Response to strike from Pakistan will be massive: IAF chief

[Kazhugu]

You leave out one crucial detail - that J&K is not a 'State in India', it is disputed territory divided between Pakistan and India.

not really..when northern areas are surreptitiously made a part of pakistan through some ridiculous justifications and a part of kashmir is unilaterally gifted to china ,,, a third party....

look lets not mix technicalities and ground situations after 63 years......unless you understand the ground situations and avoid harping on technicalities this problem will never be solved....

for starters...there will be no referendum...period.....

 

[ashokdeiva]

Pakistan does not have a tendancy to accept LOC == IB and India is not interested in what Pakistan demands, at last its good for the major exporters of hardware that they have a place to sell their flying, sailing and land based weapons to both of us. Kodos for both the nations that its hard earned money easily finds a home in some western pocket.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But then Afghanistan can ask for the same because they don't recognise Durand line as an International Border.

They can ask for referendum in Balochistan and NWFP as well.

The Afghans need to first make their case in the UN or some other international body, and get a decision in their favor.

As far as Pakistan is concerned, 98% of those who voted in the NWFP referendum chose Pakistan. The percentage of the electorate that showed up to vote was almost identical to the percentage of the electorate that showed up to vote in the previous elections that brought the ANP to power.

And similarly referendums were held in Baluchistan, barring the Khan of Kalat's territory. BTW, quoting Selig Harrison on Baluchistan is not a good idea. He himself has admitted strong friendships with Baluch secessionist leaders and has called for the dismemberment of Pakistan on several occasions. Many of his claims have also been shown to be factually incorrect or unsubstantiated.

 

[fatman17]

Response to strike from Pakistan will be massive: IAF chief
Rajat Pandit, TNN | Jul 26, 2011, 02.25PM IST
NEW DELHI: Indian Air Force (IAF) chief P V Naik on Tuesday said Pakistan's new tactical nuclear missile or expanding arsenal is of no worry to India.

"As per our doctrine, response to a first strike will be massive," Naik threatened. The IAF chief's statement came following the news report that Pakistan planned to add 24 nuclear-capable, short-range missiles capable of hitting all major Indian cities to its arsenal this year.

This will be the highest number of missiles Pakistan has ever produced in a year if the government achieves the target, The Express Tribune newspaper quoted its sources as saying.

The air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles will be able to hit targets at a distance between 700 km and 1,000 km, thus putting nearly all major Indian cities within their range, the report claimed.

The plan is in line with Pakistan's official policy of having what is rhetorically called "maintaining a minimum deterrence", especially against India, the daily quoted sources as saying.
Response to strike from Pakistan will be massive: IAF chief - The Times of India

shaking in my boots here boss!!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

not really..when northern areas are surreptitiously made a part of pakistan through some ridiculous justifications and a part of kashmir is unilaterally gifted to china ,,, a third party....

look lets not mix technicalities and ground situations after 63 years......unless you understand the ground situations and avoid harping on technicalities this problem will never be solved....

for starters...there will be no referendum...period.....

I don't believe Pakistan has any issues with including the NA's in any referendum held in J&K - the more pro-Pakistan people in the referendum the better

Next excuse please....

 

[karan.1970]

You leave out one crucial detail - that J&K is not a 'State in India', it is disputed territory divided between Pakistan and India.

J&K is a state of India as per the constitution and that is paramount, even more than the UN. But for the sake of argument without accepting the stand of J&K not being a state, for a second, lets even assume its not a state . Even then, letting go of any part of Indian territory (disputed or otherwise) again, will need a national referendum and not just the referendum in that area. So either way, the idea of a J&K specific referendum is pretty much a non starter..

 

[Icarus]

But then Afghanistan can ask for the same because they don't recognise Durand line as an International Border.

They can ask for referendum in Balochistan and NWFP as well.

Already happened and they chose to join Pakistan. You are about 64 years too late.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

did all the people agree to partition or to any subsequent events......?...there is no neutral referendum as the demography chnages are grastic on pak side....to balance out hat...india must be allowed to scrap article 370 for 60 years...allow people from any part of india to settle in kashmir and then go for a referendum...

btw you are wrong in saying jammu and kashmir...its the kashmir valley....just kashmir valley.....

Any hard statistics or evidence to justify 'significant demographic changes' in PaK? I hear this a lot from Indian commentators, but I have yet to see any actual evidence supporting these claims. It appears just another excuse to avoid holding a referendum from the Indian side.

 

[aakash_2410]

The Afghans need to first make their case in the UN or some other international body, and get a decision in their favor.

As far as Pakistan is concerned, 98% of those who voted in the NWFP referendum chose Pakistan. The percentage of the electorate that showed up to vote was almost identical to the percentage of the electorate that showed up to vote in the previous elections that brought the ANP to power.

And similarly referendums were held in Baluchistan, barring the Khan of Kalat's territory. BTW, quoting Selig Harrison on Baluchistan is not a good idea. He himself has admitted strong friendships with Baluch secessionist leaders and has called for the dismemberment of Pakistan on several occasions. Many of his claims have also been shown to be factually incorrect or unsubstantiated.

True but NWFP or Balochistan are not the areas subjected to permanent changes to demographics and systematic ethnic cleansing like J&K though. Where Hindus were 47% at the time of partition which is now down to 30%.

 

[ashokdeiva]

I don't believe Pakistan has any issues with including the NA's in any referendum held in J&K - the more pro-Pakistan people in the referendum the better

Next excuse please....

why are you not commenting on the Article 370 that has prevented Indians from other part of the country to settle in Kashmir. if you look at this Pakistan has allowed its people to settle in its part of the Kashmir and hence if a voting is done there is a clear sign that all on the other side of the border who are not Kashmiris will also contribute to the number of votes which is not right.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

J&K is a state of India as per the constitution and that is paramount, even more than the UN. But for the sake of argument without accepting the stand of J&K not being a state, for a second, lets even assume its not a state . Even then, letting go of any part of Indian territory (disputed or otherwise) again, will need a national referendum and not just the referendum in that area. So either way, the idea of a J&K specific referendum is pretty much a non starter..

Fascinating that India did not, and many Indians even today do not, criticize India's interventions in Junagadh, Hyderabad and East Pakistan, by applying your 'logic' above.

Or not really 'fascinating' at all, just pure hypocrisy.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

True but NWFP or Balochistan are not the areas subjected to permanent changes to demographics and systematic ethnic cleansing like J&K though. Where Hindus were 47% at the time of partition which is now down to 30%.

Again, the Kashmiri diaspora settled abroad outnumbers the Pandit population - I have no problems having the UN verify, register and collect votes from both sets of groups in a referendum - this works to Pakistan's advantage.

 

[ashokdeiva]

this thread is not going any where, no conclusions but a bunch of ____ eating each others head.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

why are you not commenting on the Article 370 that has prevented Indians from other part of the country to settle in Kashmir. if you look at this Pakistan has allowed its people to settle in its part of the Kashmir and hence if a voting is done there is a clear sign that all on the other side of the border who are not Kashmiris will also contribute to the number of votes which is not right.

If you can provide some credible statistical evidence from a neutral and credible source to justify the 'significant demographic changes in PaK', then we can proceed with your line of argument - till then you just have an unsubstantiated allegation.

 

[karan.1970]

1947: Pathans attack Kashmir, India moves troops into Kashmir, then Pakistan moves troops against India.
1965: Our bad.
1971: India already funding and actively training Mukti Bahini, 0.5 million troops already at the borders of East Pakistan. Op Chingez Khan was a diversion not a pre-emptive strike.
1999: Our bad.

I would say our history of instigation is pretty much balanced.

1947: And the pathans in 1947 belonged to ??????
1971: Question.. Pakistan has by self admission supported insurgents in J&K. So does that mean if at any time India attacks Pakistan (heaven forbid), it should be treated as diversion and not aggression??