State of teaching (and recording) military history (MH) in Pakistan

[Wickerman]

Hey maybe you are a victim of same over confidence syndrome most of the indian posters are accusing us of- 1 Pak vs 10 Inherently weak indians- No?-
Now your text book teaching that- media feeding that- Generals portraying that i suppose?-
The same over confidence gona get you killed in the battle field some day-

This is not overconfidence. Infact apart for the peace process and other developments, Pakistan is not even spoken about that frequently on Indian media, although it is the country most spoken about. This is purely a judgement based on capabilities - both qualitative and quantitative.

And yet you guys lay some where in the middle--

And yet these "people that lie in the middle" beat you 4 times What does that say about you?

 

[INDIC]

1965

Yes you attacked Pakistan in 1965 war. Indian Occupied Kashmir is a disputed territory and is not part of India. The military action was taking place in IOK. India attacked mainland Pakistan. India is the aggressor.

LOC is the ceasefire line, violating ceasefire by crossing ceasefire line by sending thousands of soldiers is open declaration of war.

 

[JonAsad]

Of course you would have eaten us alive if the demographics had been reversed. That very telling statement represents the essence of the Pakistani deep state - always aggressive, always nursing I'll-feeling, always looking for an opportunity to harm its neighbours.

The only neighbour we have problem with is you- contrary to your position where you are surrounded by hostile neighbours- kindly leave the tiny miny nepal- burma- and similar co. out of the equation- Maybe you are so weak every one with little force tries to threaten you or you really have some problem that makes majority of your neighbours hostile towards you-

It was a conscious decision by the Indian leadership not to humiliate Pakistan further in 1971. It was a conscious decision to release the prisoners to Pakistan, rather than to Bangladesh, which was clamoring for a public war crimes trial. It was a conscious decision to keep the protocols relating to Kashmir secret, because of Bhutto's pleading not to have to explain their decisions to a defeated and humiliated country. And it was a conscious decision by Pakistan to become even more hostile, even more intractable than ever before.

Count yourself lucky that you do not face a vicious, terrorist-sponsoring neighbour determined to eat you alive.

Thats what i call- boastful syndrome- nothing else-

Btw you do realize you quoted a declared troll post to reply to?-

 

[Joe Shearer]

The only neighbour we have problem with is you- contrary to your position where you are surrounded by hostile neighbours- kindly leave the tiny miny nepal- burma- and similar co. out of the equation- Maybe you are so weak every one with little force tries to threaten you or you really have some problem that makes majority of your neighbours hostile towards you-


Thats what i call- boastful syndrome- nothing else-

Btw you do realize you quoted a declared troll post to reply to?-

The fact that you have had an uneasy relationship with Afghanistan doesn't count of course.

Once your borders with Afghanistan and India are taken out of the equation, what remains? Iran?

 

[Wickerman]

The only neighbour we have problem with is you- contrary to your position where you are surrounded by hostile neighbours- kindly leave the tiny miny nepal- burma- and similar co. out of the equation- Maybe you are so weak every one with little force tries to threaten you or you really have some problem that makes majority of your neighbours hostile towards you-

Yes Pakistan has no problem with any of her neighbors. Nice try.

What about your border dispute with Afghanistan?

The only other country that you have borders with is Iran. Even with them, you have a good-not-so-good relations. Because Pakistan is a majority Sunni Muslim nation, you guys side with Saudi more. And Saudi hates Iran to its guts cuz Iran is Shia.

Dude, just fix your issues first before talking about imaginary problems India faces.

 

[Ticker]

@Ticker, are you, Sir, seriously under the impression that you Re speaking to a bunch of illiterates without access to a map, or to the records of your own public personalities?

Apparently so, from the condescension with which you dole out your home-cooked history to us poor beggars.

Here is a map.

Could it be the case that the unfortunate kabilas lost their way, and raped Kashmiri women in Baramula thinking that they were raping Punjabi women from Alwar (which lies in Punjab according to your home-cooked geography), Kapurthala and those places? After all, people have been known to lose their way in unfamiliar territory before.

As for raping and looting those just raped and looted according to your account, obviously it might be argued that these women having succumbed to Sikh and Hindu mobs earlier, all they deserved was a little more punitive raping and looting, to remind them not to get raped and looted in future. Nothing personal, of course, only to drive home the point about resistance to marauding mobs in future. No, not the marauding mobs of Pathans, marauding mobs of Sikhs.

WOW ... And you are denying that the massacres and ethnic cleansing never happened in jammu region of IOK well before the so-called Pathans invaded IOK. The Pathans came in basically on the news and stories of atrocities committed by marauding Hindus invading from Punjab etc and save the Muslims being butchered by your own people.

Is it because that the truth is not taught to you people and is wiped out from your school and college text books and only bigoted history is taught or is it that hiding such shameful acts reveal your true self and that is why the unacceptability.

Take a walk Joe Shearer - breath deep and hide your head in shame for hiding the worst parts of Indian history. Don't come over here and tell us about your innocence by displaying your white gloves.

 

[Joe Shearer]

WOW ... And you are denying that the massacres and ethnic cleansing never happened in jammu region of IOK well before the so-called Pathans invaded IOK. The Pathans came in basically on the news and stories of atrocities committed by marauding Hindus invading from Punjab etc and save the Muslims being butchered by your own people.

Is it because that the truth is not taught to you people and is wiped out from your school and college text books and only bigoted history is taught or is it that hiding such shameful acts reveal your true self and that is why the unacceptability.

Take a walk Joe Shearer - breath deep and hide your head in shame for hiding the worst parts of Indian history. Don't come over here and tell us about your innocence by displaying your white gloves.

Try - TRY - not to weasel out of the spot that you have talked yourself into.

How do the alleged massacres in Jammu by hooligans lead to the invasion by tribals recruited by a chain of command directly responsible to Liaqat Ali? How did these alleged atrocities against Muslims come to justify the rape, pillage, abduction and murder of Muslims in Kashmir?

The Pathans came in basically on the news and stories of atrocities committed by marauding Hindus from Punjab etc. and save the Muslims being butchered by your own people..

By butchering them themselves? Before the Hindus got to them?

What exactly is your incoherent account trying to say?

If you were not so busy manufacturing history on an industrial scale, you would be rolling on the floor laughing at your own idiocies.

 

[Ticker]

@Ticker, please try to explain why military action in a disputed territory should be permissible. According to the UN Resolutions which ill-informed people like to cite when it suits therm, without having read them, not only was military action forbidden, but also the resolution had asked Pakistan to evacuate all military and other arms-bearing personnel from the state.

On what grounds can this be interpreted to legitimize military action? And on what grounds is it not to be counted as an attack on the Indian state, considering that the territory had given itself a constitution and was ruled by an elected government, not to mention that the targets of the commandos infiltrated were the units of tthe Indian Army stationed in the state?

We were not discussing the permissibility of attacking IOK and violating the so-called inviolability of the LOC. Even Bharat Karnard and many other Indian writers opine that disputed territory of IOK should not be inviolable. Irrespective of this, IOK is not part of India and is a disputed territory. Violating the inviolability of LOC in IOK does not have anything to do with mainland India.

And this fact makes an Indian attack on mainland Pakistan an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. If you can not understand this and can only resort to sarcasm - continue with your unnecessary and repetitive diatribe.

 

[Ticker]

We now have lies, damn' lies and Ticker's recasting of history.

You are already aware of the circumstances behind the Nawab of Junagadh's misadventure with his a cession; this was discussed at length. However, it is entirely consistent with your propagandist approach to ignore what you cannot refute and repeat the lie as soon as possible, in a different place.

As far as the attack on Kashmir is concerned, even Tariq Ali has no hesitation in depicting in minute detail how the Pakistani invasion was plotted and executed, long before the Indian Army found its way there. We have also gone through a detailed analysis of how the state troops of the Mehtar of Gilgit supported the kabilas on their northern flank and captured Skardu, then Kargil and then besieged Leh. The dates are on record, and if you are not aware of them, it is not due to lack of effort on the part of those of us who would like any discussion to be illuminated by facts, not fancy.

These are not damned lies - these are damned facts. You people have been twisting the facts since last six decades and think that everybody else is a fool.

What you have been telling the world are the damned lies. And then have the temerity to turn around and mock those who state facts.

Please go somewhere else to spread any further lies. I heard about Indian mission to Mars.

 

[SamantK]

We were not discussing the permissibility of attacking IOK and violating the so-called inviolability of the LOC. Even Bharat Karnard and many other Indian writers opine that disputed territory of IOK should not be inviolable. Irrespective of this, IOK is not part of India and is a disputed territory. Violating the inviolability of LOC in IOK does not have anything to do with mainland India.

And this fact makes an Indian attack on mainland Pakistan an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. If you can not understand this and can only resort to sarcasm - continue with your unnecessary and repetitive diatribe.

That is how your sentiment works, if you think it is a disputed teritory and I ask who says so, then you will bring in the UN and when you bring the UN. Now they never said go attack India or did they? Till such time when the whole of Kashmir does not take part in a plebiscite, it will remain our mainland. Now you can twist it any way you like (Like pathans helping people in Kashmir when the help was needed in Jammu ) You cannot distort the history not on this forum anyway.. And if you are such a scholar then god help Pakistan!

 

[Joe Shearer]

We were not discussing the permissibility of attacking IOK and violating the so-called inviolability of the LOC. Even Bharat Karnard and many other Indian writers opine that disputed territory of IOK should not be inviolable. Irrespective of this, IOK is not part of India and is a disputed territory. Violating the inviolability of LOC in IOK does not have anything to do with mainland India.

And this fact makes an Indian attack on mainland Pakistan an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. If you can not understand this and can only resort to sarcasm - continue with your unnecessary and repetitive diatribe.

Are you even remotely acquainted with international law, or do you depend on Bharat Karnad for your insights? An armed attack on another sovereign nation's soldiers and civilian administrators is an act of aggression. You do not get a hunting license by declaring a particular piece of land yours, attacking it, being asked to vacate it wholly, violating every international direction and then smuggling commandos across to wage war in a manner outside the cover of the Geneva Conventions. For your information, the Pakistani special forces men infiltrated into Kashmir and adopting civilian clothes for their attacks put themselves out of the cover given to combatants.

From every legal point of view, as you would have known if you were not so busy manufacturing rules on your own, the attack known as Operation Gibraltar was a war-crime committed by Pakistan. Check with any knowledgeable friends with some knowledge of the law; you must have Some friends.

It was this savage attack that was repulsed, and that was sought to be salvaged by another, an assault by armoured and artillery elements on the Indian Army.

Are you even aware of the right of hot pursuit? And that it can be applied to collateral forces, over and beyond the exact individuals involved in the first case?

You really should educate yourself - about another ten years should do the trick - before you comment in public on matters about which you are totally ignorant.

These are not damned lies - these are damned facts. You people have been twisting the facts since last six decades and think that everybody else is a fool.

What you have been telling the world are the damned lies. And then have the temerity to turn around and mock those who state facts.

Please go somewhere else to spread any further lies. I heard about Indian mission to Mars.

The facts are on record. Every fact has been backed up. In response, we get whines of self-pity.

Try reading up on the facts instead.

 

[Ticker]

Try - TRY - not to weasel out of the spot that you have talked yourself into.

How do the alleged massacres in Jammu by hooligans lead to the invasion by tribals recruited by a chain of command directly responsible to Liaqat Ali? How did these alleged atrocities against Muslims come to justify the rape, pillage, abduction and murder of Muslims in Kashmir?


By butchering them themselves? Before the Hindus got to them?

What exactly is your incoherent account trying to say?

If you were not so busy manufacturing history on an industrial scale, you would be rolling on the floor laughing at your own idiocies.

Hey Joe, we were not discussing Pathans - you brought them in. Don't try and dig yourself out of your own todd and well habitat. If the Pathans were organised and supported they would not have resorted to some of the acts which they committed - I wish they were. They were later attempts to organise them and many such attempts paid well.

But the main reason was Hindu hordes who invaded Jammu region of IOK as per a well planned operation. And this is a fact which you are running away from. They were not hooligans, many were from the regular forces of those Maharajas. These were organised terrorists who were properly tasked as per a detailed plan with the aim of carrying out mass murders and ethnic cleansing. This is the muck that the Indian people are not exposed to.

 

[Wickerman]

We were not discussing the permissibility of attacking IOK and violating the so-called inviolability of the LOC. Even Bharat Karnard and many other Indian writers opine that disputed territory of IOK should not be inviolable. Irrespective of this, IOK is not part of India and is a disputed territory. Violating the inviolability of LOC in IOK does not have anything to do with mainland India.

And this fact makes an Indian attack on mainland Pakistan an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. If you can not understand this and can only resort to sarcasm - continue with your unnecessary and repetitive diatribe.

It is disputed only by Pakistan. Not by India. India contends, and rightfully so based on the Instrument of Accession, that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India. ALL of it. Aksai Chin+Azad Kashmir+Whatever is a part of India right now. When we have a Line of Control demarcated, in a territory disputed by only one party, an attack by that party is an attack on the mainland. That is what you fail to understand. So when Pakistan attacks our mainland, we have every right to respond in kind.

These are damned lies - these are facts. You people have been twisting the facts since last six decades and think that everybody else is a fool.

What you have been telling the world are the damned lies. And then have the temerity to turn around and mock those who state facts.

History is not your twisted version. History is what it is and you refuse to discuss facts for what they are. This doesnt mean we are twisting facts. It is you that has a distorted view of history.

 

[Ticker]

Are you even remotely acquainted with international law, or do you depend on Bharat Karnad for your insights? An armed attack on another sovereign nation's soldiers and civilian administrators is an act of aggression. You do not get a hunting license by declaring a particular piece of land yours, attacking it, being asked to vacate it wholly, violating every international direction and then smuggling commandos across to wage war in a manner outside the cover of the Geneva Conventions. For your information, the Pakistani special forces men infiltrated into Kashmir and adopting civilian clothes for their attacks put themselves out of the cover given to combatants.

From every legal point of view, as you would have known if you were not so busy manufacturing rules on your own, the attack known as Operation Gibraltar was a war-crime committed by Pakistan. Check with any knowledgeable friends with some knowledge of the law; you must have Some friends.

It was this savage attack that was repulsed, and that was sought to be salvaged by another, an assault by armoured and artillery elements on the Indian Army.

Are you even aware of the right of hot pursuit? And that it can be applied to collateral forces, over and beyond the exact individuals involved in the first case?

You really should educate yourself - about another ten years should do the trick - before you comment in public on matters about which you are totally ignorant.



The facts are on record. Every fact has been backed up. In response, we get whines of self-pity.

Try reading up on the facts instead.

Stop running towards the semantics Joe. The international law and the wild west juries running around to hook the noose around an innocent's throat.

The facts are as I stated. And you are talking schmuck which one can smell from miles around.

Have a rest and come back later.

 

[Joe Shearer]

We were not discussing the permissibility of attacking IOK and violating the so-called inviolability of the LOC. Even Bharat Karnard and many other Indian writers opine that disputed territory of IOK should not be inviolable. Irrespective of this, IOK is not part of India and is a disputed territory. Violating the inviolability of LOC in IOK does not have anything to do with mainland India.

And this fact makes an Indian attack on mainland Pakistan an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. If you can not understand this and can only resort to sarcasm - continue with your unnecessary and repetitive diatribe.

Would you know what a sovereign nation is, if one came up and kicked you in the goolies? I don't think so.

Consider: either the accession of Kashmir to India was a legitimate act by its sovereign ruler, or it was not.

If it was, Pakistan attacked sovereign Indian soil both in 1948 and in 1965.

If it was not, Pakistan attacked sovereign Jammu and Kashmir both in 1948 and in 1965.

Pakistan herself could have got sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir Only if the existing sovereign had ceded sovereignty. That never happened. You are in the unpleasant legal position of being on-going aggressors.

Wonder if Bharat Karnad will help you out of this one.