not only in our mind but also in the minds of others.

So stop ranting unnecessarily, particularly when you don't have an answer.

 

[Mav3rick]

In 1962, yes, It was the bloody politicians who killed most of our armymen since they did not prepare and equip them well for the war and refused to use the airforce to its full capability..

1965, we kind of kicked your a$$ so no issues there..

You probably mean by slamming yours ***** on our boots!

Well, you can keep repeating the same thing and never learn from history even with facts when you have always either accepted stalemates or retreated unconditionally despite tall claims. Blows away your credibility time and again.

 

[LiberalAtheist]

I really don't see the point of this thread still running.

 

[Ticker]

Dear Sir,

I have taken a little time to refresh my mind about the events concerning Junagadh.

Achieving independence was a glorious occasion. To many sensitive minds, it was overcast by the horror of the slaughter of innocents that accompanied it. The events surrounding partition were so dreadful that few, if any, of them would draw anything less than a shudder of fear and loathing. Both my parents' families were from a land overnight declared alien and forbidden. The trek of the refugees, and of their neglect and slow slaughter by a government that was obsessed by the plight of the northern refugees, and totally neglected those in the east. Those who are interested may like to read Amitava Ghosh' The Hungry Tide. The last despairing days of these wretched people are described with feeling and emotion. Those who read it may gauge dimly how deep the iron has entered the soul of Bengal, how deep our resentment of nameless and shapeless politicians and bureaucrats in Delhi lies. That Bengal remains loyal is due to our embracing the ideal of a secular, multi-lingual India, not due to anything that the politicians have done.

In all this, there was a comic moment, when we witnessed a Ruritanian revolution, with the full accompanying paraphernalia of royal guards in richly embroidered uniforms and showy arms, a wicked but incompetent minister, a foolish king, princes and barons in revolt, the representative of the Emperor wafting through with august words of imperial wisdom, subjects surging around in all directions, and an Army that was sent to the border of a statelet and then, to its bafflement, kept waiting there in complete inactivity.

That, Sir, was Junagadh.



The matter was far more complicated.

Junagadh was itself a Suzerain, while being sovereign in itself, also responsible for the foreign policy of two other even smaller states, Mangrol and Babarwadia. These were all accounted within the 562 powers that were set free to decide their destinies after August 15. In other words, Mangrol and Babarwadia were themselves free to accede to either Pakistan or India, irrespective of the decision to be taken by Junagadh. This is an important point.

Mountbatten plays a role in all these events, far more than his role in other matters relating to British India, because of his position prior to August 15. It was primarily he who spoke to the Indian princes on behalf of the Crown, and he who laid down guidelines for the implementation of the rules governing accession, for while in theory, each prince was free to declare himself an independent realm and apply for membership of the UN, in practice, each was expected to align himself to either of the two Dominions. Only Hyderabad, Kashmir, Jodhpur, Travancore-Cochin and Junagadh (Tripura and Manipur were very different in nature) resisted easy merger and took a lot of the time and attention of the secretary concerned, V. P. Menon.

The events were as follows:

Mountbatten had proposed, as a voluntary guideline, not as a fixed rule, that only states contiguous to Pakistan should consider acceding to Pakistan. The Nawab of Junagadh, however, exercised his option to accede to Pakistan. Mangrol and Babarwadia promptly declared for India. The Nawab then occupied Babarwadia with his state troops. India sent in troops to free Babarwadia and did so, but refrained from entering Junagadh. The Nawab gathered his collection of dogs and left hurriedly for Karachi. After about a week or so, the Dewan reversed accession to Pakistan, wrote to the nearest Indian functionary to step in and manage things, and himself departed to Karachi, to concentrate on breeding a line of Prime Ministers. The Indian Administration took over. The Government of Pakistan discovered a conspiracy. Life continued.

Please note that Indian troops DID NOT enter Junagadh, contrary to popular impression.

(to be continued)

In 1940 Lahore resolution, it was clearly announced about creation of a separate homeland in Muslim Majority areas and not the whole of Hindustan. Kashmir was 85% Muslim before independence, was a Muslim majority, was adjoining the other Muslim majority areas and irrespective of its status the demand was that it should become part of Pakistan.

What you call conspiracy theories, it was a conspiracy or call it scheming, and Mountbatten was part of it. When he was retained as the Governor General, Hindus named him as Pandit Mountbatten for nothing, did they!

It has been proved from historical evidence that this scheming had started much earlier between the Congress leaders and Maharaja of Kashmir, much before the intrusion of Pathans in Kashmir even began and based on which the Indian invasion of Kashmir was blamed on.

Even Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel wrote a letter to the Maharaja four months before Pathan intrusion. This was clearly in reply to a letter from Maharaja. Through this letter also it has been clearly identified that when Pandit Mountbatten visited he Kashmir, he could not properly explain the reasons for Kashmir’s accession to Maharaja and therefore, he invited the Maharaja to visit Delhi to meet him so that the details could be explained to him. These letters have been published and are available for you to read and confirm.

All the above was also preceded by meetings between rulers of Alwar, Kapurthala and Patiala with Maharaja of Kashmir.

And, the intrusion of Pathans has been blamed for everything. However, does any of you even know that after the pogrom in Punjab where Muslims were killed in millions in order to ethnically cleanse the areas and change the demography, where did these marauding Hindu and Sikh hordes were sent to? No you wouldn’t know or probably wouldn’t want to acknowledge it – these hordes were sent to Jammu.

As planned, in the initial instance, they intended to ethnically cleanse areas of Jammu where Muslims were in minority. Between July and October 47, over 500,000 Muslims were thrown out of their homes, out of which 200,000 thousand were killed and about 300,000 were forced to emigrate to Pakistan. This was the first stage of this operation. The Pathans came to safeguard the Muslims from hordes of marauding Sikhs and fundamentalist Hindus.

You need to read more Joe Shearer to post a logical analysis. You are also doing the same which other Indians do here. It is just that you can rant a bit better in English than your other countrymen.