Response to strike from Pakistan will be massive: IAF chief

[deckingraj]

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.

Probably they have taken a leaf out of US - In Event of WMD Attack, "All Bets Are Off" - CBS News
All bets are off if US under biological attack, warns Hillary Clinton | News.com.au

In short she is only stating the nuclear policy..I honestly don't see anything wrong in it...if attacked by nukes India will respond massively...

 

[Bratva]

Indian Defense ministry had put a gag order on all Chiefs not to give any statement. But again we are seeing this circus again!

 

[MTTPakistan]

response to strike from india will also be massive. Interesting, more massive then India could even think.

Having samba just 5 km away from our reach, india is never gonna take the risks.

 

[Cool_Soldier]

Can any one tell the names of missiles which Pakistan is going to deploy that Shacked Indian Air chief to give such threaten statement in peace time?

 

[toxic_pus]

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.

Firstly, India entered Junagadh on 9th Nov, while the Pathans, backed by PA and led by PA officers entered in Kashmir on 22 Oct, 1947, although the first such transgression by PA into Kashmir territory, then an independent Princely State, was recorded in the last week of August, 1947. Kashmir lodged an official complaint with Pakistan on 4th (or 6th?) Sept, 1947. Before entering Junagadh, India gave plenty of opportunities to Pakistan to amicably solve the problems of Junagadh, Kashmir and Hyderabad, through negotiations. Mountbatten had personally proposed a plebiscite to Jinnah, on 1st Nov, 1947. Jinnah rejected. He wanted it all. He ended up loosing all. Your attempt to paint India's legitimate intervention in Junagadh as 1st cause is just a lousy attempt to rationalize your country's irrationalities.

Secondly, India didn't 'invade' or 'occupy' or 'annex' Junagadh. After Pakistan - too busy to militarily annex Kashmir by bullying the ruler - failed to carry out the basic obligation as a sovereign state, in spite of repeated appeals by the ruler, and after the ruler had fled with his concubines and state's gold, the people of Junagadh, in view of rapidly deteriorating condition of a ruler less, administration less, law less state, forced the Dewan to ask India for intervention. That letter to India, asking for intervention, was representative of public will, where the Dewan's signature was mere formality. India intervened, which you are deliberately calling 'invasion' only after that, thus legitimizing the so called 'military' action. Instead of 'occupying' Junagadh, which India could have easily done, India organised a plebiscite where the citizens of Junagadh overwhelmingly vetted India's 'military' action and acceded to India. It is hardly what 'annexations' are made of.

Even if Junagadh had happened before Kashmir, it still couldn't have been a justification for Pakistan's misadventures in Kashmir. India had intervened legitimately while what Pakistan did in Kashmir was unadulterated state sponsored thuggery.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Even if Junagadh had happened before Kashmir, it still couldn't have been a justification for Pakistan's misadventures in Kashmir. India had intervened legitimately while what Pakistan did in Kashmir was unadulterated state sponsored thuggery.

I never argued that India's support for terrorists/rebels in Junagadh was 'justification' for Pakistan's intervention in J&K - I merely pointed out that India was assisting rebels/terrorists in Junagadh before the tribals entered J&K (or around the same time) - and that was in response to arguments by Karan that implied that somehow Pakistan alone was engaged in this 'non-state actor' business.

As for 'attempting to resolve the issue of Junagadh' - the argument of 'plenty of opportunity' is patently false. By your own admission barely a few months were allowed before Indian forces 'officially' invaded and occupied Junagadh, and the 'unofficial' assistance to terrorists/rebels fighting against the State that had legally acceded to Pakistan occurred even before then.

Nothing India did in Junagahd was 'legitimate' - it was 'thuggery' plain and simple. The state had legally acceded to Pakistan, and the 'Prime Minister of Junagadh' had no authority whatsoever to do conduct any negotiations with India - his capacity after accession was simply that of a local administrator, and the diplomatic cables between India and Pakistan reveal Pakistan's objections, clearly communicated to India, against India intervention in Junagadh.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

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

If you really think the kashmiri diaspora settled abroad is 'pro-Indian' as is the 'Kashmiri Pandit Diaspora', then you should have no objections to the UN verifying and registering these millions settled abroad and counting their votes in a referendum.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

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..

Not at all - I never indicated one as justification for the other. I am merely pointing out that you cannot criticize Pakistan alone for 'supporting non-state actors' and 'aggression against another nation or against territory administered by another nation', given India's actions in Junagadh and Hyderabad.

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.

I didn't either - yet that did not stop India from doing exactly that in Junagadh, East Pakistan and Sri Lanka (LTTE).

 

[newdelhinsa]

Their excuses are valid for Baluchistan but Indian excuses are not valid in any case?

Why mukti bahini were trained and what is the definition of refugee crisis and how it was supposed to be cope with especially when super powers controlling UN were very friendly with Pakistan? Change of regime? How ? 1971 war.

@ toxic pus: Can you recall the events or is it correct Junagadh ruler attacked its neighbouring states which then acceded to India. Therefore it was a moral obligation for India to protect those two neighbouring states from Junagadh. I read the armies of these states were positioned at frontier facing each other.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Their excuses are valid for Baluchistan but Indian excuses are not valid in any case?

There was a referendum in most parts of Baluchistan and NWFP - was there one in J&K?

 

[Kazhugu]

There was a referendum in most parts of Baluchistan and NWFP - was there one in J&K?

why are going in circles.......the fact is kashmir is not going anywhere.....the million dollar question is when is pakistan going to realize that ?...you can call the facade of referendums in nwfp and b'stan as credible..but they were not.....history sates that akbar khan invaded kalat and imprisoned the khan ..took him to karachi and made him sign the accession document there....

 

[Abhishek_]

There was a referendum in most parts of Baluchistan and NWFP - was there one in J&K?

referendum will happen when PA moves out of occupied kashmir but we know that's not gonna happen.
It would be more productive to come to terms with reality AM, J&K will remain Indian territory for the foreseeable future.
It's your call to either feed the establishment (who has yet to deliver any tangible returns) or put the money for better uses.

 

[Ahmad Abdullah Ravian]

Well done Pakistan , It is India who drew our attention to Great advancements in Pakistan Nuke Problem , I thank IAF Chief too
otherwise we had no one would have told that himself in Pakistan

 

[Rank]

baat to aapki sahi hai
well china border is silent and friendly then western border..and same is going to happen in next few years wrt china border

actually India China border is not silent ... loo zara panga phir dekho kesay moor kar deta hey china andar!

Well its a warning to Pakistan,to stay in its limits,else i have not seen other armed forces' chiefs' warning in such a staunch manner.And it makes sense.India can well rip apart Pakistan,if Pakistan goes offensive.

same bullshits we are listening from last 60 years "India can well rip apart Pakistan" still pakistan exsist and answer of your super duper claim is is Mumbai attacks ... where is your surgical strike ?? LOLZZZZZZZZZZZ

"moo say boolna asaan hey kuch karnay kiliye **** may *** chahyeee lolzzzzzzz"

 

[Abhishek_]

^some are perpetual slaves to the military and their false bravado....
others believe in restraint and social development.
The results are there for all to see

still Pakistan exists

well half of it does...and in what condition?