What is common between 1971, 9/11, and 11/26?

[FaujHistorian]

Double standards much???

Pakistan can do whatever it wants and when its victims pay back in the same coin they cry murder. Be man enough to bear it if you believe in dishing it out.

Terrorists being pushed into another country is bad idea.

to be precise, that is a "single standard".

 

[angelwarrior]

Terrorists being pushed into another country is bad idea.

to be precise, that is a "single standard".

It is fine when you pushed terrorists in one of the princely state in 1947, it is fine when you did the same in 65 and it is fine when you are doing the same till date but it is not good when we returned the favor in the very same way. Kamaal karte hai miya aap.

 

[Kaniska]

Indian push of 60,000 insurgents followed by an attack on E. Pakistan back in 1971 was no better than

bunch of hijackers destroying Twin Towers
or
Beardo Mullahs attack on civilians in Mumbai.




Indira made a HUGE blunder back then and so many Indian posters and analysts fail to understand the implications and continue repeating foolish victory, just like Talibarbarians dance after mumbai, or Palestinian extremists dance after 9/11.


If Indian posters want respect for Indian borders,

then learn to respect other country's borders too.

Thank you.

I think you are comparing apple and oranges....If you would like to compare then i feel that India's involvement in BD creation is somewhat simillar to Your adventure in Kashmir of today....Otherwise rest of the comparison as simply out of tune...i am not relly worried about 9/11 ..You can interpret whatever you feel good to you...But India perceive 26/11 is a clear case of state sponsored terrorism although Pakistan denies with argument as it is a Non state actor sponsored one...

Sometime i am really wondering how come your politician and military strategist are so naive at that time....Whenever you are having a nation with 2 parts separated by thousands of miles to each other and again...you have a every possibility that your eastern part can be easily chocked out by India at any point of time, then for the sake of making your nation to united and successful, Pakistan should have rather tried to maintain a good relation with India rather than fighting for Kashmir....If i my assumption is correct, your establishment may have thought Kashmir as more imp than BD...Otherwise ...it is a foolish idea of your military to fight with India when your half of the nation is so vulnerable to be attacked...

 

[ranjeet]

Indian push of 60,000 insurgents followed by an attack on E. Pakistan back in 1971 was no better than

bunch of hijackers destroying Twin Towers
or
Beardo Mullahs attack on civilians in Mumbai.
Indira made a HUGE blunder back then and so many Indian posters and analysts fail to understand the implications and continue repeating foolish victory, just like Talibarbarians dance after mumbai, or Palestinian extremists dance after 9/11.
If Indian posters want respect for Indian borders,

then learn to respect other country's borders too.

Thank you.

I am afraid you are comparing apples and oranges there Sir, India supporting Mukhti Bahini must be compared to Pakistani support to Mujahidins during USSR invasion. It has absolutely nothing to do with the cowardly terrorists attacks of either 9/11 or 26/11.

 

[FaujHistorian]

It is fine when you pushed terrorists in one of the princely state in 1947, it is fine when you did the same in 65 and it is fine when you are doing the same till date but it is not good when we returned the favor in the very same way. Kamaal karte hai miya aap.

not fine. read my replies.

I am afraid you are comparing apples and oranges there Sir, India supporting Mukhti Bahini must be compared to Pakistani support to Mujahidins during USSR invasion. It has absolutely nothing to do with the cowardly terrorists attacks of either 9/11 or 26/11.

USSR was not the government of Afghanistan.

What on earth are you talking about.

I think you are comparing apple and oranges....If you would like to compare then i feel that India's involvement in BD creation is somewhat simillar to Your adventure in Kashmir of today....Otherwise rest of the comparison as simply out of tune...i am not relly worried about 9/11 ..You can interpret whatever you feel good to you...But India perceive 26/11 is a clear case of state sponsored terrorism although Pakistan denies with argument as it is a Non state actor sponsored one...

Sometime i am really wondering how come your politician and military strategist are so naive at that time....Whenever you are having a nation with 2 parts separated by thousands of miles to each other and again...you have a every possibility that your eastern part can be easily chocked out by India at any point of time, then for the sake of making your nation to united and successful, Pakistan should have rather tried to maintain a good relation with India rather than fighting for Kashmir....If i my assumption is correct, your establishment may have thought Kashmir as more imp than BD...Otherwise ...it is a foolish idea of your military to fight with India when your half of the nation is so vulnerable to be attacked...

REad my posts. I am against 65 like $tupid adventures.

 

[ranjeet]

USSR was not the government of Afghanistan.

What on earth are you talking about.

I am talking about millions of refugees pouring inside our borders because they felt being persecuted in their own homeland. Same was the case in afghanistan, the communist govt there started a crackdown and USSR stepped in on the pretext of helping the GoA.
What right did GoP had back then to interfere in the internal matters of AFG?

 

[FaujHistorian]

So why does Pakistan mourn the loss of BD since - and you are on the money - it would have happened anyway?

Two brothers can distribute ancestral property in a peaceful way. every one is happy happy happy.

Two brothers kill each other's sons (their nephews) over property dispute. That is sad sad sad thing.

 

[indiatester]

1948 Kashmir push by Pakistan was ditto copy of what India did to Hindu majority but Muslim run princely states.

p.s.
If you know me, I have written against any push through LOC. So you don't have to convince me on that.

The purpose of this thread is to make Indian posters realize that crossing international borders is a bad bad idea unless approved by UN and done by international force (in extreme circumstances).

You are actually ignoring that an actual massacre (some say genocide) was happening in the then East Pakistan. India was having a direct impact because of it. You can't compare what India had to do in 1971 to other actions by Pakistan.

You are also looking at the issue from a Hindu/Muslim aspect. Any sensible leader would have acted the same way or even better. The whole idea of a dis-joint country in itself is extremely strange and I guess you will agree that it couldn't work. India and Pakistan needed may be better negotiators and leaders who should have buried those issues at that time and gone on to build on what they had. Please don't replace your intelligence with fanaticism.

 

[k_arura]

Would you then support the idea of pushing Talibarbarians into Kashmir as a forking liberation movement?

Get your head straight.

Treat insurgencies similar way

if you know what I mean.



I know exactly how the war started when Indira called Gen. Manekshaw in her office.

So don't be childish about wiki.

SO you deny Operation Changhez Khan Operation Chengiz Khan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[FaujHistorian]

I am talking about millions of refugees pouring inside our borders because they felt being persecuted in their own homeland. Same was the case in afghanistan, the communist govt there started a crackdown and USSR stepped in on the pretext of helping the GoA.
What right did GoP had back then to interfere in the internal matters of AFG?

As I said,

USSR invasion of Afghanistan was similar to Indian invasion of E. Pakistan (your example is reversed)

If you have to compare

Then

Read about Punjabi/Sikh uprising and Indian army's curshing blow to them. That is more appropriate to some degree.

Still I do not celebrate the deaths of either Sikhs or Indian armymen.

Hope you understand.

 

[k_arura]

Two brothers can distribute ancestral property in a peaceful way. every one is happy happy happy.

Two brothers kill each other's sons (their nephews) over property dispute. That is sad sad sad thing.

And you think your Punjabi army was ready and waiting to handover BD to Bengalis with welcome arms?

 

[FaujHistorian]

You are actually ignoring that an actual massacre (some say genocide) was happening in the then East Pakistan. India was having a direct impact because of it. You can't compare what India had to do in 1971 to other actions by Pakistan.

You are also looking at the issue from a Hindu/Muslim aspect. Any sensible leader would have acted the same way or even better. The whole idea of a dis-joint country in itself is extremely strange and I guess you will agree that it couldn't work. India and Pakistan needed may be better negotiators and leaders who should have buried those issues at that time and gone on to build on what they had. Please don't replace your intelligence with fanaticism.

Pakistani army action in E. Pakistan was against insurgents.

Like

Indian army action in Punjab was against Sikh militants.

Keep the examples straight please.

And you think your Punjabi army was ready and waiting to handover BD to Bengalis with welcome arms?

Punjabi army wasn't there in large numbers prior to April 1971.

What the heck are you talking about.

E. Pakistan since 1947 had very light presence of Pak army and may be may be couple of squadrons of PAF.

E. Pakistan was mainly guarded by E. Pakistan Rifles that was an indigenous force.

Get your facts straight.

 

[ranjeet]

As I said,
USSR invasion of Afghanistan was similar to Indian invasion of E. Pakistan (your example is reversed)

If you have to compare

Then

Read about Punjabi/Sikh uprising and Indian army's curshing blow to them. That is more appropriate to some degree.

Still I do not celebrate the deaths of either Sikhs or Indian armymen.

Hope you understand.

How is the USSR invasion was similar to Indian invasion of E. Pakistan? USSR never had the huge influx of refugees which India or Pakistan suffered.

 

[FaujHistorian]

How is the USSR invasion was similar to Indian invasion of E. Pakistan? USSR never had the huge influx of refugees which India or Pakistan suffered.

There were hardly any refugees in March 1971.

What the heck are you talking about dear.

Refugees resulted from insurgents destroying their homes and farms.
Like Pundits who had to leave their homes due to Kashmir insurgents.

Get your bearings straight.

 

[indiatester]

Pakistani army action in E. Pakistan was against insurgents.

Like

Indian army action in Punjab was against Sikh militants.

Keep the examples straight please.

Let me get this straight then.
Till elections in 1970, there was no insurgency in E. Pakistan.
Yahya Khan did not transfer power on 28th February 1971, there was no insurgency in E. Pakistan

Operation searchlight started on 25th March 1971.

So you mean to say in the 25 days, India pushed Pakistan to such an extent that PA had to massacre its own people?