Y Pak army dont want war with India as India want war with Pak. Its most strategist question

[Verve]

Really? Zia delivered an ultimatum? And it's stayed concealed in your bosom until now? Must say you are good at keeping secrets.

you are in a bad mood today!

Maybe Indian historians have deleted Zia's short stop at Delhi airport and what happened there!

 

[El Sidd]

So do I, so do I. Any tips? Nobody on this forum more creative than you, so perhaps I can pick up some moves from you.



I always told those idiots that marching on Islamabad through Lhasa was going to be tough. You spotted it too, did you?



There's the creativity. It's such a pleasure watching a class act.



We couldn't. India fell apart. I'm sitting in the independent city of Hyderabad, surrounded by zillions of blood-thirsty Telingas. Can you lend us some creativity?



On the first, it wasn't a malfunctioning ambulance. On the second, it wasn't a battlefield replacement that cost us a war.

Nice professional analysis

 

[Joe Shearer]

you are in a bad mood today!

Maybe Indian historians have deleted Zia's short stop at Delhi airport and what happened there!

Actually, I am. You're right. I'll take a break, pop a couple of jamuns and write my essay for insaniyat; it's looking good.

I am an historian, and I know nothing about Zia's stop and what happened there, honest.

Sorry about the snappishness; I've been in a sawal-jawab with one of the natives whose uppishness and general lack of learning and culture irritates me hugely. Shouldn't have taken it out on you. Consider that an apology.

 

[Hamza913]

After 3 and 1/2 wars, probably someone understood. They will not gain an inch of land with conventional war. So changed strategy to bleed by thousand cuts.

Is that why we still hold 1/3 of Kashmir, Chamb sector, Point 5353, etc?

You guys really didn't gain anything during the wars we've fought, if you honestly think about it.

In 1947, we took 1/3 of Kashmir from you.

In 1965, it was a stalemate so nobody got anything out of it.

In 1971, yes you helped give East Pakistan independence, but you lost more men, let us keep Chamb sector among other territories, and created even more trouble for yourselves by letting Bangladesh rule itself (you've been having border trouble with them ever since). You gained next to nothing.

In 1999, we gained Point 5353. Again, you gained nothing.

The only war you've actually got anything out of is the Siachen war, but even then that land is a frozen wasteland, with your men dying left right and centre from the abysmal conditions (ours suffer too, but nowhere nearly as much).

 

[cerberus]

Is that why we still hold 1/3 of Kashmir, Chamb sector, Point 5353, etc?

You guys really didn't gain anything during the wars we've fought, if you honestly think about it.

In 1947, we took 1/3 of Kashmir from you.

In 1965, it was a stalemate so nobody got anything out of it.

In 1971, yes you helped give East Pakistan independence, but you lost more men, let us keep Chamb sector among other territories, and created even more trouble for yourselves by letting Bangladesh rule itself (you've been having border trouble with them ever since). You gained next to nothing.

In 1999, we gained Point 5353. Again, you gained nothing.

The only war you've actually got anything out of is the Siachen war, but even then that land is a frozen wasteland, with your men dying left right and centre from the abysmal conditions (ours suffer too, but nowhere nearly as much).

RIP history

 

[Śakra]

RIP history

And logic. Leave them be it’s a coping mechanism.

 

[Hamza913]

RIP history

Truth hurts.

 

[Hamza913]

And logic. Leave them be it’s a coping mechanism.

I think you guys denying this is a coping mechanism to deal with Muslim dominance over the region for a thousand years.

I don't even know why it still upsets you guys.

 

[niaz]

what India achieved in 1971? breaking Pakistan and making another Islamic state Bangladesh? is this your strategy? we break India into two pieces in 1947 and make a safe place for Muslims and even Pak was created before India.this is the most humiliating words for any Indian.

I am sorry to disagree. I was there.

Regret to admit that it was Indian Army that won the Bangla Desh for the Bengalis not the Mukti Bahini. I witnessed the coward AK Niazi surrendering to Lt Gen Aurora in Paltan Maidaan Dacca on Dec 16, 1971 on PTV. Indians took 90,000 Pakistani POW's. I would hate that day until the day I die, but I would not deny a historical fact.

 

[Mrc]

there will be a war... make no mistakes

 

[django]

True, true.

You keep doing it. Very impressive.

And I am certain India will attempt to reciprocate in a similar manner with the Indus, hence an effective deterrent to total war. As long as sane folks are in charge sense will prevail.Kudos Joe

 

[Hamza913]

I am sorry to disagree. I was there.

Regret to admit that it was Indian Army that won the Bangla Desh for the Bengalis not the Mukti Bahini. I witnessed the coward AK Niazi surrendering to Lt Gen Aurora in Paltan Maidaan Dacca on Dec 16, 1971 on PTV. Indians took 90,000 Pakistani POW's. I would hate that day until the day I die, but I would not deny a historical fact.

He was outnumbered and didn't have a damn hope of winning.

Don't blame the guy for surrendering, we'd all do the same.

 

[Shajida Khan]

Pakistan in 1971 was still far smaller than India, it was your historical complex (deeply embeded from the events of the previous millennia), a mere figment of your imagination, that was a two-front war. East Pakistan never had the military prowess to ensure that possibility, its air force and armoured columns were quite insufficient when compared to the West Pakistan. In 1948 and throughout the border skirmishes uptill the war of 1965, this Indian establishment's theory only proved to be nothing but a paranoia - even during the 1963 Indo-China war, India was worried if Pakistan would open its front, but we did not despite doing militarily and economically far better than India.

Which events of previous millennia? There were just two reason.

First was a huge problem of refugees post brutal massacre done by East Pakistani army in East Pakistan. Dont believe me? Look at the current Rohingya crisis that BD is facing. Indian Leadership was wise enough to intervene and avert this crisis to fall into sensitive areas of WB.

Second, strategically speaking, your current abilities are never the lone factors in deciding such matters. That time Pakistan was not having enough military presence in East Pakistan. What stops Pakistan from creating a build up in future? Or allowing some foreign power to encircle India, that time it was USA.

BTW, Pakistan attacked India in '65 after seeing lack of prepration during Indo China war.

What happened in 1971 has a far-reaching impact, you have antagonized your eastern front till eternity. Your helped forged an alliance that probably wouldn't have existed in its current state had there been no 1971. Pakistan then helped the red dragon to reach out and open up to the Western world and contributed with its part to help them become a major world power four-decades later. This alliance has encircled you from your entire east to entire north and north-east and in the process choking all the natural and historical trade routes of mother India, something that has not happened in history - with China loooming large in the North-East, your Chicken neck is far more vulnerable than ever before, seven-sister states issue in this scenario can only become a trivial issue.

Actually, instead of antagonizing, we have created a much easily dealt situation in our eastern side. BD for all her issues with India, is no where as mortal enemy of India as Pakistan is. Infact India enjoys quite a comfortable relationship with BD in terms of co-operation on geo political and security issues. Heck we were able to solve one of the most complex border situations of enclaves and exclaves with BD very recently. Do you see India BD border having as much military deployment as you see in Indo-Pakistan border? I doubt it. We only antagonized West Paksitan. But then we are mortal enemies anyways.

As far as China goes, in 71 China was no where in the picture on the worlds map. And even before China came in the picture, you were courting America which was pretty anti India back then owing to India's cordial relationship with USSR. Putting it bluntly, you have always done your worst against India so cutting Pakistan into half was an apt decision. Lastly, China-India feud is not Pakistan centric. We have our own issues to tackle. With Pakistan or without Pakistan, we will have to deal with dragon. So you are overestimating your contributions in this. Any party which would have shown you a wad of cash would have bought your help.

On the north east, actually you have not noticed. India is creating an alternative route to North East via BD. It would have been impossible if it was still East Pakistan.

I am not suggesting that an Indo-Pak war would involve China (unless you try to attack Gilgit-Baltistan) so practically a 2-front war is out of the question but lo and behold, since the historical complexes still exist in the Indian mindset your Chief of Army Staff Bipin Rawat came up with idea of 2.5 front war - so 1971 took nothing away from Indian psyche and while further deteriorating the geo-strategic situation for India.

Put it simply, I like the 'Hope for best and Prepare for the worst' attitude of Mr Rawat.

 

[cerberus]

I am sorry to disagree. I was there.

Regret to admit that it was Indian Army that won the Bangla Desh for the Bengalis not the Mukti Bahini. I witnessed the coward AK Niazi surrendering to Lt Gen Aurora in Paltan Maidaan Dacca on Dec 16, 1971 on PTV. Indians took 90,000 Pakistani POW's. I would hate that day until the day I die, but I would not deny a historical fact.

Niazi made the smart decision the Bangladesh was already lost

What he prevented is unnecessary waste of professional soldiers lives
For false ego and politics of Bhutto and Yaya Khan

Many who are saved that day lived to serve Pakistan later

 

[TMA]

Lol, it was 1947 not 1948... Kashmir was never a part of Pakistan. If so, when the treaty of accession was signed?
The state of Jammu and Kashmir belongs to India. And will remain so.
Akhand bharat .. is as good as a reality as Pakistani flag on Delhi red fort. So smell the coffee and read through your historical facts again.

But Modi and Co actually want to realize Akhand Bharat eventually, don't they? And the major obstacle for this is the Land of Hind! If Pakistan falls, then it becomes much much easier.