Response to strike from Pakistan will be massive: IAF chief

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

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??

J&K is internationally recognized disputed territory between India and Pakistan, East Pakistan was not.

And India intervened in support of 'rebels/terrorists' in Junagadh (territory that had legally acceded to Pakistan months earlier), and then invaded, occupied and annexed it, before the Tribals intervened in J&K.

 

[aakash_2410]

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.

Not really mate. Kashmiri diaspora settled abroad is still Pro-Indian just like majority of Kashmiris living in J&K. Plus most of the Pakistani Diaspora living abroad mainly consists of Punjabis and Urdu-speaking Muhajirs.

And separatists coerced 1/4 million Kashmiri Hindus to leave the region. And this was 30 years ago in 1980s. Considering that Indian population hsa nearly doubled in this time the real number would be more than half a million. This is a big number because of J&K's population of 12 million.

And plus there is no way for referendum since 'Pakistan failed to withdraw its troops from the Kashmir region as was required under the same U.N. resolution of August 13, 1948 which discussed the plebiscite.'

Jammu and Kashmir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[karan.1970]

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.

For the sake of argument, I will even give you that.. They hypocrisy that is.. Its not the 1st time India and Pakistan have been hypocritical in last 60 years. Wont be the last time either. So despite this diversion, the idea of the Kashmir specific referendum has as much chance as a snowball in hell. Same was communicated to the UN in 1950's if I am not wrong.

On the East Pakistan bit, I dont remember India asking for any referendum or anything. Kind of different situation..

 

[karan.1970]

J&K is internationally recognized disputed territory between India and Pakistan, East Pakistan was not.

And India intervened in support of 'rebels/terrorists' in Junagadh (territory that had legally acceded to Pakistan months earlier), and then invaded, occupied and annexed it, before the Tribals intervened in J&K.

So your stand is that Pakistan sent in irregulars (today's defn of terrorists) in J&K in 1947 in response to India's official annexation (by force) of Junagarh and Hyderabad?? A different stand than the post I responded to.. So you gotta get your stories straight first..

And btw, I didnt see anywhere in the UN resolution (that defines J&K, AK and NA as disputed) that use of terrorists/insurgents/militants in each other's occupied territory is an ok situation.

 

[Kazhugu]

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....

no excuse needs to be given here.....just follow pak's model and incorporate j&k into india......

as i said...the faster pakistan comes to terms with ground realities and stops harping on technicalities and practically un-feasible ideas...the faster the peace comes to south asia....

no please dont say "referendum", "kashmiri aspiration" etc....kashmir was/is never about people...its about a valuable piece of real estate and the rivers that flow through it.....and pak mjust realize hell would freeze over before india agrees to part with its kashmir...no matter what valley muslims want....

 

[aakash_2410]

J&K is internationally recognized disputed territory between India and Pakistan, East Pakistan was not.

And India intervened in support of 'rebels/terrorists' in Junagadh (territory that had legally acceded to Pakistan months earlier), and then invaded, occupied and annexed it, before the Tribals intervened in J&K.

People of Junagadh were 'rebels/terrorists' and people in J&K were 'Tribal'? haha
Not really mate. It's the other way round.

We both know that people in Junagadh were common people [90% Hindus] against whose will the Nawab ceded to Pakistan.

And yeah you are right the same logic can be applied for J&K but Non-Muslims [Not just Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists as well] were in slight minority. Just about but yeah. And don't you think out of all the Muslims more than half of the Muslims would have wanted to stay in India just like it was seen throughout the whole India at the time of the partition?

 

[ashokdeiva]

no excuse needs to be given here.....just follow pak's model and incorporate j&k into india......

as i said...the faster pakistan comes to terms with ground realities and stops harping in realities...the faster the peace comes to south asia....

no please dont say "referendum", "kashmiri aspiration" etc....kashmir was/is never about people...its about a valuable piece of real estate and the rivers that flow through it.....and pak mjust realize hell would freeze over before india agrees to part with its kashmir...no matter what valley muslims want....

one piece of actuals that no one thinks at.

 

[Kazhugu]

@aakash_

i dont think there is any need for justification for the continued merry go round with indians and pakistanis justifying their actiosn in the past....what is important is how cognizant are we of ground realities in 2011......the reality is india holds more than half of kashmir and whether disputed or not is not going to hand it over or going to allow kashmir secede from india......similar is the case of pakistan occupied kashmir...the soooner we realize this...the sooner peace dawn in South asia......

 

[deckingraj]

Well Indians are a very strange nation by looking at you guys

We are as strange as any other nation in planet earth...

if you remember my post in another thread yesterday, i had asked either you or another Indian member to look at your ORBAT before telling us to see ours, India has massive numbers of troops, armor, airforce stationed towards Pakistan, all strike corps facing Pakistan, all 4 or so RAPID formations stationed against us, all the cold start doctrine being practiced in war simulations and on ground in shape of massive exercises just for Pakistan and even after all this, you say to us that we don't need to be India centric or we are being wrong in having an India centric mindset.

Such a naive statement from you is a little surprising....There have been 4 wars fought b/w us...The latest Kargil happened just a decade ago....Terror havens in Pakistan are targetting India...and yet you are commenting on all this??? It is common sense that most of your military might will be stationed in the most volatile border areas...What you are conveniently forgetting is the change in status quo...Now more and more emphasis is given to the eastern border...Having said it, this is going to be foolish to move your forces from a hostile border to a more or less peaceful one....

Either you guys don't want to understand or even if you guys do understand, it shows how much hypocrisy you guys show when blaming us for being India centric while neglecting your own designs.

Explained above...Just to add we have no problems of you being India centric.....In fact we would prefer you remain India centric...Not sure if you can connect the dots but being India centric has its share of drawbacks...

You guys are the larger among both of us, and massively larger in military strength and quality wise too, but still accuse us being India centric. So the 3 strike corps, 4000+ tanks consisting of latest T-90s, Arjuns, T-72s, BMP IFVs, 4 or so RAPID formations and many more other divisions and corps based just across Pakistan and the massive exercises in the desert bordering both countries are for what China centric ??

The basic problem here is that it is imperative that an Army has to be one adversary centric..This may work for Pakistan but not for us.....We have different ambitions and expectations...If we need to cater to our dreams we need to go after enhancing capability...If we are Pakistan centric then we should just stop modernizing because even you accepted that we are bigger in quantity and quality...no???

Tell me does it make sense for our troops to practice a war scenario keeping Bangladesh in mind??? There is so much going on the eastern border...Does that mean we are now China centric??? China recently did an exercise where they tested how long it will take their troops to reach our eastern border from far flung areas...Does that mean China is India centric???

Come on guys, till when are you guys gonna keep kidding your own selves and not see the reality that, you India being massive in numbers and quality are more Pakistan centric then we are.

Honestly speaking this is a myth...If it sounds good that India is being Pakistan centric then let it be like that....But look at the acquisations we are having...Do you think MMRCA, nuclear sub, Gorkshov etc are pakistani centric weapon??? They are for enhancing our capability....


*************************************************************************************************

When NASR got tested were's you guys terming it as game changer??? All IAF chief is saying what is there in our doctorine...Any nuclear attack on our country or interests will be retaliated with massive and punitive nuclear strikes....Not sure why are you being hyper sensitive here???

 

[aakash_2410]

@Kazhugu

Yeah true no country would let Kashmir go that easily.

There is too much pride attached with Kashmir.

 

[Solomon2]

"As per our doctrine, response to a first strike will be massive," Naik threatened.

To an American like me, this sounds like empty blather.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far" - President Theodore Roosevelt, supposedly quoting a West African proverb.

India appears to be doing the opposite.

 

[Kazhugu]

To an American like me, this sounds like empty blather.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far" - President Theodore Roosevelt, supposedly quoting a West African proverb.

India appears to be doing the opposite.

blame the reporters for that....they will not stop pestering you...until you give them the word they need......

 

[ashokdeiva]

To an American like me, this sounds like empty blather.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far" - President Theodore Roosevelt, supposedly quoting a West African proverb.

India appears to be doing the opposite.

and there goes our mentor, did you not learn from your mistakes. do you read the real speach that the ACM gave, this twisted article by media invites a lot of people not to look at what realy happened is'nt it

 

[Tshering22]

Nothing new... one country inducts nuke missiles, the other shouts... and vice versa. The only one thing that is assured is that no governments in either of these countries will initiate lobbing nukes. That much everyone knows.

 

[Solomon2]

and there goes our mentor, did you not learn from your mistakes. do you read the real speach that the ACM gave, this twisted article by media invites a lot of people not to look at what realy happened is'nt it

No, I didn't read the speech. Do you have a link?

Sadly, everybody has to live with "twisted articles" by the media. It isn't always in bad faith; sometimes it's just sloppiness.